Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What are good drum mics these days?

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 6:36:51 PM

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

What are some of the better drum mics these days?
For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly dynamic
mics
for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
I should check out?

Kick-Akg d-112, Senn-421, U-47-fet with pad, Re-20

Snare- sm 57, B&K 4000, Akg 451 with pad
Snare bottom- any one of the above-phase reversed

Toms- Sm 57, Senn 421, Km-84 with pad

Hat- any SD cond, 451

Over heads- 87, 414, any good large dia cond.
Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics

Room- pair of 414, 87, LD cond mic
omni with baffles to remove original direct signal

More about : good drum mics days

Anonymous
February 18, 2005 9:26:32 PM

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

kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
> What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly dynamic
> mics
> for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> I should check out?

I'll add a couple of older models:

Sennheiser MD409U
Beyer M201

Mostly for toms and snare.



And some currently shipping models:

Schoeps MK41/MK4/MK21 (depending on room & style of music.)
Josephson E22S (side address cardioid.)
Josephson C617 (best omnis I have heard yet.)
Microtech-Gefell M930


One in the "something old, something new" category:

AKG C460B with Audio Upgrades mods (paired with CK61/CK63 and possibly an A61 swivel.)





I hear a lot of good things about the Audix D6 on kick (I have not tried one yet.)
Anonymous
February 18, 2005 10:40:07 PM

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

> Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics

I had to think about this one for a second. Would you do this because you
want to address phase issues involing the drum OH's relative the rest of the
mics, as opposed to drum OH's relative to each other? It makes sense that if
your snare, which is panned center, is out of phase with the left OH, but in
phase with the right OH, it would kinda defeat the purpose of spending all
that money on a matched pair of KM84's.

Well, as for mics, my next purchase is an AT 4060. I've heard great things
about it for OH's and that it even gets a decent kick sound, in addition to
it's main purpose for vocals and stringed instruments. If I could afford a
matched pair to completely replace my MC012's I'd go for it, but I figure
AT's QC is tight enough that a random pair should be pretty close,
especially with a little "DIY matching."

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1108769811.484032.285280@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly dynamic
> mics
> for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> I should check out?
>
> Kick-Akg d-112, Senn-421, U-47-fet with pad, Re-20
>
> Snare- sm 57, B&K 4000, Akg 451 with pad
> Snare bottom- any one of the above-phase reversed
>
> Toms- Sm 57, Senn 421, Km-84 with pad
>
> Hat- any SD cond, 451
>
> Over heads- 87, 414, any good large dia cond.
> Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics
>
> Room- pair of 414, 87, LD cond mic
> omni with baffles to remove original direct signal
>
Related resources
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 12:16:34 AM

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

With Drum overhead phasing, I find you
need to reverse the phase on both overheads
for the low frequency range of the snare
is arriving later to the overheads, thus producing
phase problems in the low fequwncy range.
I always check by monitoring the snare and toms with
the overheads in mono and flip the phase to discover
which sounds better. In most cases I flip the phase
on both overheads
kevin
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 11:34:51 AM

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

kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
> What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly dynamic
> mics
> for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> I should check out?

Let me put in a good word for the Audio-Technica N/D 468. It's more or less
like a Sennheiser 441 in pattern and tone, but it's a whole lot smaller so
you can get closer in without worrying so much. It's also a lot cheaper.
It's not as clean as the 441 at high levels but that's sometimes a good thing.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
February 19, 2005 11:34:52 AM

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

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Let me put in a good word for the Audio-Technica N/D 468.

Hey Scott, still not quite awake? The N/D468 is Electro-Voice not AT. I
know you know that. But yeah, I love that mic. I they sound great, and
are nice and small. It seems like it's not too well known. I wonder why?

--
Eric

www.Raw-Tracks.com
www.Mad-Host.com
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 12:30:15 PM

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

EricK <eric@Raw-Tracks.com> wrote:
>Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> Let me put in a good word for the Audio-Technica N/D 468.
>
>Hey Scott, still not quite awake? The N/D468 is Electro-Voice not AT. I
>know you know that. But yeah, I love that mic. I they sound great, and
>are nice and small. It seems like it's not too well known. I wonder why?

