The 'Help Drew pick a different mic' thread, chapter two: A New Beginning

[Sam Inglis]

I am sure that many of you have been waiting with breathless anticipation for developments in the saga of Drew's vocal mic. Well, here it is.

The first post in Drew's own thread includes a link to a Soundcloud playlist with examples from his own collection of mics. On Sunday he made the trek over to East Yorkshire and we borrowed Element Studio's live room to try out a few of my mics alongside his WA-87.

The recordings we made are in this Soundcloud playlist, but read these notes before you listen...

We started by trying out three mics that are designed for close-up use. These are designated A, B and C in the playlist and you hear them all on the same take, with Drew about six inches away from the mics. (Incidentally, although these mics would normally be worked closer, and although all three mics have plosive protection built in, we had to put up a separate pop shield as well. And even then you can hear some popping.)

We then moved on to large-diaphragm capacitor mics. We tested two groups of three mics. Mics D, E and F were tested in two different positions. In both cases they were about a foot away, but in position 1 they were at chest/shoulder height, whereas in position 2 they were higher, in front of Drew's face. Mics D and F are multi-pattern so we also tried them in omni. This means there are a total of eight files across three takes for mics D, E and F.

Mics G, H and I were tested only in position 2. Mics G and I were tested in both cardioid and omni, so there are five files across two takes. I know from bitter experience that mic I is very susceptible to rumble pickup, so I used the high-pass filter on all three of these mics at its lowest setting (below the vocal range).

Finally, we tested three ribbon mics (actually four, but I didn't include the one that turned out to be broken). This was a single take with Drew backed off even further from the mics to get a balanced sound -- in a real-world situation I might have chosen to have him closer and use a high-pass filter to combat the proximity effect. These are labelled J, K and L.

All of the takes were recorded directly into a Zoom Livetrak L-20 using its built-in preamps.

So, seven (very consistent) takes, 12 mics... if you were spending Drew's money, where would you put it?

[Drew Stephenson]

And a massive thank you from me for Sam's time and involvement. It's a really interesting conundrum.

[tea for two]

My preference

7 Ribbon Mic L
then
1 Close Mic A
then
6 Capacitor Mic I Omni position 2.

These have the least metalness essing sibilance spittyness, with the 3 Ribbon having these the least.
These mics positions polar patterns I preferred would work for different songs depending on how sparse to how meaty the mix is.
In all these recordings there's lesser essing sibilance spittyness than on Drew's original mic comparison recordings (to my gollum ears).

::

Listening on Shure1440 which accentuate upper mids, highs, helps me hear metalness essing sibilance spittyness.

[Drew Stephenson]

Interesting, thank you TFT.

[amanise]

I'm no expert at this - and am probably making entirely the wrong choice - but having listened to them all in a pretty straightforward process of elimination I end up with...

1 Close Mic C

[Wonks]

My ears are so bad I couldn’t really tell a difference. They all sounded like Drew.

[Arpangel]

I never got past "we are defined" they all sounded more or less the same to me, or like Wonks said, like Drew, so what’s the problem? I’ve forgotten.

[Wonks]

His mic technique, from the sound of it. Which hopefully is greatly improved after his day in the studio with Sam.

[Drew Stephenson]

Mic technique, voice, melody, lyrics, etc.

[Eddy Deegan]

Listening on AKG 702s I'm really struggling to put into words the difference between any of them. Although there are some they are subtle enough to be of no real consequence as I hear it. This could be my ears and/or headphones. I'll repeat the exercise on my KH120s tomorrow but for what little it's worth here's what I noted:

Group 1; Close Mic A - clean
Group 1; Close Mic B - nearly identical, I thought a hint more lower mid
Group 1; Close Mic C - as B above but my brain wants to say 'rounder' even though I can't define that. Prefer this to A or B
Group 2; Capacitor D, E, F: Cardoid position 1 - can't tell the difference between these but they sound clearer than any in group 1
Group 3; Capacitor D, E, F: Cardoid position 2 - a hint more upper-mid than Group 2? I preferred group 2 in isolation but couldn't say if that would hold true in a mix
Group 4; Capacitor D, F: Omni position 2 - more hi-mid than group 2? I thought clearer than group 2 but a touch more harshness than any of group 1 if less than group 3
Group 5; Capacitor G, H, I: Cardoid position 2 - 'smoother' than the above (and agin, I struggle to define that). Can't tell the difference between any in this group but my preferred sound thus far
Group 6; Capacitor G, I: Omni position 2 - I'm really struggling to hear much difference to many of the above to the point I've no specific comment
Group 7; Ribbon: J, K L: I can't tell the difference between them. Very 'smooth' sounding and may be the best for a cappella recordings but hard to tell if that's good in a mix or not

In short, the difference between any of these is small enough to me that I'd be happy with any of them although if pushed I'd pick any from group 5.

