Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Female and Male Mics

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:13:40 PM

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

Hello.
I have read that Mr. Dorsey said that the Electrovoice RE-20 is almost
always an OK mic choice (not necesarilly the best) for vocals.
I dont sing but i record differents vocals once in a while. The RE-20 is not
too much expensive so it could be a good choice for vocals on a home studio.
Is this true for female and male?.

Thanks.

More about : female male mics

Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:14:34 PM

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

José Luis Amores wrote:
> Hello.
> I have read that Mr. Dorsey said that the Electrovoice RE-20 is almost
> always an OK mic choice (not necesarilly the best) for vocals.
> I dont sing but i record differents vocals once in a while. The RE-20 is not
> too much expensive so it could be a good choice for vocals on a home studio.
> Is this true for female and male?.
>
> Thanks.
>
>


Yes, but you should arrange to hire or borrow one to test before you buy
one. You may or may not like it.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:15:44 PM

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

José Luis Amores <jlamores@wanadoo.es> wrote:
>Hello.
>I have read that Mr. Dorsey said that the Electrovoice RE-20 is almost
>always an OK mic choice (not necesarilly the best) for vocals.
>I dont sing but i record differents vocals once in a while. The RE-20 is not
>too much expensive so it could be a good choice for vocals on a home studio.
>Is this true for female and male?.

The midrange on the RE-20 is flat enough that it's reasonable for both male
and female vocals. The problems you run into are with microphones that are
very specifically designed to flatter vocals in some way or another; most of
the things that are flattering to one sort of voice won't be flattering to
others. The flat midrange on the RE-20 makes it less exciting, but it makes
it usable on an incredible range of different things.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Related resources
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:21:27 PM

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

The RE-20 is reportedly Bonnie Riatt's favorite studio mic.

Al

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 13:13:40 +0100, "José Luis Amores"
<jlamores@wanadoo.es> wrote:

>Hello.
>I have read that Mr. Dorsey said that the Electrovoice RE-20 is almost
>always an OK mic choice (not necesarilly the best) for vocals.
>I dont sing but i record differents vocals once in a while. The RE-20 is not
>too much expensive so it could be a good choice for vocals on a home studio.
>Is this true for female and male?.
>
>Thanks.
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 4:35:08 PM

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

> >I have read that Mr. Dorsey said that the Electrovoice RE-20 is almost
> >always an OK mic choice (not necesarilly the best) for vocals.
> >I dont sing but i record differents vocals once in a while. The RE-20 is
not
> >too much expensive so it could be a good choice for vocals on a home
studio.
> >Is this true for female and male?.
>
> The midrange on the RE-20 is flat enough that it's reasonable for both
male
> and female vocals. The problems you run into are with microphones that
are
> very specifically designed to flatter vocals in some way or another; most
of
> the things that are flattering to one sort of voice won't be flattering to
> others. The flat midrange on the RE-20 makes it less exciting, but it
makes
> it usable on an incredible range of different things.

Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy on
high treble for vocals IMO. In a live setting it can be nice since it
doesn't have the 4kHz notch of most dynamics, but there's many less
expensive and tougher alternatives. I'd gladly endure a 4kHz notch for
something more durable for stage, and there are several condenser mics I'd
try long before considering any dynamic mic for vocals in the studio, and
even then an RE-20 probably wouldn't be the first dynamic I'd pick, more
likely an AKG D3800.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 5:23:50 PM

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

Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy on
> high treble for vocals IMO.

No, actually it doesn't. Even considering how big that mylar diaphragm is.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 10:05:44 PM

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

Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:

> Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy on
> high treble for vocals IMO.

I beseech thee, get thee to the .pdf for the RE20 and learn somethng
about its response.

Ever seen the response of the MD441? It's a dynamic mic.

> In a live setting it can be nice since it
> doesn't have the 4kHz notch of most dynamics,

Keeerist...

> but there's many less
> expensive and tougher alternatives.

Given that the RE20 is one of the toughest mics ever built, that is not
likely. Yeah, there are cheaper mics around. But tougher? Damn few.