No, clearly I haven't had my tea yet. It is indeed an EV mike. And I
don't know why they aren't very well known because they are really a great
go-to microphone whenever you need a stage mike with a tight pattern and
no presence peak. I've even used it on vocals.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 5:33:49 PM

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

Close micing: Damn they're loud
-----
Kick- AKG D112, ATM25, EV-RE20

Snare- Beyer M201, SM57, MXL603s

Rack Toms-EV-RE20, AT3528, Audix D-2
Floor Toms-MD421, RE-20, ATM25

Hat-MXL603s

Overheads-AT4041, AKG-535EB, Studio Projects C-4 (omni)

About the only time I used LD on drums is in a whole kit configuration.
My room is to small to use LD's for ovhds in close micing.


Whole kit micing: Jazz, Pop, Country
-----
3 mic setup-Neuman-TLM103, (2)AT4050
or (2)AT4050's, D112 and a SM57


Wayne :>)
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 7:37:58 PM

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

> >
> Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't
like the
> sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare frequencies
are
> arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
>
> --
Hi Dave
You are quite correct with all frequencies arriving at the same time.
It's just that all mid and high frequencies are in phase when they
arrive to the snare and O/H's, but the lower frequencies are out of
phase,
due to their longer wavelengths. Most of the time if the O/H's are 3-4
ft
above the snare
kevin doyle
>N
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 7:47:01 PM

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

I added a 468 to the kit about a year ago. I've had a D112 for years, love
that fat sound. As Scott says, the 468 has a lot going for it, but not that
phat sound. An Audix D6 is next on the list for kick mics though.

Best regards,

John
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 7:52:37 PM

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

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Let me put in a good word for the Audio-Technica N/D 468.

Why does that look to me like an EV model number?

--
ha
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 8:42:42 PM

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

"Kurt Albershardt" <kurt@nv.net> wrote in message
news:37nmenF5gjfnlU1@individual.net...
>
>
> I hear a lot of good things about the Audix D6 on kick (I have not tried
one yet.)
>

I *LOVE* this mic on Kick - in virtually every style I've tried it on.

I also combine it with a '57 on Heavy Guitar sounds and it works great.

Well worth a look.


Geoff
Anonymous
February 19, 2005 9:11:49 PM

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

kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
>> Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't
>> like the sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare
>> frequencies are arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
>
>
> Hi Dave
> You are quite correct with all frequencies arriving at the same time.
> It's just that all mid and high frequencies are in phase when they
> arrive to the snare and O/H's

Wrong. The higher frequencies are more like random phase, so polarity changes aren't usually audible.




> the lower frequencies are out of
> phase, due to their longer wavelengths.

Opposite polarity, not out of phase.

And just for the beginners--what this really means is flip the polarity and see if you can hear a difference. Pick what sounds best.
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 2:19:21 AM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1108790194.054387.126830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> With Drum overhead phasing, I find you
> need to reverse the phase on both overheads
> for the low frequency range of the snare
> is arriving later to the overheads, thus producing
> phase problems in the low fequwncy range.
> I always check by monitoring the snare and toms with
> the overheads in mono and flip the phase to discover
> which sounds better. In most cases I flip the phase
> on both overheads
> kevin
>
Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't like the
sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare frequencies are
arriving later, not just the low frequencies...

--
Dave Martin
DMA, Inc
Nashville, TN
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 2:19:22 AM

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

Dave Martin wrote:


> Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't like the
> sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare frequencies are
> arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
>

How much further away would you have to put them to equal half of one
cycle? Seems like that would be more natural sounding.
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 2:19:23 AM

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

> > Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't like
the
> > sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare frequencies are
> > arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
> >
>
> How much further away would you have to put them to equal half of one
> cycle? Seems like that would be more natural sounding.

