Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SM7(A) ???

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:18:06 PM

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

Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.

I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything ellse
? Bass drum (as an alternative to D112) maybe ?

geoff

More about : sm7

Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:18:07 PM

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

Geoff Wood wrote:
> Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>
> I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything ellse
> ? Bass drum (as an alternative to D112) maybe ?
>
> geoff
>
>
Works on a lot of stuff. Hi Hat, Bass drum, guitar cabs, just about
anything. Pretty versatile mic (originally designed for broadcast).

As with every other mic, point it at something and see if it sounds good
to your ears.

Roach
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:18:07 PM

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

In article <42ca17df$1@clear.net.nz> geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz writes:

> Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>
> I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything ellse

Why would you gather that? One message from someone who found that it
worked well for a rock vocal and an upright bass? It's a nicer SM-57.
Use it for whatever you'd use an SM-57 for (which is just about
anything, if you don't have something that you like better).


--
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
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:18:07 PM

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

Geoff Wood <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:
>Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>
>I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything ellse
>? Bass drum (as an alternative to D112) maybe ?

I've used it on kick before, and it's definitely more subtle than the
D112. It's not bad on electric guitar either.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 9:18:07 PM

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

I have an SM7b and it's a great all rounder.
Vocals, E-gtr, kick, bass amp...

I think it's nice to have an MD421 and an ATM25 for kick as well, depending
on the bass drum itself and the sound you're after, those cheap mics will
make your life easier.

I prefer the D12E to the 112.

JP


"Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> a écrit dans le message de
news:42ca17df$1@clear.net.nz...
> Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>
> I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything
ellse
> ? Bass drum (as an alternative to D112) maybe ?
>
> geoff
>
>
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 10:10:56 PM

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

Geoff@work wrote:

> Is the SM57 a large-diameter dynamic ?!!!

No, it's a bit smaller than the SM7.

> > Use it for whatever you'd use an SM-57 for (which is just about
> > anything, if you don't have something that you like better).
>
> Though it may have similar sonic characteristics (or not - that's what I'm
> try to find out), I would like to hear anecdotes of what others have
> received sucess with from wrt this mic.

The SM7 was Shure's answer to the EV RE20.
Quite often found in voice-over, radio DJ
and news broadcast announce booths.
It's also been used by film sound and
foley artists over the years.
The mic also has the close talk proximity effect
so it has a different character than the RE20
when used up close like a lot of DJs like to do.
All of the versions have the response switches
on the back (usually concealed by an access plate)
so the sound can be tailored a bit:
low cut, 'presence' boost.

It's a high quality dynamic that can tame a nasally
singer and sounds great on horns, especially the
bigger saxes.

rd
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 4:24:27 PM

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1120558943k@trad...
>
> In article <42ca17df$1@clear.net.nz> geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz writes:
>
>> Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>>
>> I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything
>> ellse
>
> Why would you gather that? One message from someone who found that it
> worked well for a rock vocal and an upright bass?

That's pretty much all Google could find on the subject.

>It's a nicer SM-57.

Is the SM57 a large-diameter dynamic ?!!!

> Use it for whatever you'd use an SM-57 for (which is just about
> anything, if you don't have something that you like better).

Though it may have similar sonic characteristics (or not - that's what I'm
try to find out), I would like to hear anecdotes of what others have
received sucess with from wrt this mic.

geoff
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 4:24:28 PM

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

In article <0xFye.13185$U4.1589565@news.xtra.co.nz> Geoff@work writes:

> >It's a nicer SM-57.
> Is the SM57 a large-diameter dynamic ?!!!

Not too well kept secret: The only thing "larger" about the SM7 is the
case. It does sound a bit different from an SM57 because of the case
design and internal windscreen, but the applications are about the
same.

> Though it may have similar sonic characteristics (or not - that's what I'm
> try to find out), I would like to hear anecdotes of what others have
> received sucess with from wrt this mic.

Do you want them to be true?

You can read some applications on the Shure web site:
http://ss634.fusionbot.com/cgi-bin/ss_query?keys=sm7&si...

or http://tinyurl.com/dovx8


--
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
July 6, 2005 5:30:50 PM

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

I don't know - I have a fresh SM57 and a fresh SM7b and they sound nothing
alike...

I can't, won't and don't use the 57 but I do use the 7 regularly.

I wish the 7 was smaller but that's only a minor problem.