> I'd gladly endure a 4kHz notch for
> something more durable for stage, and there are several condenser mics I'd
> try long before considering any dynamic mic for vocals in the studio,

Dang it, wish somebody had known that before Bonnie's track became such
a hit. Maybe Ed should call you next time before he puts up a mic for a
rough that turns out a killer vocal that sells cowabunga.

--
ha
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 10:05:45 PM

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

Combining posts...

> > Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy on
> > high treble for vocals IMO.
>
> I beseech thee, get thee to the .pdf for the RE20 and learn somethng
> about its response.
[and]
> No, actually it doesn't. Even considering how big that mylar diaphragm
is.

Look again yourselves:
http://tinyurl.com/4jjbk

Now check the D3800:
http://tinyurl.com/4pvwd
gets up closer to 16kHz

And the greatest disparity between the two is at 4kHz, like I said.

> Ever seen the response of the MD441? It's a dynamic mic.
>
> Guess you have to scratch all those vocal tracks done with an SM7
> while you're at it.

Both of these have a treble boost switch. Try comparing switch off and EQ
up. Treble is the last thing I want to have to EQ, whether it's a plug-in,
mixer strip, or on-board circuit. Dynamic diaphrams just don't get up there
nearly as well as condensers, and it's a critical aspect to an impressive
vocal sound. Midrange is too of course, which is where a dynamic can be
most effective, but not at the expense of high treble under everyday
circumstances, like the OP is considering.

> > I'd gladly endure a 4kHz notch for
> > something more durable for stage, and there are several condenser mics
I'd
> > try long before considering any dynamic mic for vocals in the studio,
>
> Dang it, wish somebody had known that before Bonnie's track became such
> a hit. Maybe Ed should call you next time before he puts up a mic for a
> rough that turns out a killer vocal that sells cowabunga.

Right, he put it up for a *rough take* and it was a fluke that it worked
*for that voice in that setting*. He could easily have come to the same
conclusion after trying several more likely condenser candidates, and
wouldn't be wasting his time doing so. Doesn't change the fact that 99% of
the time it's a condenser that works best, and of the 1% where a dynamic is
preferable it's generally because of an atypical voice or vocal style.

The OP is talking about a first vocal mic. A dynamic mic for recording
vocals is a 5th or 6th mic at best. I'm not saying don't ever use dynamics
on vocals, I'm saying don't limit yourself to one. Damn near any reasonable
$300+ condenser is going to work better more often. Who in their right mind
would pick an RE20 over a NT1000 as their one-and-only vocal mic?
January 10, 2005 10:57:21 PM

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

walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich) writes:

>Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>> I'd gladly endure a 4kHz notch for
>> something more durable for stage, and there are several condenser mics I'd
>> try long before considering any dynamic mic for vocals in the studio,

>Dang it, wish somebody had known that before Bonnie's track became such
>a hit. Maybe Ed should call you next time before he puts up a mic for a
>rough that turns out a killer vocal that sells cowabunga.

>--
>ha

Guess you have to scratch all those vocal tracks done with an SM7
while you're at it.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:42:47 AM

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

> Who in their right mind would pick an RE20 over a
> NT1000 as their one-and-only vocal mic?

Just about any radio station in the world.
Thank goodness those DJ's aren't singing !

rd
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:47:30 AM

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

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Sugarite wrote:

> > Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy on
> > high treble for vocals IMO.

> No, actually it doesn't. Even considering how big that mylar diaphragm is.

An RE20 in good shape is down 3 dB @ 18 Khz.

http://tinyurl.com/4jjbk

--
ha
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:45:13 AM

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

hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote:

> As stated and observed, these mics do not have "treble boost" switches.

I correct myself: there is a peaking treble boost switch on the MD441,
but it doesn't extend the frequency range of the mic; the mic's hi-freq
extension is to 20 KHz with or without that switch. I've had these mics
since the mid-'70's and I don't ever feel the need to use that switch. I
do sometimes use the lo-freq roll-off, but not often for singing vox,
mainly for speech apps.

