Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Cost effective stage/studio vocal mic?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
August 25, 2004 6:42:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
to praise properly.

I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
"Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.

I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.

Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
cone of a super or hyper cardiod.


Thanks,

Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
August 25, 2004 8:05:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:
>
> looking for a cost effective (good bang for the buck) dual use,
> stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she is using but I'm not all
> that pleased with it. I'm tending toward a condenser but could be
> talked out of that. I see plenty in the $250 and above range but for
> starters I'd like to find something less expensive. Any suggestions
> appreciated.
>
> Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must. Stage monitors
> can probably be placed near or in the null cone of a super or hyper
> cardiod.


Audio Techinca AE5400 is out of your budget.
Scott already mentioned the E855

Used Sennheiser MD431?
Audix OM5 or OM6?
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 12:39:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cgj0hg02ccn@enews3.newsguy.com...
> ...I'm tending
> toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
> plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
> to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.
>
> Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Bob,

We've used Shure Beta 87A the last two years for just this. Male (growly
baritone) and female (resonant alto/2nd soprano) vocals, excellent GBF
(supercardioid), very open, clear sound, with good texture. Proximity
easily manipulated, they take EQ well, and are very rugged - classic Shure.
Priced at $250, but you can find them for less.

We've compared them lots of times off and on to other live SR mics -- the
Neumann KMS105 had much worse stage wash, I think those are best with IEM,
plus they were very difficult to use proximity for male voice; and also have
compared to several Audix OM dynamics - not enough "body" in these to suit
us. We keep coming back to the Beta 87A. They record well directly from
the mixer, you can get really close to them and get very little bleed.

Steve
Related resources
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 4:51:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hey BC,

All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp

-bg-

--
www.thelittlecanadaheadphoneband.ca
www.lchb.ca


"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cgj0hg02ccn@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
> I've been live recording a local talent, a decent band and a
> female singer/leader whose talent I don't have words enough
> to praise properly.
>
> I've been using a M/S mic but predictably her vocals are far
> too diffuse and smudged by the house and their reinforcement
> system to display her talent adequately on the recordings so
> I did the obvious at the last show and recorded a third
> track from her mic. Mixing it in with Waves TrueVerb
> "Studio A" on it did exactly what I wanted, gave her vocals
> a distinct center and enormously improved resolution and
> presence. Still sounds totaly M/S live too, which is cool.
>
> I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
> mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
> buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
> is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
> toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
> plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
> to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.
>
> Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
> --
>
> "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
> simpler."
>
> A. Einstein
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 5:43:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

The best mic solution will be free for you.
Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
investment in a good mic by her.

Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
listen with the help of your ears.
She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
must also be partially hers.

Rich

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cgj0hg02ccn@enews3.newsguy.com...
>
> I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
> mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
> buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic.
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 5:43:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rich Peet wrote:

> The best mic solution will be free for you.
> Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
> For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
> investment in a good mic by her.
>
> Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
> listen with the help of your ears.
> She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
> must also be partially hers.

I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
think many of us would agree with that.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 6:00:10 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
>mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
>buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
>is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
>toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
>plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
>to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.
>
>
I've gotten good results with an AKG 535EB in both live/studio situations and
they're about $230 new. It's worth trying out on the singer before purchasing,
but you already know that.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 6:27:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:

< sorry to snip >

> Low handling noise

?

You'll be hard pressed to get a studio quality recording when the mic is
hand held IMHO.

> and good gain before feedback a must.
> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time. EV RE-11 for example.

Good luck with your project.


Graham
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 6:27:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear wrote:
>
>> good gain before feedback a must.
>> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
>> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.
>
>
> Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.
>
> True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> all the time.

That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their back end towards the front row.
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 9:50:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cgj0hg02ccn@enews3.newsguy.com...

> I'm so taken with her singing that I want to find a better
> mic. I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
> buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
> is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
> toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
> plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
> to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.
>
> Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

Depends on her voice, of course, but in that approximate price range my
first grab would be for a Beyer M260.