JP

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:znr1120611542k@trad...
>
> In article <0xFye.13185$U4.1589565@news.xtra.co.nz> Geoff@work writes:
>
> > >It's a nicer SM-57.
> > Is the SM57 a large-diameter dynamic ?!!!
>
> Not too well kept secret: The only thing "larger" about the SM7 is the
> case. It does sound a bit different from an SM57 because of the case
> design and internal windscreen, but the applications are about the
> same.
>
> > Though it may have similar sonic characteristics (or not - that's what
I'm
> > try to find out), I would like to hear anecdotes of what others have
> > received sucess with from wrt this mic.
>
> Do you want them to be true?
>
> You can read some applications on the Shure web site:
>
http://ss634.fusionbot.com/cgi-bin/ss_query?keys=sm7&si...
>
> or http://tinyurl.com/dovx8
>
>
> --
> 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
July 6, 2005 5:30:51 PM

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

"JP Gerard" <jpgerard@skynet.be> wrote in message
news:42cbc11c$0$318$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
>I don't know - I have a fresh SM57 and a fresh SM7b and they sound nothing
> alike...
>
I have both mics, too. If Mike is correct that the only difference is the
case design (he didn't put it quite that way I know), then the case has a
bit of magic in it, because, to me, the two mics sound very different. The
SM7 was first issued long before the 57. The 545 and 546 were
contemporaries of the original SM7 and were as ubiquitous for guitar
cabinets, toms, close-miced snare, and whatever other insturments were left
over, when the mic cabinet was empty, as SM57s are today.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 5:30:51 PM

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

In article <42cbc11c$0$318$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> jpgerard@skynet.be writes:

> I don't know - I have a fresh SM57 and a fresh SM7b and they sound nothing
> alike...

OK, guys, help me out here. Am I thinking about another Shure mic that
has a similar capsule to the SM57?

I asked at an AES show what was different about the SM7B and was told
"we just updated the sound a bit" so maybe there's something that's
never really out of the circuit when you think you have those switches
in the "flat" setting, and the frequency response is modified
electrically to what they think a mic that looks like that should
sound like. There's a lot to occulopsychoacoustics. <g>

--
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
July 6, 2005 5:53:28 PM

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

In article <znr1120656865k@trad>, Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>In article <42cbc11c$0$318$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> jpgerard@skynet.be writes:
>
>> I don't know - I have a fresh SM57 and a fresh SM7b and they sound nothing
>> alike...
>
>OK, guys, help me out here. Am I thinking about another Shure mic that
>has a similar capsule to the SM57?

The SM58 has the same capsule as the SM57.

The SM7 capsule is different than the SM57, but not a whole huge amount
different. Nowhere near as different as the RE-20 capsule, for instance.
But it does sound very different, which has a lot to do with the body
and the transformer.

>I asked at an AES show what was different about the SM7B and was told
>"we just updated the sound a bit" so maybe there's something that's
>never really out of the circuit when you think you have those switches
>in the "flat" setting, and the frequency response is modified
>electrically to what they think a mic that looks like that should
>sound like. There's a lot to occulopsychoacoustics. <g>

There is a bunch of stuff in there, and the schematic should still be
on the Shure website. But the thing always sounds better when set for
flat, to my ears anyway.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 6:36:21 PM

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

I completely agree on the versatile-ness of the SM7. The SM7-B is the
same mic element but with a humbucker xfmr and a bigger windscreen. I
have several of both series and notice no sonic differences (the big
screen does help keep the user off the mic enough to avoid plosives).
The question I have is: how close is this capsule in design to the old
SM-5 (the football mic)? SM5's are still considered the shiznit by old
radio guys who collect them. I have never used an SM5 to compare it
with anything else.
-Darren
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 9:05:59 PM

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

An absolutely great mic. Wonderful on lots of things from acoustic guitars
to saxes to vocals. Everyone should have one. If you can get it on a swap,
so much the better. I have an SM7 and it gets used for lots of things in
preference to more expensive condensors. Does need a preamp with some gain
though. Not a particularly "hot" mic (or at least mine is not).

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote in message
news:42ca17df$1@clear.net.nz...
> Not a lot of copmprehensive usage info on the net that I can find.
>
> I gather it can be grreat for rock vox and upright bass, but anything
ellse
> ? Bass drum (as an alternative to D112) maybe ?
>
> geoff
>
>
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 10:21:03 PM

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

In article <dah5qo$7ue$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com writes:

> The SM58 has the same capsule as the SM57.

True, but obviously what I was thinking about.

> The SM7 capsule is different than the SM57, but not a whole huge amount
> different.

