Pro group looking for tough reliable good sounding mics...

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

Hello all,

Paul W. Felch here from the group Three Men and a Tenor. We are about
to go national and have been using the classic Shure Beta 58 and/or Shure SM
58 wireless mics for 13 years now. We are in the market for new mics for
the new year and are interested in the opinions of techs as to the best mics
for us.
These mics will see anywhere from 500-700 hours of road (stage &
rehearsal) use in a year along with the need of a large frequency channel
range to find clean channels in all the cities we will be in. (Understanding
that if/when we go overseas on tour that their airwave regulation and freq
allocations are different and we will again just rent mics there). We are
four vocalists who imitate the sound of a band. Their use will include a
touch of "beat-boxing" (percussive air bursts on the transducer) to soft and
delicate 4-part ballads. I as the Bass Singer reach a low B up 3 1/2
octaves to our Tenor who has a tremendous falsetto (close to Aretha Franklin
in power for high notes). We also depend on clean crispy high freq's such
as a cymbal (we use the Sssss sound as high-hat/crash drum sounds).
Who in the business is using what and why? We are open for an
endorsement deal also. Thanks for any help you can offer!!


P.W. Felch
Bass Singer/Song Writer
Three Men and a Tenor
paulf@threemenandatenor.com

Three Men and a Tenor
www.threemenandatenor.com
7 answers Last reply
More about group tough reliable good sounding mics
  1. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "P.W. Felch" wrote...
    > Paul W. Felch here from the group Three Men and a Tenor.

    As a tenor, I am offended by the name and premise of your group! :-)
  2. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Check into Sennheiser wireless. Probably not cheap, but that is the point.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <10t31umo03ps816@corp.supernews.com> rcrowley7@xprt.net writes:

    > > Paul W. Felch here from the group Three Men and a Tenor.
    >
    > As a tenor, I am offended by the name and premise of your group! :-)

    It could have been Three Fives and a Tenor.

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

    > These mics will see anywhere from 500-700 hours of road (stage &
    >rehearsal) use in a year along with the need of a large frequency channel
    >
    >range to find clean channels in all the cities we will be in. (Understanding
    >
    >that if/when we go overseas on tour that their airwave regulation and freq
    >
    >allocations are different and we will again just rent mics there). We are
    >
    >four vocalists who imitate the sound of a band. Their use will include
    >a
    >touch of "beat-boxing" (percussive air bursts on the transducer) to soft
    >and
    >delicate 4-part ballads. I as the Bass Singer reach a low B up 3 1/2
    >octaves to our Tenor who has a tremendous falsetto (close to Aretha Franklin
    >
    >in power for high notes). We also depend on clean crispy high freq's such
    >
    >as a cymbal (we use the Sssss sound as high-hat/crash drum sounds).
    > Who in the business is using what and why? We are open for an
    >endorsement deal also. Thanks for any help you can offer!!
    >
    >
    > P.W. Felch
    >Bass Singer/Song Writer
    >Three Men and a Tenor
    >paulf@threemenandatenor.com
    >
    > Three Men and a Tenor
    >www.threemenandatenor.com
    >
    >

    For what you are doing, there is nothing wrong with your microphone selection.
    If you want crispier High Frequency, look at the units with the sm87 condensor
    capsules.

    As far as wireless, The better Shure wireless units are frequency agile and
    that should be enough to keep you out of RF Hell.

    I've been using their better lav units with no problems whatsoever.
    Richard H. Kuschel
    "I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty
  5. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    P.W. Felch <paulf@threemenandatenor.com> wrote:
    >
    > Paul W. Felch here from the group Three Men and a Tenor. We are about
    >to go national and have been using the classic Shure Beta 58 and/or Shure SM
    >58 wireless mics for 13 years now. We are in the market for new mics for
    >the new year and are interested in the opinions of techs as to the best mics
    >for us.

    Do you like the SM-58? What do you like about it and what don't you like
    about it?

    If you like the SM-58, you might find the Sennheiser e855 to be a step up
    but still maintaining the same general feel and similar technique.

    > These mics will see anywhere from 500-700 hours of road (stage &
    >rehearsal) use in a year along with the need of a large frequency channel
    >range to find clean channels in all the cities we will be in. (Understanding
    >that if/when we go overseas on tour that their airwave regulation and freq
    >allocations are different and we will again just rent mics there).

    Find a mike that you like, THEN get a wireless kit for it. I will suggest
    you bite the bullet and spend the money for Lectrosonics or Zaxcom wireless
    hardware because it will save you grief in the long run. I'll also suggest
    that getting a cheap scanner with a spectrum analyzer display (the new
    Icom looks nice) can save you a lot of grief as well because you can do a
    site survey for some time before the actual performance to get a sense of
    what the noise floor on various channels are like.