--
ha
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 7:08:07 AM

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

Think you really should get all your facts together before you post, and
making sure they're correct would help too.
Been doing this long??

--
Martin Harrington
www.lendanear-sound.com
"Sugarite" <nobody@home.com> wrote in message
news:gdCEd.15691$0y4.2427@read1.cgocable.net...
> Combining posts...
>
>> > Yeah, but being a dynamic mic it rolls off at about 12kHz, rather shy
>> > on
>> > high treble for vocals IMO.
>>
>> I beseech thee, get thee to the .pdf for the RE20 and learn somethng
>> about its response.
> [and]
>> No, actually it doesn't. Even considering how big that mylar diaphragm
> is.
>
> Look again yourselves:
> http://tinyurl.com/4jjbk
>
> Now check the D3800:
> http://tinyurl.com/4pvwd
> gets up closer to 16kHz
>
> And the greatest disparity between the two is at 4kHz, like I said.
>
>> Ever seen the response of the MD441? It's a dynamic mic.
>>
>> Guess you have to scratch all those vocal tracks done with an SM7
>> while you're at it.
>
> Both of these have a treble boost switch. Try comparing switch off and EQ
> up. Treble is the last thing I want to have to EQ, whether it's a
> plug-in,
> mixer strip, or on-board circuit. Dynamic diaphrams just don't get up
> there
> nearly as well as condensers, and it's a critical aspect to an impressive
> vocal sound. Midrange is too of course, which is where a dynamic can be
> most effective, but not at the expense of high treble under everyday
> circumstances, like the OP is considering.
>
>> > I'd gladly endure a 4kHz notch for
>> > something more durable for stage, and there are several condenser mics
> I'd
>> > try long before considering any dynamic mic for vocals in the studio,
>>
>> Dang it, wish somebody had known that before Bonnie's track became such
>> a hit. Maybe Ed should call you next time before he puts up a mic for a
>> rough that turns out a killer vocal that sells cowabunga.
>
> Right, he put it up for a *rough take* and it was a fluke that it worked
> *for that voice in that setting*. He could easily have come to the same
> conclusion after trying several more likely condenser candidates, and
> wouldn't be wasting his time doing so. Doesn't change the fact that 99%
> of
> the time it's a condenser that works best, and of the 1% where a dynamic
> is
> preferable it's generally because of an atypical voice or vocal style.
>
> The OP is talking about a first vocal mic. A dynamic mic for recording
> vocals is a 5th or 6th mic at best. I'm not saying don't ever use
> dynamics
> on vocals, I'm saying don't limit yourself to one. Damn near any
> reasonable
> $300+ condenser is going to work better more often. Who in their right
> mind
> would pick an RE20 over a NT1000 as their one-and-only vocal mic?
>
>
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 6:51:25 PM

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

Sugarite wrote:
>
> The 4kHz notch is common to most cardioid dynamic mics

Says you.




> I guess you haven't done much SR - step 1: drop the 4kHz by 6dB (not a
> permanent adjustment, but a good starting point).

Usually to offset the nasty presence peak that starts around 5-6k in many vocal mics. Dipping at a slightly lower Fc helps offset the nasty 3k5 ringing found in so many cheap PA setups.






> 3.5k is hardly treble

What else would you call a frequency that is only produced as an overtone by the vast majority of instruments? Piano and Piccolo come to mind as common instruments which emit fundamentals that high, but not much else other than percussion.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 9:57:05 PM

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

Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net> wrote:
>Sugarite wrote:
>>
>> The 4kHz notch is common to most cardioid dynamic mics
>
>Says you.

By "notch" do you actually mean a boost at 4KHz? Like a presence peak?

When most folks use the word "notch" we are talking about a dip and not
a boost.

It's true that most cheap dynamics have a presence peak, and one of the
wonderful things about the RE-20 is that it doesn't have one.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 11:27:12 PM

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

> By "notch" do you actually mean a boost at 4KHz? Like a presence peak?

Oops... brainfart there. I guess I figured the meaning would be obvious
due to the commonality of the phenomenon.