I think we need to remember that all frequencies travel at the same speed
(about 3120 fps @ room temp) and the length of a cycle is variable depending
on the frequency. This means that ALL frequencies arrive at the mic at the
same time, so the phase relationship between mics will be exactly the same
at all frequencies. Now, with this in mind, it's still important to note
that LF's and HF's will be affected differently by phase issues. LF's tend
to be more affected by phase and therefor it may SEEM that they arrive
later. It's often a good indicator that your OH's are OOP if the kick drops
out of your mix.

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



"Joe Sensor" <crabcakes@emagic.net> wrote in message
news:37q0prF5e6a3eU1@individual.net...
> Dave Martin wrote:
>
>
> > Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't like
the
> > sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare frequencies are
> > arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
> >
>
> How much further away would you have to put them to equal half of one
> cycle? Seems like that would be more natural sounding.
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 2:19:24 AM

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

Jonny Durango wrote:


> (about 3120 fps @ room temp)


Wrong planet and atmospheric composition. Assuming the OP is on Earth
and using air (mostly O2/N2 mixed 20/80), that would be 1130 fps.
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 3:58:35 AM

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

On 19 Feb 2005 16:37:58 -0800, kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:

>You are quite correct with all frequencies arriving at the same time.
>It's just that all mid and high frequencies are in phase when they
>arrive to the snare and O/H's, but the lower frequencies are out of
>phase, due to their longer wavelengths.

Y'all just stop it! You're driving me crazy. Stop saying "phase".
Just say no. Please, stop!

"Phase" is a word like "family values", that gets used
uncritically, and so just muddies the waters. Stop!



What's switched at the microphone is "polarity". What's
adjusted in mixing to compensate is "time delay".

These things have *nothing* to do with phase. And therein
lie all your misunderstandings.

Thanks; I feel better now,

Chris Hornbeck
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 4:01:37 AM

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

Jonny Durango wrote:

> It's often a good indicator that your OH's are OOP if the kick drops
> out of your mix.

That statement is loaded with assumptions, not the least of which is
that every time anybody mics a kit they do it just like everybody else
does it with the same mics in the same room on the same kit and all the
mics placed precisely the same with the exact same distance from the
kit.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 5:51:17 AM

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

On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 18:11:49 -0800, Kurt Albershardt wrote:

> kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
>>> Not me - I have tried reversing the phase of the OH's, and didn't
>>> like the sound at all. And.... I would think that ALL the snare
>>> frequencies are arriving later, not just the low frequencies...
>>
>>
>> Hi Dave
>> You are quite correct with all frequencies arriving at the same time.
>> It's just that all mid and high frequencies are in phase when they
>> arrive to the snare and O/H's
>
> Wrong. The higher frequencies are more like random phase, so polarity changes aren't usually audible.
>
>
>
>
>> the lower frequencies are out of
>> phase, due to their longer wavelengths.
>
> Opposite polarity, not out of phase.

So, when is it technically correct to use the word 'phase'?
If I have a snare mic, and some overheads, surely they have a phase
relationship, rather than a polarity?

I would say the term 'phase' is often misused, like the 'phase' button on
a mixer reverses the polarity, rather than changing the phase. But I don't
see how you can use the term polarity when dealing with phase differences
between multiple mics.


>
> And just for the beginners--what this really means is flip the polarity
> and see if you can hear a difference. Pick what sounds best.
It's worth checking in mono too...
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 9:09:47 AM

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

S O'Neill wrote:

> Wrong planet and atmospheric composition.

I hate when that happens. Completely disorienting.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 9:09:48 AM

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

hank alrich wrote:

> S O'Neill wrote:
>
>
>>Wrong planet and atmospheric composition.
>
>
> I hate when that happens. Completely disorienting.