I'm curious to discover if my perceptions differ when listening on the monitors.

[James Perrett]

Given Drew's other post on de-essing, I would say mics A, B, C or I are probably most appropriate. The ribbon mics had too much room sound for my taste - particularly when compared to the others which gave a more appropriate sound in my opinion.

[Sam Inglis]

I agree that the ribbon mics picked up too much room sound. As I said in the OP I wanted to get a balanced sound without too much proximity effect so had them quite distant from Drew. But perhaps it would have been better to have them closer and use a low cut.

FWIW my own preferences were the same as James'. Any of the close mics would work fine, and mic I is my favourite of the capacitor mics. Probably my favourite overall, too.

[Drew Stephenson]

It's really interesting this as it seems I'm really bad at assessing my own voice.
Part of it, to be fair, is that I tend to have two different use cases. On some tracks the vocal is very exposed and does all the heavy lifting supported by a single instrument. On others it's in a very busy mix with a whole bunch of other stuff happening at the same time. These call for different things from the final vocal sound.

It's been a busy week in Trollholm so I've not listened to these as much as I would like, but my initial preferences were:
Mic C of the close mics (but I wasn't really keen on any of them),
Mic F in cardiod in position 2 of the first batch of LDCs,
Mic G in cardiod of the second set of LDCs
And mic J of the ribbons.
With a preference to mic J overall (assuming slightly closer use and in a slightly less resonant room).

But that's my assessment for the 'exposed' use case mentioned above. I'm not sure on the 'busy mix' front.

[Stuart79]

Just out of curiosity as several people have mentioned the 'busy mix' thing as a deciding factor: is there not a case for choosing the best mic for the voice full stop, and then sculpting the mix around this given it's likely to be the main feature? (Not just in Drew's case, but in general.)

I get that in a live context selecting a mic to cut through the chaos might be more of an issue, but shouldn't the sound you want in a production be the deciding factor in this sort of situation?

[amanise]

Well. I don't know what these mics are yet - but Mic C of the close ones was my choice out of all of them, I think. And we all judge our own voices 'differently' to those on the receiving end.

I still double mic all my vocals even though I'm not sending one side through mangling effects now. I use my Rode on one side and an SM58 on the other. The '58 cuts a bit more through busy sections - as you'd expect - so I can bring this one up and down on a volume envelope in parts of a track that are more dense - and you know how dense I can get. I might only use the top half of it and EQ out everything below about 700Hz just to get the edgy bits pushed a bit here and there. The Rode carries the main vocal part.

You like more pricey gear than I do - but you could go the same way - and you're better at setting up for no phase problems than I am.

[James Perrett]

Just out of curiosity as several people have mentioned the 'busy mix' thing as a deciding factor: is there not a case for choosing the best mic for the voice full stop, and then sculpting the mix around this given it's likely to be the main feature? (Not just in Drew's case, but in general.)

In some of the genres that I work in, the vocals have to sound like they are fighting to get out of the mix in order to convey the energy and loudness of the song. I also find that many mics that sound impressive on their own, create that impression by filling up frequency ranges where you want to put something else - like percussion or guitar picking. There's a good reason why the U87 and SM58 are popular vocal mics amongst people who have the choice of many other mics available.

[Drew Stephenson]

Just out of curiosity as several people have mentioned the 'busy mix' thing as a deciding factor: is there not a case for choosing the best mic for the voice full stop, and then sculpting the mix around this given it's likely to be the main feature? (Not just in Drew's case, but in general.)

A good question but, to give a parallel, if I'm recording a guitar part that I know is going to be part of a busy mix, I'll approach that differently to how I'd record it if it was going to be a solo instrument. I might even use a different guitar altogether.
I think trying to shape a mix around a vocal would end up being a lot more work than trying to fit a vocal in a mix. But I am increasingly doubting my abilities around any of this so I wouldn't take my word for anything!