> It's true that most cheap dynamics have a presence peak, and one of the
> wonderful things about the RE-20 is that it doesn't have one.

Cheap has nothing to do with it. The D3800, D112, MD441, MD421, E855, OM-7
are all over $300 as well as over +3dB at 4kHz. Frankly I can't think of a
dynamic mic that isn't except for the RE20 and SM7, which is probably a big
reason why they are preferred dynamic mics for vocals in the studio.
Neither have the high treble response characteristics of a condenser that
are advantageous to vocals IMO.

Here endeth the on-topic section of this post.

> > I guess you haven't done much SR - step 1: drop the 4kHz by 6dB (not a
> > permanent adjustment, but a good starting point).
>
> Usually to offset the nasty presence peak that starts around 5-6k in many
vocal mics. Dipping at a slightly lower Fc helps offset the nasty 3k5
ringing found in so many cheap PA setups.

Actually I find compression horns rip at about 4.5kHz (not just cheap ones
either), and presence peaks above 5kHz are generally welcome. The 4k range
just isn't pleasant through horns, hence the default -6dB.

> > 3.5k is hardly treble
>
> What else would you call a frequency that is only produced as an overtone
by the vast majority of instruments? Piano and Piccolo come to mind as
common instruments which emit fundamentals that high, but not much else
other than percussion.

Not to imply that your response isn't rediculous argumentative rhetorical
nonesense, I consider the range from 2kHz to 4.5kHz to be high-midrange,
consisting predominantly of formants and sibillants, and treble refers to
frequencies beyond that where only sibilance is prefered. And an EQ knob
for 3.5kHz would never be called "treble" except perhaps on a guitar amp.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 12:56:40 AM

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

> Cheap has nothing to do with it. The D3800, D112, MD441,
> MD421, E855, OM-7
> are all over $300 as well as over +3dB at 4kHz. Frankly I
> can't think of a
> dynamic mic that isn't except for the RE20 and SM7, which is >
probably a big
> reason why they are preferred dynamic mics for vocals in the >
studio.
> Neither have the high treble response characteristics of a
> condenser that
> are advantageous to vocals IMO.


You might want to look at BeyerDynamic's M201.
around $200 new, Hypercard, very flat except
for a little top end boost above 10K.
You'll need a pop-stop in front to use for vocal.
"The little dynamic that thinks it's a condensor"

rd
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 4:49:15 AM

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

Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:

> I guess you haven't done much SR

I started doing live sound in 1968, professionally. I did some
interesting SR work at Armadillo World Headquarters and I have a long
list of wonderful artists for whom I have provided SR since moving from
Austin to northern California twenty years ago. I've mixed Count Basie
and I've mixed John Nitzinger. I've mixed on tiny consoles and huge
ones, from Peavey to Midas. I've mixed in venues that hold a couple
dozen folks and in venues that hold a couple dozen thousand folks.

I find your spec sheet generalizations outrightly silly, based on my
experience. But I leave you to them.

--
ha
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 4:49:16 AM

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

> > I guess you haven't done much SR
>
> I started doing live sound in 1968, professionally. I did some
> interesting SR work at Armadillo World Headquarters and I have a long
> list of wonderful artists for whom I have provided SR since moving from
> Austin to northern California twenty years ago. I've mixed Count Basie
> and I've mixed John Nitzinger. I've mixed on tiny consoles and huge
> ones, from Peavey to Midas. I've mixed in venues that hold a couple
> dozen folks and in venues that hold a couple dozen thousand folks.

....when reason fails, name-drop. Anyone who takes someone's advice just
because they've mixed Count Basie shouldn't be reading usenet.

> I find your spec sheet generalizations outrightly silly, based on my
> experience. But I leave you to them.

> I beseech thee, get thee to the .pdf for the RE20 and learn somethng
> about its response.

Hard to believe those two posts are from the same person...