Sounds really *cool*, though.
Anonymous
February 20, 2005 12:20:22 PM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message

> Over heads- 87, 414, any good large dia cond.
> Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics
>
> Room- pair of 414, 87, LD cond mic
> omni with baffles to remove original direct signal


Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !) SD mics
in these applications ?

geoff
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 12:53:06 AM

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

Chris Hornbeck wrote:

> Y'all just stop it! You're driving me crazy. Stop saying "phase".
> Just say no. Please, stop!
>
> "Phase" is a word like "family values", that gets used
> uncritically, and so just muddies the waters. Stop!

It's hard for my to stop when I was exposed to the
terms in an interrelated way from my education on...
Although there may have been some distractions at the time.
(ducking Ohio NG bullets at Kent State in the
early 70's)

> What's switched at the microphone is "polarity". What's
> adjusted in mixing to compensate is "time delay".

>From my Soundcraft owner's manual:
" 0 (phase) reverses the phase of the selected input."
While it's not technically accurate,
it is a common 'expression'.

> These things have *nothing* to do with phase. And therein
> lie all your misunderstandings.
>
> Thanks; I feel better now,
>
> Chris Hornbeck

I feel better now too ;-]
rd
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 1:03:57 AM

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

Kurt Albershardt wrote:
> kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
> > What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> > For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly
dynamic
> > mics
> > for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> > All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> > I should check out?
>
> I'll add a couple of older models:
>
> Sennheiser MD409U
> Beyer M201

I'm pretty sure the M201 is still current.
Try a pair on OH, or one at the HiHat.
GREAT little mic.

> Mostly for toms and snare.

Bargain: the Senn e604's on rock toms.

> And some currently shipping models:
>
> Schoeps MK41/MK4/MK21 (depending on room & style of music.)
> Josephson E22S (side address cardioid.)
> Josephson C617 (best omnis I have heard yet.)
> Microtech-Gefell M930
>
>
> One in the "something old, something new" category:
>
> AKG C460B with Audio Upgrades mods (paired with CK61/CK63 and
possibly an A61 swivel.)

Or just pop for the C480.

rd
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 5:28:55 AM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message news:1108769811.484032.285280@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly dynamic
> mics for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> I should check out?

I don't think there's a lot to add to your list that are overly impressive. I tend
to use a lot of these as well.

> Kick-Akg d-112, Senn-421, U-47-fet with pad, Re-20

D-12 or D-112 are first choices for me, while a lot of folks think the 112 is
overhyped in the low end and boxey sounding. Personally, I'm not the least
bit afraid of EQ, so it's fine with me. Another that I've been running into and
liking a lot is the Sennheiser E-602
http://www.sennheiserusa.com/newsite/productdetail.asp?...
Shure has a fairly new kick mic too, but I haven't any experience with it.

> Snare- sm 57, B&K 4000, Akg 451 with pad

Haven't used the B&K, the other two are absolute first choices for me as well.

> Snare bottom- any one of the above-phase reversed

I don't reverse the phase on anything until I've checked it for myself. I might
even find that I can use a small phase difference to my advantage, because
the frequencies effected will change slightly depending on how much level
one applies to the bottom mic. I rarely mic the bottom and even more rarely
actually use it in the mix... even after another producer calls for the bottom
mic, most often they don't use it either. I've *never* been told to 'automatically'
reverse the phase on a bottom mic.

There's a fairly large thread about just this subject that's been going for a couple
of weeks. I've stayed out of it because I don't go by the math or the 'expected'
results, I use my ears or don't use the bottom mic. <g> OK, I'll use a phase
meter and check in mono, but I seem to have waaay fewer 'phase' issues
than most people complain about having.

> Toms- Sm 57, Senn 421, Km-84 with pad

I've used LDCs on toms before, but I prefer your first two choices here.
Sennheiser has some entries in the tom mic category, but IMHO, they're
darned close to 57s.

> Hat- any SD cond, 451

Ahhh... the always forgotten and rarely used hat mic. Yup... a SDC makes
just about everyone happy for recording. I trash the hat mic in about 85%
of all recordings when it comes to mix time.