Then I guess this is it. Of course there would be no reason for Shure
to make another mic that sounded like the SM7 or SM57, so I would
expect it to sound different.


--
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
July 6, 2005 10:27:36 PM

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

JP Gerard wrote:

> To me, the top end of the SM59 is closer to the SM7bs' than the SM57's.

That's because the SM59 is a very smooth, flat sounding mic.

> The element is very different in the SM59, and the body too...

The SM59 was as much a styling exercise as an innovative
functional design. The appearence was styled as a 'TV' mic
(think Senn MD431) and included the better pop filter and
internal shock mounting. I'd be curious if the '59 is
similar/closer to the SM7 than the others.
<Mine has been gone for a few years.>

rd
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 11:08:00 PM

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

"dtube" <dtube@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:1120685781.470636.162830@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I completely agree on the versatile-ness of the SM7. The SM7-B is the
> same mic element but with a humbucker xfmr and a bigger windscreen. I
> have several of both series and notice no sonic differences (the big
> screen does help keep the user off the mic enough to avoid plosives).
> The question I have is: how close is this capsule in design to the old
> SM-5 (the football mic)? SM5's are still considered the shiznit by old
> radio guys who collect them. I have never used an SM5 to compare it
> with anything else.
> -Darren

I was thinking of the SM5 also, when replying about the SM7. I really don't
remember if the two use the same capsule. If so, the case and the
transformer make a big difference. The SM5 enjoyed a few years as the go-to
announcer/narrator mic in Chicago. It was bullet-proof. Couldn't pop
it...period. Even the most agressive --- "Sunday, Sunday, Sunday...blah,
blah --- announcer sounded okay. Not great, but good enough for both AM and
FM. However, I preferred the SM7 or RE20 then and still do for voice-overs.
I don't remember why, other than it didn't sound good enough to displace
something else, but the SM5 rarely if ever got hauled out for music
sessions. By contrast, the SM7s usually found a spot for anything larger
than a rock quartet.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 1:21:47 AM

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

To me, the top end of the SM59 is closer to the SM7bs' than the SM57's.

The element is very different in the SM59, and the body too...

I would be very surprised if the 57 and the 7 shared the same element.

I leave my SM7b in the "Flat" setting, and that doesn't sound like a 57.
Even with the bass cut and presence boost on, it sounds different.

I compared the 57 and the SM7b with its foam cap off but I haven't compared
the mics with their elements totally out of their respective bodies.

JP

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:znr1120656865k@trad...
>
> In article <42cbc11c$0$318$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be> jpgerard@skynet.be
writes:
>
> > I don't know - I have a fresh SM57 and a fresh SM7b and they sound
nothing
> > alike...
>
> OK, guys, help me out here. Am I thinking about another Shure mic that
> has a similar capsule to the SM57?
>
> I asked at an AES show what was different about the SM7B and was told
> "we just updated the sound a bit" so maybe there's something that's
> never really out of the circuit when you think you have those switches
> in the "flat" setting, and the frequency response is modified
> electrically to what they think a mic that looks like that should
> sound like. There's a lot to occulopsychoacoustics. <g>
>
> --
> 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
July 7, 2005 12:25:56 PM

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message

>
> Do you want them to be true?

I have an opportyunity to pick one up as a 'swap'. I can't try it first.
Appreciate any helpful hints as to whether it would be worthwhile having an
SM7a. I have 5(ish) SM57s already.

geoff
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 12:25:57 PM

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

Geoff Wood <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote:
>"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
>
>> Do you want them to be true?
>
>I have an opportyunity to pick one up as a 'swap'. I can't try it first.
>Appreciate any helpful hints as to whether it would be worthwhile having an
>SM7a. I have 5(ish) SM57s already.

You need an SM7.
Trust me.
You also need an RE-20 and a pair of 441s.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 12:25:57 PM

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

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz> wrote in message
news:42cc3e5a$1@clear.net.nz...
>
> "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
>
>>
>> Do you want them to be true?
>
> I have an opportyunity to pick one up as a 'swap'. I can't try it first.
> Appreciate any helpful hints as to whether it would be worthwhile having
> an SM7a. I have 5(ish) SM57s already.
>
> geoff

I'm with Scott. You can't go wrong with an SM7 of any version in the
closet. Lots of uses. Holds its value. I like it flat, but on some voices
the presence peak is very nice.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 12:30:04 PM

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message

> I asked at an AES show what was different about the SM7B and was told
> "we just updated the sound a bit"

'Updated the sound' versus the SM7 and SM7a maybe ? . Not merely 'updated
the sound' versus an SM57. But I really don't know.