I leave you to your unfounded bias.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 4:49:16 AM

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

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:1gq8jgg.1py18i6cqvhxcN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>
>> I guess you haven't done much SR
>
> I started doing live sound in 1968, professionally. I did some
> interesting SR work at Armadillo World Headquarters and I have a long
> list of wonderful artists for whom I have provided SR since moving from
> Austin to northern California twenty years ago. I've mixed Count Basie
> and I've mixed John Nitzinger. I've mixed on tiny consoles and huge
> ones, from Peavey to Midas. I've mixed in venues that hold a couple
> dozen folks and in venues that hold a couple dozen thousand folks.
>
> I find your spec sheet generalizations outrightly silly, based on my
> experience. But I leave you to them.
>
> --
> ha

Game. Set. Match.

Steve King
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:07:17 AM

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

On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 22:25:03 -0500, "Sugarite" <nobody@home.com>
wrote:

>I leave you to your unfounded bias.

Geez, Louise. Let me guess: Southern Cal? Anywhere in Canada?
Around here it was 70F and blustery today, and all's right
with the world. Until the tornados tommorrow.

So I can lollback and comfortably assure you that you're in
Mistooken. Been there so many times I could draw the map.
It's no sin.

Good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck
"Happiness isn't something you experience; it's something you remember."
-Oscar Levant
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 12:23:41 PM

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

Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>> By "notch" do you actually mean a boost at 4KHz? Like a presence peak?
>
>Oops... brainfart there. I guess I figured the meaning would be obvious
>due to the commonality of the phenomenon.
>
>> It's true that most cheap dynamics have a presence peak, and one of the
>> wonderful things about the RE-20 is that it doesn't have one.
>
>Cheap has nothing to do with it. The D3800, D112, MD441, MD421, E855, OM-7
>are all over $300 as well as over +3dB at 4kHz. Frankly I can't think of a
>dynamic mic that isn't except for the RE20 and SM7, which is probably a big
>reason why they are preferred dynamic mics for vocals in the studio.
>Neither have the high treble response characteristics of a condenser that
>are advantageous to vocals IMO.

The 441 has no real presence peak. The 421 has a very slight one (although the
"New And Improved 421 II" has a much more serious one). The response on the
D112 is so wacky that it's hard to tell WHAT it's doing.

Other good examples of dynamics without presence peaks are the 666, the
664 and 676, and some of the Audio-Technica mikes like the AT N/D 468.

There are plenty of mikes out there with solid patterns and no presence
boost, but you do have to look a bit harder for them these days. It is
really a serious problem for PA that most of the cheaper PA mikes all have
a presence boost and are usually combined with speaker systems that have
a presence boost as well. The end result sadly often needs a lot of EQ
to make it sound decent at all. There's no reason for that.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 12:23:42 PM

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

Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:
>
>>> By "notch" do you actually mean a boost at 4KHz? Like a presence peak?
>>
>> Oops... brainfart there. I guess I figured the meaning would be obvious
>> due to the commonality of the phenomenon.
>>
>>
>>> It's true that most cheap dynamics have a presence peak, and one of the
>>> wonderful things about the RE-20 is that it doesn't have one.
>>
>> Cheap has nothing to do with it. The D3800, D112, MD441, MD421, E855, OM-7
>> are all over $300 as well as over +3dB at 4kHz. Frankly I can't think of a
>> dynamic mic that isn't except for the RE20 and SM7, which is probably a big
>> reason why they are preferred dynamic mics for vocals in the studio.
>> Neither have the high treble response characteristics of a condenser that
>> are advantageous to vocals IMO.
>
>
> The 441 has no real presence peak. The 421 has a very slight one (although the
> "New And Improved 421 II" has a much more serious one). The response on the
> D112 is so wacky that it's hard to tell WHAT it's doing.
>
> Other good examples of dynamics without presence peaks are the 666, the
> 664 and 676, and some of the Audio-Technica mikes like the AT N/D 468.

And of course the Beyer M201.
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 5:21:50 PM

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

Sugarite <nobody@home.com> wrote:

> > > I guess you haven't done much SR

and

> I leave you to your unfounded bias.

LOL!

--
ha
!