> Over heads- 87, 414, any good large dia cond.
> Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics

I have a couple of producers that like LDCs for overheads. They look
good and it's hard to make them sound bad, but I definitely prefer a
small diaphragm for overheads. KM84, 184, Sony 535, 451s, and
my favorite... the Audio Technica 4051.

You're biting off a can of worms by reversing phase on the biggest
picture of the drum kit without some pretty substantial reasoning to go
along with it.

> Room- pair of 414, 87, LD cond mic
> omni with baffles to remove original direct signal

You're lucky.... <g>. I'm rarely in a room that's good enough or has
enough space available for throwing up a room mics for drums without
expecting it to be chocked full of other instruments.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 5:41:45 AM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message news:1108790194.054387.126830@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> With Drum overhead phasing, I find you
> need to reverse the phase on both overheads
> for the low frequency range of the snare
> is arriving later to the overheads, thus producing
> phase problems in the low fequwncy range.
> I always check by monitoring the snare and toms with
> the overheads in mono and flip the phase to discover
> which sounds better. In most cases I flip the phase
> on both overheads
> kevin


I've never had a problem with 'phase' on overheads in 30+ years
of recording. Of course, there's a disclaimer to that... I deliberately
roll off the vast majority of low frequencies in my overheads. I'm not
trying to get a full-blown or even accurate picture of the entire drum
kit in the OHs, I just want the image and the sizzle.

I mike every drum (rarely use a snare bottom or a second mic on the
bass drum), and I find that any low frequency stuff from cymbals is
usually present in the tom mics, and all I really want from my small
diaphragm overhead mics is the cymbals and a little of the space they
sit in. I have to deal with things like snare drum and tomtom attack in
the overheads, but I always check in mono and find that 'phase' is
rarely enough of a problem to fret over once all of the mics are put
back together to create the full image of the kit.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 12:37:09 PM

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

In article <HHbSd.43862$uc.15253@trnddc04> mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com writes:

> I don't reverse the phase on anything until I've checked it for myself.

Smart move.

> I might
> even find that I can use a small phase difference to my advantage, because
> the frequencies effected will change slightly depending on how much level
> one applies to the bottom mic.

The frequencies won't be affected (unless you change the level by
moving the mic) but the amount of cancellation at whatever frequencies
tend to cancel will change as you change the mix of the two mics. It's
more like changing the amount of cut on an EQ control rather than
adjusting the frequency. But since changing the mix also changes the
shape of the sides of the notch (and therefore the width) it may seem
like it's changing the frequencies cancelled.


--
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
February 21, 2005 3:23:03 PM

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

The phase reverse on both overheads is a choice and
a good way to check for ideal recording. Try it on some old recordings
and
see what happens
kevin
Anonymous
February 21, 2005 8:58:22 PM

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message news:znr1108988296k@trad...
>
> In article <HHbSd.43862$uc.15253@trnddc04> mams@NOSPAm-a-m-s.com writes:
>
> > I don't reverse the phase on anything until I've checked it for myself.
>
> Smart move.
>
> > I might
> > even find that I can use a small phase difference to my advantage, because
> > the frequencies effected will change slightly depending on how much level
> > one applies to the bottom mic.
>
> The frequencies won't be affected (unless you change the level by
> moving the mic) but the amount of cancellation at whatever frequencies
> tend to cancel will change as you change the mix of the two mics. It's
> more like changing the amount of cut on an EQ control rather than
> adjusting the frequency. But since changing the mix also changes the
> shape of the sides of the notch (and therefore the width) it may seem
> like it's changing the frequencies cancelled.


He shoots, he scoooores....! Sorry 'bout that - you are correctamundo.
Maybe if I actually did it more often I would keep up with such trivia. ;-)

DM
Anonymous
February 22, 2005 4:31:12 PM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1109017383.487497.186550@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> The phase reverse on both overheads is a choice and
> a good way to check for ideal recording. Try it on some old recordings
> and
> see what happens
> kevin
>

I usually Zoom in on my Sequoia rig, and check the polarity of all the mics
visually

I try different combinations of polarity, depending on distance etc.