By 'large diameter dynamic' I was thinking more D112-size than '57 size...

geoff
Anonymous
July 7, 2005 12:30:05 PM

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

In article <42cc3f46@clear.net.nz> geoff@nospam-paf.co.nz writes:

>
> > I asked at an AES show what was different about the SM7B and was told
> > "we just updated the sound a bit"
>
> 'Updated the sound' versus the SM7 and SM7a maybe ? .

Yes. The SM7 is a relatively old model.

> By 'large diameter dynamic' I was thinking more D112-size than '57 size...

Well, the mic is pretty large, but for some reason we seem to talk
about "size" like it matters, and specifically, the size of the
diaphragm - the part that does the work. The diaphragm of an SM7 is
not particularly large. There's a lot of not-diaphragm inside that
large case.

--
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
July 7, 2005 4:09:27 PM

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

For radio v/o stuff, I prefer SM7's across the board as they will (IME)
produce "usable" results no matter what voice or how much processing is
involved. In a prior life, I was a Prod Director for an 80's AOR - i.e.
lots of big, low, boomy, male voice talent - and could not get
intelligible results from RE20's once any level of processing was
applied to the big voices. The RE20 sounded great on the female
staffers and on me (my voice is low-mids based), but, they turned to
mud with any of the alpha, chain-smoking, males that used them. BUT,
those same males loved that sound from those mics and, to a one,
absolutely hated hearing themselves through the SM7s (same opinion when
the RE20 roll-off was on). We used Valley 400 mic procs then, but I
experimented with some other compressors and an Orban parametric
whenever I got a chance. Looking back, I wonder what the RE20's with
those voices would have sounded like using a bright pre-amp ahead of
the comps and eq? I really want to get another RE20 to use for my own
voice someday.

Too many mics...too few days...

-Darren
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:39:57 PM

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

"dtube" <dtube@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:1120763367.428619.92800@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> For radio v/o stuff, I prefer SM7's across the board as they will (IME)
> produce "usable" results no matter what voice or how much processing is
> involved. In a prior life, I was a Prod Director for an 80's AOR - i.e.
> lots of big, low, boomy, male voice talent - and could not get
> intelligible results from RE20's once any level of processing was
> applied to the big voices. The RE20 sounded great on the female
> staffers and on me (my voice is low-mids based), but, they turned to
> mud with any of the alpha, chain-smoking, males that used them. BUT,
> those same males loved that sound from those mics and, to a one,
> absolutely hated hearing themselves through the SM7s (same opinion when
> the RE20 roll-off was on). We used Valley 400 mic procs then, but I
> experimented with some other compressors and an Orban parametric
> whenever I got a chance. Looking back, I wonder what the RE20's with
> those voices would have sounded like using a bright pre-amp ahead of
> the comps and eq? I really want to get another RE20 to use for my own
> voice someday.
>
> Too many mics...too few days...
>
> -Darren

I've been reluctant to voice negative opinions about the RE-20, knowing how
much they are revered here, but I tend to agree with Darren. When I worked
in a studio in the 80s that did bunches of commercial VOs and corporate
narration, we had four RE-20s. They were always 'okay' on all voices, but,
when there was time to try a few mics, on rich male voices they rarely got
the nod. I'm talking types like Ken Nordine (LD condensers or SM7 depending
on whether he was using his soft 'cool' voice or cutting through a music and
effects commercial bed). On the other hand, RE-20s frequently were the pick
for female voice actors. Both mics have multiple uses in music recording.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 12:55:24 PM

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

> Even with really good preamps, I've yet to hear a voice on a 77DX (I own one
> and it's in good shape) that I didn't like better than something else.

The last place I worked prior to becoming enslaved at a small college
(gotta love the job security and pension, though), was one of those
historical AM/FM/TV studios owned by the family that started it in the
late 1920's ("was" being the operative word there...). Anyway, they had
a small production booth set-up in what was at one-time a vocal booth;
in there was a meticulously crafted, copy of a 1960's-era RCA radio
console and a well-kept 77. My God, did that studio ever produce
warmest, smoothest vocals you can imagine. There was no mic processor
in that room...but it was not needed as nobody minded the VU levels on
the board - just the cart deck VU's (which were calibrated about 10dB
lower than the console's. Wow, I wished I had that set-up again for v/o
work for my campus Classical station.
-Darren
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 2:00:20 PM