Peace,
Paul
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 12:02:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<412D3C89.8BF4A671@hotmail.com>...
> Bob Cain wrote:
>
> < sorry to snip >
>
> > Low handling noise
>
> ?
>
> You'll be hard pressed to get a studio quality recording when the mic is
> hand held IMHO.
>
> > and good gain before feedback a must.
> > Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> > cone of a super or hyper cardiod.
>
> Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.
>
> True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> all the time. EV RE-11 for example.
>
> Good luck with your project.
>

Hypercards can be difficult, but if used right, can also be the best
choice. However, I'm a bigger fan of supercardioid pattern, for two
reasons:

1. Smaller lobe in the back, thus easier to use in most situation, and
2. Wider lobe in the front makes for an easier mic to "work".

The two mics I'd suggest, that both give a pretty big "bang for the
buck" are the Sennheiser e865 and the AKG C535. I know the 865 is a
supercardioid, but I'm not sure about the AKG. Both are condenser mics
and will generally give much better detail than any dynamic mic.

YMMV

Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 12:12:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"**bg**" <info@thelittlecanadaheadphoneband.ca> wrote in news:yuaXc.206601
$M95.156594@pd7tw1no:

> Hey BC,
>
> All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
> situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp
>
> -bg-
>
Why?
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 12:53:23 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message news:<cgj0hg02ccn@enews3.newsguy.com>...
> ...I'm looking for a cost effective (good bang for the
> buck) dual use, stage/studio, vocal mic. Not sure what she
> is using but I'm not all that pleased with it. I'm tending
> toward a condenser but could be talked out of that. I see
> plenty in the $250 and above range but for starters I'd like
> to find something less expensive. Any suggestions appreciated.
>
> Low handling noise and good gain before feedback a must.
> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.

A used Sennheiser MD-431 (four THIRTY-one) would fit within your
budget. It's a great mic for both the stage and studio.
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 5:46:34 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Actually it presumes only that the vocalist must control the texture of her
sounds that are being captured and the only way to insure that is for the
vocalist to control by ownership the microphone used. The additional
advantage is that the vocalist will not need to learn more than once the
sensitivity of the microphone or its responses to various ways of being
handled. The recording and production should and will stay with those
people.

She will need your help in hearing the differences of different microphones
as she will have no way to judge the shortcommings of different makes.

Rich

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:cgjm2h01vsf@enews4.newsguy.com...
>
>
> Rich Peet wrote:
>
> > The best mic solution will be free for you.
> > Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
> > For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
> > investment in a good mic by her.
> >
> > Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
> > listen with the help of your ears.
> > She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the
sound
> > must also be partially hers.
>
> I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
> judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
> think many of us would agree with that.
>
>
> Bob
> --
>
> "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
> simpler."
>
> A. Einstein
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 7:20:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:46:34 GMT, Rich Peet <RichPeet@comcast.net>
wrote:
> Actually it presumes only that the vocalist must control the texture of her
> sounds that are being captured and the only way to insure that is for the
> vocalist to control by ownership the microphone used. The additional
> advantage is that the vocalist will not need to learn more than once the
> sensitivity of the microphone or its responses to various ways of being
> handled. The recording and production should and will stay with those
> people.
>
> She will need your help in hearing the differences of different microphones
> as she will have no way to judge the shortcommings of different makes.
>

Some vocalists (okay, most . .) are headcases. I'm aware of at least
one soundman who's become quite skilled at retrofitting his preferred
condensor capsule into things like SM-58s, Beta58s . . whatever the
singer "insists" is what s/he needs for "his/her sound."
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 7:55:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

**bg** wrote:

> All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
> situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp

Why? When I bought my first round of mics intended for vox I bought 4
Beyer M500's just to avoid the SM58. That was over thrity years ago and
I have never regretted the decision. Yes, I have many times met and
dealt with SM58's, but I see no reason to prefer them or inflict them
onto any particular vocalist. They work well to cut through in some
situations with some material, but all around I'd never suggest them as
a general purpose vocal mic.

