Shure Nexadyne Questions

[alexis]

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/shure-nexadyne

Hi, smart SOS people!

It looks like I'll be doing some live playing again, against all I would have thought likely for years. It'll be open mic night at a friendly venue, with some jamming along with new acquaintances I hope to become closer to, musically and otherwise. I'll be playing/singing one or two songs I've written, using my Roland Juno DS-88, a mic, and a small Behringer mixer (Xenyx 1202 SFX) at my side, in turn routed into IEMs, as well as FOH. I'm targeting a date next month to give me time to practice the performance.

Sorry for the long preamble, I have a few questions about mics - mainly whether the Shure Nexadyne would help me with a problem or two I remember having when I used to play out years ago; and if so, whether the cardioid or supercardioid model would be best.

From playing in bands long ago I remember two main issues with mics that bothered me when I simultaneously played keyboard and sang: contorting myself to try to keep my mouth be in front of the mic while my body was briefly off to the side so I could play keys properly, and difficulty with howling feedback.

This SOS writeup caught my eye as a nice way to address the first problem - it presents great off-axis volume preservation. Yayy!

Question 1: Re: Howling feedback. Of note, my singing voice is usually low volume, which I think means feedback is more likely as I turn up the mic trim (?). My limited understanding is that the null points of the supercardioid would likely result in less feedback than the cardioid (less likely to pick up others' monitors), would that be correct?

Question 2: I'm concerned about the bigger frequency bumps in the Nexadynes compared to other mics, especially in the supercardioid compared to the cardioid version. I'm working on vocal technique to tame a tendency towards a shrill overtone (sorry for the non-scientific term) in a certain range of notes at volume. I was going to be adjusting the 3-knob Behringer EQ to compensate as much as possible/needed, but I was worried that the supercardioid would make that even more of a challenge. Is that likely to be even an issue?

3: The SOS write up has the following sentence, which I'm not sure I understand:
"The flip side of this is that, in relative terms, the presence peak around 3‑4 kHz is even more pronounced off‑axis, and such sound as is captured at the nulls isn’t terribly attractive."

Can someone help me there please? What is being compared in that statement?

Thank you, everybody!

(PS: I should say I live in an area where I'm not able to trial these mics).

[alexis]

Well I see I scared everyone away by some combination of ignorance/stupidity, length of OP, and ? other -- whoops!

I realized on further review I had two competing desires for my stage mic: great off-axis pickup for when I'm singing but am leaning over to play piano at one side or the other, vs. great feedback rejection from other players' monitors. Seems like a cardioid would be better for the first, and a supercardioid for the second.

I ordered an Earthworks SR117 - decided to prioritize feedback control with a supercardioid, noting from the polar plot that at least it seemed the tone would remain fairly consistent as I went off axis.

Another reason I picked this mic is how flat the frrquency response is - both as published, and as described in user reviews.

I'll be missing the proximity control offered by the Nexadyne, I'm bummed about that, but what can one do.

I'd still be happy to read any comments or suggestions if anyone is so inclined - thanks!

https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/earthworks-sr117

[AlecSp]

I remember two main issues with mics that bothered me when I simultaneously played keyboard and sang: contorting myself to try to keep my mouth be in front of the mic while my body was briefly off to the side so I could play keys properly, and difficulty with howling feedback.

If your mouth position is not consistent in front of the mic, you need a cardoid mic.

Of note, my singing voice is usually low volume, which I think means feedback is more likely as I turn up the mic trim (?).

Yes, and this is the crux of your problem. Resolved by keeping on the mic and delivering decent level.

My limited understanding is that the null points of the supercardioid would likely result in less feedback than the cardioid (less likely to pick up others' monitors), would that be correct?

Not necessarily. Super/hypercardoid mics have a tail of response to their rear, which means that wedges need to be kept in the null area, and not directly behind the mic. With a lot of singers, this can't be guaranteed, so I'd stick with a cardoid mic. If using IEMs, no problem. Feedback from other's monitors shouldn't be a problem unless your vocal is stupidly loud in them, which is unlikely.

[alexis]

Hi AlecSp,

Dang dude, thank you so much for the uber-educational response!

It all makes sense what you say.

Given that the Earthworks (supercardioid, very flat response, typical proximity effect) is on the way, I'll try that out for at least a bit, but based on what you wrote I'll also probably trial the Nexadyne (cardioid, not as flat a response, decreased (absent?) proximity effect.

Thanks again!

[AlecSp]

Proper mic technique with an SM58 will sound way better than expecting a fancy mic to fix problems with poor mic technique.

Get things right at source before wasting money on fancy mics, however alluring they might seem.

[Drew Stephenson]

Remember also that pick-up patterns are 3 dimensional. A monitor sitting at the base of a typical boom mic stand, with the mic angled 20-30 degrees up to the singer's mouth, will be sitting almost perfectly in the null of a supercardioid mic.

[James Perrett]

Proper mic technique with an SM58 will sound way better than expecting a fancy mic to fix problems with poor mic technique.

Get things right at source before wasting money on fancy mics, however alluring they might seem.

^^ This! If you are buying this mic for your open mic performances then you've probably wasted your money. An SM58 is the most appropriate mic for an open mic because of its versatility. Learn to use one before you start going for anything else.

[alexis]

Thanks, James

I'm also thinking of possible future band gigs as I think of mics. I've still got my old EV N/D 767a from my last band way back when.

[alexis]

Some questions I had on the SOS review of the Shure Nexadyne mic (link in OP):

1. The article said:

"...the (supercardioid version) likewise comes much closer to the theoretical ideal than the nominally supercardioid Beta 57A. At the angles of greatest rejection — 180 degrees for the 8/C and 126 degrees for the 8/S — the nulls are impressively deep.

The flip side of this is that, in relative terms, the presence peak around 3‑4 kHz is even more pronounced off‑axis, and such sound as is captured at the nulls isn’t terribly attractive."


What does all that mean?

2. Also, they said:

"The cardioid version is also very tolerant of side‑to‑side movement, in a way that many stage mics aren’t. Whether you’re a singer who deliberately employs ‘mic technique’ or someone who simply moves around a lot on stage, I think the Nexadynes will prove a lot more forgiving than conventional vocal mics.
...
I lent the cardioid version to a friend who runs a hard‑working party band. One of the biggest challenges they face is finding a vocal mic that works for a singing keyboard player. When your hands are flying all over the keyboard as you crank out ‘Crocodile Rock’, it’s almost impossible to address the vocal mic in a consistent, close‑up way. The verdict on the Nexadyne 8/C? “Absolutely incredible. It’s a real cracker in a live situation. Very little EQ required, and had a really great capture area for the keys player.”

This sounds like the Nexadyne would be better than a "typical" mic as described for the exact situation I have a problem with (coming off mic when I'm singing while reaching to one side of the keyboard or another).

Does anyone read that differently?

Thanks!

[adrian_k]

The flip side of this is that, in relative terms, the presence peak around 3‑4 kHz is even more pronounced off‑axis, and such sound as is captured at the nulls isn’t terribly attractive."

I think what they are saying is that, bearing in mind that the null positions will still pick up some sound, in this case the presence peak combined with the attenuation of other frequencies can produce an unpleasant sound at the null position. So for example picking up sound from your monitor mostly in the 3-4 KHz range, albeit at reduced level.

Not sure how that would translate in your application.