My starting point now is making sure the overheads exert a positive waveform
front...so if, due to the distance, it happens to be a negative wavefront, I
flip 'em so the main sound (ie the overheads and the kick) are nice and
in-phase, and have a positive excursion.

Everything else in the kit is made to work with the overheads, since that
usually gives me the most realistic image of the kit.

But it varies so much, since I never put the mics in exactly the same spot -
I tend to move them to where it seems to sound nice for each kit / drummer
etc.

YMMV

Geoff
Anonymous
February 23, 2005 10:50:09 PM

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

Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !)
SD mics
in these applications ?


Better LOw end response
kevin
February 24, 2005 5:35:34 AM

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

Jonny Durango wrote:
> > Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics
>
> I had to think about this one for a second. Would you do this because
you
> want to address phase issues involing the drum OH's relative the rest
of the
> mics, as opposed to drum OH's relative to each other? It makes sense
that if
> your snare, which is panned center, is out of phase with the left OH,
but in
> phase with the right OH, it would kinda defeat the purpose of
spending all
> that money on a matched pair of KM84's.

Usually when I'm setting up the drum overheads I get out the tape
measure and make sure both OH's are the exact same distance from the
snare, so that the sound of the snare arrives at each mic at the same
time, keeping it nice and tight in the L-R's.

Albert
>
> Well, as for mics, my next purchase is an AT 4060. I've heard great
things
> about it for OH's and that it even gets a decent kick sound, in
addition to
> it's main purpose for vocals and stringed instruments. If I could
afford a
> matched pair to completely replace my MC012's I'd go for it, but I
figure
> AT's QC is tight enough that a random pair should be pretty close,
> especially with a little "DIY matching."
>
> --
>
> Jonny Durango
>
> "Patrick was a saint. I ain't."
>
> http://www.jdurango.com
>
>
>
> <kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:1108769811.484032.285280@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > What are some of the better drum mics these days?
> > For me, I like condensors for over-heads and hat, with mostly
dynamic
> > mics
> > for the rest of the kit. For a rock/pop set up I use;
> > All of the mics i use are older models, any newer ones
> > I should check out?
> >
> > Kick-Akg d-112, Senn-421, U-47-fet with pad, Re-20
> >
> > Snare- sm 57, B&K 4000, Akg 451 with pad
> > Snare bottom- any one of the above-phase reversed
> >
> > Toms- Sm 57, Senn 421, Km-84 with pad
> >
> > Hat- any SD cond, 451
> >
> > Over heads- 87, 414, any good large dia cond.
> > Over heads- I reverse the phase on both mics
> >
> > Room- pair of 414, 87, LD cond mic
> > omni with baffles to remove original direct signal
> >
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 11:32:02 AM

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

kevindoylemusic@rogers.com wrote:
> Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !)
> SD mics
> in these applications ?
>
>
> Better LOw end response
> kevin
>
hahahaha
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 12:14:25 PM

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

In article <1109217009.148367.265210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote:
>Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !)
>SD mics
>in these applications ?
>
>Better LOw end response

Wrong answer. Try again.
--scott
(whose B&K lab mikes have a slight peak at 2 Hz)
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 2:09:21 PM

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

"Albert" <zbert@alaska.net> wrote in message news:1109241334.282404.197020@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

> Usually when I'm setting up the drum overheads I get out the tape
> measure and make sure both OH's are the exact same distance from the
> snare, so that the sound of the snare arrives at each mic at the same
> time, keeping it nice and tight in the L-R's.


I understand that many people do this. I personally make certain they are
spaced equally around the cymbal array. I could care less where the snare
drum is sitting due the the large number of other microphones on the kit.
Were I to consider minimal miking techniqes, this could become an issue.