--
ha
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 7:55:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear wrote:

> True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> all the time.

This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
warning is well posted.

--
ha
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 8:09:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< > True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> all the time. >>

So all of the thousands of concerts in which hypercard vocal mics have been
used effectively with stage monitors by people who are aware of the patterns of
the mics as well as the wedges were invalid? Somehow I've managed to not have
them squeal unexpectedly at all, so I must be doing something wrong.


Scott Fraser
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 8:09:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

ScotFraser wrote:
>> True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
>> them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
>> all the time.
>
>
> So all of the thousands of concerts in which hypercard vocal mics have been
> used effectively with stage monitors by people who are aware of the patterns of
> the mics as well as the wedges were invalid?

Besides, the null of a super/hypercardioid can often reject spill from the adjacent floor wedge--something a cardioid will never do.
Anonymous
August 26, 2004 9:10:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich wrote:

> Pooh Bear wrote:
>
>
>>True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
>>them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
>>all the time.
>
>
> This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
> they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
> and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
> warning is well posted.

What you want to do is have the monitors in the null cone of
a beyond-cardiod mic. It would be very cool to have a mic
that projected that cone, for example with laser light, out
and away from it so that you could actuall see what's in the
cone. A beyond-cardiod gives you a spot on either front
side of the mic that would be in that cone.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:03:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain wrote:

> Rich Peet wrote:

> > The best mic solution will be free for you.
> > Instruct the women that she must find her mic and then live with it.
> > For her to create her sound without you or anyone else is worth the
> > investment in a good mic by her.

> > Take her somewhere that has a large selection that she can try out and
> > listen with the help of your ears.
> > She needs to understand that the talent is hers and the control of the sound
> > must also be partially hers.

> I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
> judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
> think many of us would agree with that.

I find Rich's suggestion little different than myself choosing my own
guitar; nobody can know more about how that singer wants to sound than
the singer herself. Onstage her voice plus that mic is most of her
instrument. Let her pick it.

--
ha
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:39:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gj4jzx.1tcq1uk8q4ixqN%walkinay@thegrid.net...

> > I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
> > judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
> > think many of us would agree with that.
>
> I find Rich's suggestion little different than myself choosing my own
> guitar; nobody can know more about how that singer wants to sound than
> the singer herself. Onstage her voice plus that mic is most of her
> instrument. Let her pick it.

Okay -- but let her pick it based on what a recording sounds like, *not*
what it sounds like while she's singing through it. Bone conduction means
she has little idea what it really sounds like out front.

Peace,
Paul
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:39:56 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Paul Stamler wrote:

> Okay -- but let her pick it based on what a recording sounds like, *not*
> what it sounds like while she's singing through it. Bone conduction means
> she has little idea what it really sounds like out front.


Now, a mic salesman would just give her headphones, flip the polarity
and show her how much warmer it sounds, and maybe sell the preamp along
with it.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 5:05:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Kurt Albershardt wrote:

> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >
> >> good gain before feedback a must.
> >> Stage monitors can probably be placed near or in the null
> >> cone of a super or hyper cardiod.
> >
> >
> > Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.
> >
> > True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> > them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> > all the time.
>
> That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their back end towards the front row.

Great in principle - until the vocalist holding the mic moves it around - total nightmare. Squealarama !


Graham
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 5:08:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

hank alrich wrote:

> Pooh Bear wrote:
>
> > True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> > them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> > all the time.
>
> This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
> they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
> and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
> warning is well posted.

I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
handheld and its positioning therefore variable.


Graham
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 5:08:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>hank alrich wrote:
>
>> Pooh Bear wrote:
>>
>> > True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
>> > them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
>> > all the time.
>>
>> This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
>> they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
>> and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
>> warning is well posted.
>
>I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
>handheld and its positioning therefore variable.