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

Steve King <steve@TakeThisOutToReplysteveking.net> wrote:
>
>I've been reluctant to voice negative opinions about the RE-20, knowing how
>much they are revered here, but I tend to agree with Darren. When I worked
>in a studio in the 80s that did bunches of commercial VOs and corporate
>narration, we had four RE-20s. They were always 'okay' on all voices, but,
>when there was time to try a few mics, on rich male voices they rarely got
>the nod. I'm talking types like Ken Nordine (LD condensers or SM7 depending
>on whether he was using his soft 'cool' voice or cutting through a music and
>effects commercial bed). On the other hand, RE-20s frequently were the pick
>for female voice actors. Both mics have multiple uses in music recording.

That doesn't sound like a negative opinion at all to me.

And don't forget the Sennheiser 421, which I think is highly underrated
as a VO mike.

If one mike sounded perfect on everyone, they'd only need to make one kind.
--scott

Personally, on the Ken Nordine-like voices, I tend to go for the 77DX.
On the other hand, Ty doesn't like the 77 at all.

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 2:29:34 PM

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

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:00:20 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article <dam0tk$sgn$1@panix2.panix.com>):

> Steve King <steve@TakeThisOutToReplysteveking.net> wrote:
>>
>> I've been reluctant to voice negative opinions about the RE-20, knowing how
>> much they are revered here, but I tend to agree with Darren. When I worked
>> in a studio in the 80s that did bunches of commercial VOs and corporate
>> narration, we had four RE-20s. They were always 'okay' on all voices, but,
>> when there was time to try a few mics, on rich male voices they rarely got
>> the nod. I'm talking types like Ken Nordine (LD condensers or SM7
>> depending
>> on whether he was using his soft 'cool' voice or cutting through a music
>> and
>> effects commercial bed). On the other hand, RE-20s frequently were the
>> pick
>> for female voice actors. Both mics have multiple uses in music recording.
>
> That doesn't sound like a negative opinion at all to me.
>
> And don't forget the Sennheiser 421, which I think is highly underrated
> as a VO mike.
>
> If one mike sounded perfect on everyone, they'd only need to make one kind.
> --scott
>
> Personally, on the Ken Nordine-like voices, I tend to go for the 77DX.
> On the other hand, Ty doesn't like the 77 at all.

wink wink....I used to use one on the air at the first and second AM radio
stations I worked at back in the last millenium. Given AM's frequency
response, they were fine.

Even with really good preamps, I've yet to hear a voice on a 77DX (I own one
and it's in good shape) that I didn't like better than something else.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
July 8, 2005 4:02:37 PM

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

In article <dam0tk$sgn$1@panix2.panix.com> kludge@panix.com writes:

> If one mike sounded perfect on everyone, they'd only need to make one kind.

But that wouldn't stop the marketeers from trying to sell more than
one kind.

--
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
July 8, 2005 6:00:29 PM

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

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message
news:D am0tk$sgn$1@panix2.panix.com...
> Steve King <steve@TakeThisOutToReplysteveking.net> wrote:
>>
>>I've been reluctant to voice negative opinions about the RE-20, knowing
>>how
>>much they are revered here, but I tend to agree with Darren. When I
>>worked
>>in a studio in the 80s that did bunches of commercial VOs and corporate
>>narration, we had four RE-20s. They were always 'okay' on all voices,
>>but,
>>when there was time to try a few mics, on rich male voices they rarely got
>>the nod. I'm talking types like Ken Nordine (LD condensers or SM7
>>depending
>>on whether he was using his soft 'cool' voice or cutting through a music
>>and
>>effects commercial bed). On the other hand, RE-20s frequently were the
>>pick
>>for female voice actors. Both mics have multiple uses in music recording.
>
> That doesn't sound like a negative opinion at all to me.
>
> And don't forget the Sennheiser 421, which I think is highly underrated
> as a VO mike.
>
> If one mike sounded perfect on everyone, they'd only need to make one
> kind.
> --scott

Shhh. I'm working on a design right now that looks promising as the go-to
mic for ***everything***. As soon as I get my quotes back from China I'll
have it out there. I think the feature people will like the best is that
we'll be making in in designer colors to match any studio decor.

Steve King
Anonymous
July 9, 2005 1:27:47 PM

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

"

Well, I picked up the SM7 - bigger than I imagined from the pix.... HAven't
had a play yet, apart from a few "psssst" and tongue clicks thru headphones
!

Now on to the next 'mic-opportunity" - see AKG D20 thread !

geof
!