[rggillespie]

Listening on my headphones, the ribbons I find most like a real voice, with breathing soft quality I really like, so they are my preference k and then j. The others do sound really similar in cardioid, but I didn't care for the omni settings, so I liked G position 2 best of the rest. I suspect acapella the ribbon would be my choice but in a mix with other instruments the clarity of G position 2 would win the day? Very interested to hear what is what, Drew thanks to your lyrics, I'm finding I have an overpowering desire to see an ordinance survey map asap!

[Albatross]

Just out of curiosity as several people have mentioned the 'busy mix' thing as a deciding factor: is there not a case for choosing the best mic for the voice full stop, and then sculpting the mix around this given it's likely to be the main feature? (Not just in Drew's case, but in general.)

A good question but, to give a parallel, if I'm recording a guitar part that I know is going to be part of a busy mix, I'll approach that differently to how I'd record it if it was going to be a solo instrument. I might even use a different guitar altogether.
I think trying to shape a mix around a vocal would end up being a lot more work than trying to fit a vocal in a mix. But I am increasingly doubting my abilities around any of this so I wouldn't take my word for anything!

I remember reading an interview with Bob Clearmountain and he said his approach was to get the vocal and have that sounding good, set in an appropriate space... then bring up the band around it.

[Drew Stephenson]

Drew thanks to your lyrics, I'm finding I have an overpowering desire to see an ordinance survey map asap!

Guess what's on the track artwork?
Not that you should listen to the current release, wait for Bob's version on the album when that comes out.

[Sam Inglis]

In case anyone's interested, here is the key:

A: Audix PDX720
B: Shure SM7dB (used as an active mic in this case)
C: Earthworks ETHOS

D: Warm Audio WA-87
E: Universal Audio SC-1 with Hemisphere plug-in modelling Neumann U87
F: Neumann U87 (original, not the current U87Ai)

G: AKG C414B-ULS
H: Universal Audio SC-1 with Hemisphere plug-in modelling AKG C414B-ULS
I: AKG C414EB with 'brass ring' capsule

J: Extinct Audio BM9
K: Rode NT-R
L: Cloud 44 Midnight (with Cloudlifter CL1)

Some observations: to my ears, the UA modelling mic gets pretty close to the real thing, and definitely sounds more like a U87 than the WA-87. However, I think Drew's WA-87 is the older MkI version, and I'm told the newer version gets much closer. The UA mic is cardioid-only, and for some reason the Hemisphere plug-in includes a model of the B-ULS but not the more desirable EB.

I really didn't expect to like the C414EB on Drew's voice, but I actually loved it. This particular example seems to be less bright than some (they can be all over the map).

[tea for two]

Drew was searching for least essing sibilance metalness spittyness : which is what I was listening foremost.
Thereafter I considered which from these would work on different mixes from sparse to meaty.
3 mics I preferred I felt had these.

7 Ribbon Mic L
then
1 Close Mic A
then
6 Capacitor Mic I Omni position 2.

These have the least metalness essing sibilance spittyness, with the 3 Ribbon having these the least.
These mics positions polar patterns I preferred would work for different songs depending on how sparse to how meaty the mix is.

My most preferred with least essing sibilance metalness spittyness

7 Ribbon mic L : Cloud 44 Midnight (with Cloudlifter CL1)
would work on a sparse mix.

My next preferred
1 Close mic A : Audix PDX720
would work on a busier mix than sparse.

My next preferred
Capacitor mic I : AKG C414EB with 'brass ring' capsule
would work on a meaty meatiest mix.

::

A World Class engineer as Sam in a decent venuu makes a difference. So I would liked to have heard Drew's Xaudia ribbon, SubZero V12C valve, and Aston Stealth (dark) in this situation.

::

Reading Sam's 2023 review of Audix PDX720
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/au ... re-edition
retails approx £750
it doesn't read too dissimilar to Neat King Bee mk1
Paul's 2016 review
https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/ne ... worker-bee
approx 1/10th price £70 used 2nd hand.
Both mics read as having a nice bottom a smooth sound with pleasant top which I can confirm on my Neat King Bee mk1.
Both mics are heevee.

[Drew Stephenson]

Just one minor point, the WA87 is the R2 version not the original.