No, this problem is entirely the result of a vocalist who doesn't know
not to point the mike directly away from the monitors. In a touring
situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 5:09:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

**bg** wrote:

> Hey BC,
>
> All vocalists should live with an SM58 for a year or two, in every
> situation, see http://www.shure.com/microphones/models/sm58.asp
>

To discover how bad / over-rated it is ?


Graham
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 6:40:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >hank alrich wrote:
> >
> >> Pooh Bear wrote:
> >>
> >> > True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
> >> > them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
> >> > all the time.
> >>
> >> This is a matter of awareness and mic positioning. Point 'em rightly and
> >> they aren't usually a problem. However, in the context of a handheld mic
> >> and a vocalist with no understanding of a hypercard pattern, your
> >> warning is well posted.
> >
> >I failed to make clear that the problem was as a result of the mic being
> >handheld and its positioning therefore variable.
>
> No, this problem is entirely the result of a vocalist who doesn't know
> not to point the mike directly away from the monitors.

I hear you !

> In a touring
> situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
> no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
> acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
> the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.

Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.

Jagger for example ?

Graham
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 7:21:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< Pooh Bear rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com >>
<< Beware of hyper cardioids ! I fell foul of this one and never forgot it.

True hyper cardioids may have a nasty + phase lobe immediately behind
them. Utterly useless with stage monitoring, it'll squeal unexpectedly
all the time. EV RE-11 for example.
>>

This is why I teach the new guys that generally hypercardiods (like a Beta
87) work well when you have *2* wedges angled in at a singer, and a cardiod
(like a Beta 58) better matches a single monitor paradigm. And often at work
there is no eq around to ring out monitors either, so this is an important
consideration.

Other affordable mics I'd consider for vocals besides the Senn MD431 and
Beyer M500 would be the Beyer M69 and M88 - very nice mics, and of course a
Sennheiser MD421. An MD409 wokrs for many voices up close, and you might try
the newer (and cheap) MD609 too, it's a similar design.


Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 11:02:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< > That's why you put them more directly over the monitor, and point their
back end towards the front row.>

<Great in principle - until the vocalist holding the mic moves it around -
total nightmare. Squealarama !
>>

Did you know there are people who are trained in the profession of running
sound systems who can actually set system gain & equalization so that these
feedback problems don't occur?

Scott Fraser
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 12:51:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In a touring
>> situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
>> no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
>> acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
>> the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.
>
>Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.

Depends on how the monitors are laid out. And yeah, careful monitor layout
is more of a big deal.

>Jagger for example ?

The Stones have actually been using in-ear monitoring since before the
Steel Wheels tour, mostly because they are all so deaf. They each have
major monitor equalization to compensate for their particular hearing deficits.
This makes it a whole lot easier to deal with this sort of thing; there is
a lot of drum wash and amp noise coming from the back of the stage but there
are no wedges except for emergency backup.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 4:16:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <412E912B.8B723787@hotmail.com> rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com writes:

> > In a touring
> > situation, this lack of knowledge can be corrected in the first runthrough,
> > no problem. In a festival situation where you get five minutes between
> > acts and no runthrough or sound check, there's usually not enough time for
> > the vocalist to get used to anything even remotely unfamiliar, though.
>
> Kinda tricky for the rock & rollers who like to prance around the stage though.
> Jagger for example ?

Jagger doesn't perform without rehearsals and sound checks, at least
not since the days when feedback was a symbol of power.

I've seen singer crouch right over a wedge monitor and not have
feedback, but in order to do that, both the singer and the monitor
engineer need to be on the ball.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 4:16:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <20040826232114.19243.00003979@mb-m04.aol.com> willstg@aol.comnospam writes:

> This is why I teach the new guys that generally hypercardiods (like a Beta
> 87) work well when you have *2* wedges angled in at a singer, and a cardiod
> (like a Beta 58) better matches a single monitor paradigm.