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 3:01:52 PM

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

Geoff Wood wrote:
Why do you recommend LD mics here

I would suggest you try comparing the two mics between LD & SD.
I think you will notice a huge difference in the low end between the a
SD and a LD especially on a cello or double bass.
Yo Yo MA swears by the C-12, U 47 and the E 251
In my experience I get a fuller bottom end out of a grand piano with a
pair of 87's or 414's than a pair of Km 100's or AKG 451's. Also I have
noticed that SD mics do track the upper high end a lot faster and
smoother due to their smaller mass. If you ever get a chance to use the
4000 series by B&K - DAP you will notice a huge difference in the
12-16khz range and in imaging. I haven't heard anything that comes
close in achieving this effect.
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 6:07:57 PM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote:
>
>I would suggest you try comparing the two mics between LD & SD.
>I think you will notice a huge difference in the low end between the a
>SD and a LD especially on a cello or double bass.

Yes, but not necessarily to the benefit of the LD mike. A lot of the
problem has to do with the odd pattern of the LD mikes causing weird
things when you get a proximity boost... the result isn't a single nice
big boost pole, but often a couple little ones. That's interesting, but
it sure isn't accurate.

>In my experience I get a fuller bottom end out of a grand piano with a
>pair of 87's or 414's than a pair of Km 100's or AKG 451's. Also I have
>noticed that SD mics do track the upper high end a lot faster and
>smoother due to their smaller mass. If you ever get a chance to use the
>4000 series by B&K - DAP you will notice a huge difference in the
>12-16khz range and in imaging. I haven't heard anything that comes
>close in achieving this effect.

Try those KM-100s with the omni capsules and you'll get as full a low
end as you ever want.

Next time you do this with an 87 or a 414, notice how the low end changes
with the change in the pattern control. That's how you know that the effect
you are getting has to do with an altered proximity effect.

You'll find the bottom end on the DPA mikes (not the B&K measurement mikes
which also are 4000-series mikes but are unrelated) is a whole lot flatter
than any large diaphragm mike too. Not to say that you'll like it more,
just that it's flatter and more accurate.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 7:12:50 PM

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

"Albert" <zbert@alaska.net> wrote in message
news:1109241334.282404.197020@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Usually when I'm setting up the drum overheads I get out the tape
> measure and make sure both OH's are the exact same distance from the
> snare, so that the sound of the snare arrives at each mic at the same
> time, keeping it nice and tight in the L-R's.
>

I'd rather take a beating than have to do that. I place OH mics based on the
cymbal placement, not the snare. Since the snare isn't centered on a drum
set, why should it be defined as the 'center' for your overheads?
--
Dave Martin
DMA, Inc
Nashville, TN
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 7:29:24 PM

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

<kevindoyle wrote:

> Geoff Wood wrote:

>> Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !)
>> SD mics in these applications ?

> Better LOw end response

You may prefer the coloration of LDC's compared to SDC's, but there is
no "better low end" response to be found from them, at least not in
amplitude, nor linearity.

--
ha
Anonymous
February 24, 2005 11:16:36 PM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1109217009.148367.265210@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Whjy do you recommend LD mics here ? What's wrong with (accurate !)
> SD mics
> in these applications ?
>
>
> Better LOw end response
> kevin


You mean SDCs have a problem being flat down to 25Hz or so ?!!

geoff
Anonymous
February 25, 2005 12:00:35 AM

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

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message news:1109275312.164660.113470@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Geoff Wood wrote:
> Why do you recommend LD mics here
>
> I would suggest you try comparing the two mics between LD & SD.
> I think you will notice a huge difference in the low end between the a
> SD and a LD especially on a cello or double bass.

Ah... but the subject matter was drum overheads. ;-)

I think I hear what you describe, but I'd be inclined to attribute that
to proximity effect as well, at least on the instruments you refer to.

> In my experience I get a fuller bottom end out of a grand piano with a
> pair of 87's or 414's than a pair of Km 100's or AKG 451's.

Miking from what position? If you're going inside the piano, I'd agree
with the experience - hence I tend to stay away from them due to their
susceptibility to harvest unwanted mechanical noises.

DM
!