    >We are
    >four vocalists who imitate the sound of a band. Their use will include a
    >touch of "beat-boxing" (percussive air bursts on the transducer) to soft and
    >delicate 4-part ballads. I as the Bass Singer reach a low B up 3 1/2
    >octaves to our Tenor who has a tremendous falsetto (close to Aretha Franklin
    >in power for high notes). We also depend on clean crispy high freq's such
    >as a cymbal (we use the Sssss sound as high-hat/crash drum sounds).
    > Who in the business is using what and why? We are open for an
    >endorsement deal also. Thanks for any help you can offer!!

    You may want to try using different mikes for different performers, or if
    you are all basically comfortable already with the 58, you may want to all
    keep using the same so that you can change them out on the fly. It is worth
    going out to someplace where you can try a couple dozen different vocal mikes
    and record yourself on them so you can hear what the differences are.
    --scott


    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  6. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Scott Dorsey wrote:
    > P.W. Felch <paulf@threemenandatenor.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > Paul W. Felch here from the group Three Men and a Tenor. We are
    about
    > >to go national and have been using the classic Shure Beta 58 and/or
    Shure SM
    > >58 wireless mics for 13 years now. We are in the market for new
    mics for
    > >the new year and are interested in the opinions of techs as to the
    best mics
    > >for us.
    >
    > Do you like the SM-58? What do you like about it and what don't you
    like
    > about it?
    >
    > If you like the SM-58, you might find the Sennheiser e855 to be a
    step up
    > but still maintaining the same general feel and similar technique.

    I agree with Scott on this, but it may be worth looking into some of
    the currently available condenser capsules. For singing with nuances,
    condensers make a noticable difference. Several manufacturers make good
    models, and it is well worth auditioning them to find good matches to
    each voice. Some models allow for individual tone contouring to better
    suit individual voices.
    >
    > > These mics will see anywhere from 500-700 hours of road (stage &

    > >rehearsal) use in a year along with the need of a large frequency
    channel
    > >range to find clean channels in all the cities we will be in.
    (Understanding
    > >that if/when we go overseas on tour that their airwave regulation
    and freq
    > >allocations are different and we will again just rent mics there).
    >
    > Find a mike that you like, THEN get a wireless kit for it. I will
    suggest
    > you bite the bullet and spend the money for Lectrosonics or Zaxcom
    wireless
    > hardware because it will save you grief in the long run. I'll also
    suggest
    > that getting a cheap scanner with a spectrum analyzer display (the
    new
    > Icom looks nice) can save you a lot of grief as well because you can
    do a
    > site survey for some time before the actual performance to get a
    sense of
    > what the noise floor on various channels are like.

    Several of the current model receivers offer scanning built in, making
    it easier to get clean frequencies and then set your receiver and
    transmitter to these frequencies.
    >
    > >We are
    > >four vocalists who imitate the sound of a band. Their use will
    include a
    > >touch of "beat-boxing" (percussive air bursts on the transducer) to
    soft and
    > >delicate 4-part ballads. I as the Bass Singer reach a low B up 3
    1/2
    > >octaves to our Tenor who has a tremendous falsetto (close to Aretha
    Franklin
    > >in power for high notes). We also depend on clean crispy high
    freq's such
    > >as a cymbal (we use the Sssss sound as high-hat/crash drum sounds).
    > > Who in the business is using what and why? We are open for an
    > >endorsement deal also. Thanks for any help you can offer!!

    Most of the systems out there will do generally well for your
    application, and provide plenty of frequency response both above and
    below your ranges. The only one thing you may need to look at is
    systems with either a dual-band compander, digital hybrid, or pure
    digital. The reason for this is that your percussive sounds,
    particularly the cymbal imitation is not always handled with with
    "traditional" wireless meant just for vocals.
    >
    > You may want to try using different mikes for different performers,
    or if
    > you are all basically comfortable already with the 58, you may want
    to all
    > keep using the same so that you can change them out on the fly. It
    is worth
    > going out to someplace where you can try a couple dozen different
    vocal mikes
    > and record yourself on them so you can hear what the differences are.
    > --scott
    >

    Karl Winkler
    Lectrosonics, Inc.
    http://www.lectrosonics.com
  7. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    In article <cqv62m$6a1$1@panix2.panix.com>, kludge@panix.com (Scott
    Dorsey) wrote:

    >
    > >We are
    > >four vocalists who imitate the sound of a band. Their use will include
    > >a
    > >touch of "beat-boxing" (percussive air bursts on the transducer) to soft
    > >and
    > >delicate 4-part ballads. I as the Bass Singer reach a low B up 3 1/2
    > >octaves to our Tenor who has a tremendous falsetto (close to Aretha
    > >Franklin
    > >in power for high notes). We also depend on clean crispy high freq's
    > >such
    > >as a cymbal (we use the Sssss sound as high-hat/crash drum sounds).
    > > Who in the business is using what and why? We are open for an
    > >endorsement deal also. Thanks for any help you can offer!!


    We bought a Rode S-1 and love it. Very smooth and rich sounding compared
    to our SM58 wireless. Worth checking out if you have phantom power.
Ask a new question

Read More

Pro Audio Audio