While this seems sensible when you look at the pictures, I find that
it doesn't really work in practice. Mics and monitors are generally
far enough apart so that nulls are no longer effective in preventing
feedback. It works when you're very close to the monitors but unless
the singer is crawling on the stage floor, the best reason to use an
directional mic is to reduce leakage from other things on stage.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 5:56:20 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:EZudnfnRqere2rLcRVn-iA@comcast.com...

> Is an MD431 in the budget? I forget the price.

The MD431 II can be had new for less than $350 US.

I'm not sure how used prices are currently running for
the old MD431.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 8:40:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<< I've seen singer crouch right over a wedge monitor and not have
feedback, but in order to do that, both the singer and the monitor
engineer need to be on the ball. >>

And when I mixed Thomas Mapfumo at the Barbican in London he was in the habit
of standing right in front of the stage right mains & leaning his head into the
stack while singing, facing into the stack!
No feedback, and a hypercardioid mic.


Scott Fraser
Anonymous
August 28, 2004 5:29:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

About $130-160 or so on E-Bay.


On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:56:20 -0400, "Hal Laurent" <laurent@charm.net>
wrote:

>"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:EZudnfnRqere2rLcRVn-iA@comcast.com...
>
>> Is an MD431 in the budget? I forget the price.
>
>The MD431 II can be had new for less than $350 US.
>
>I'm not sure how used prices are currently running for
>the old MD431.
>
>Hal Laurent
>Baltimore
>
Anonymous
August 28, 2004 9:19:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Paul Stamler wrote:

> "hank alrich" wrote...

> > > I dunno, Rich, this presumes that preformers are the best
> > > judge of how to record and produce themselves and I don't
> > > think many of us would agree with that.

> > I find Rich's suggestion little different than myself choosing my own
> > guitar; nobody can know more about how that singer wants to sound than
> > the singer herself. Onstage her voice plus that mic is most of her
> > instrument. Let her pick it.

> Okay -- but let her pick it based on what a recording sounds like, *not*
> what it sounds like while she's singing through it. Bone conduction means
> she has little idea what it really sounds like out front.

Agreed.

--
ha
March 27, 2011 11:09:30 PM

Hey mate;

From far the most cost effective choices on the market are (both five star choices for their own reasons): SHURE SM57 and also RODE NT1-A (get this one for her). This answer is PRETTY WELL RESEARCHED and you can trust and bet your life on it. Some info on them:



- SHURE SM57 (lower end pro dinamic/cardio) - Legendary. You *must* own one of these, period. The best pro mic you can EVER have for the least buck possible - check and you'll find that about 99% of medium to experienced singers/sound engineers have this opinion (heck, no, 100%). Perfect for rocky vocals. Even being this cheap, it's the presidents' standard mic choice. Sir Paul McCartney uses it. Pro bands do use it shamelessly as instrumental AND also vocal mic (mostly male rock singers - Bono used, etc). Sturdier than a rock and outlives its singers.

- RODE NT1-A (VERY pro *&* very cheap condenser, perfect): Use this one for your great singer. AMAZINGLY cost effective and probably the best you'll ever need, it records the sounds *exactly* as they are - not too good as a stage mic however, as condensers are fragile. If you go for this one, get the awesome KIT - pro quality XLRcable, pop-flt, anti-shock mount and dustcover - not for free, but it's a steal.


I own the Rode and have a cheaper Shure SM57 knockoff just cause it went amazingly well with my particular voice & taste and I live in Brazil, where the SM57 can't be had cheaply (it's the JTS PDM-57).



Edit: this answer came a bit late, but it's a good one :)  lol
March 28, 2011 7:04:57 PM

The only one is a Shure SM 58
May 2, 2011 10:49:23 PM

soundguruman said:
The only one is a Shure SM 58


get off your sm58 trip... yes it's a wonderful live mic for vocals but it actually sucks in a studio... So mister "soundguru" get hip with what you're trying to tell people...

The Røde NT-1 is the way to go... as the man said...
!