Review / Microphone / Various: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 158: | Line 158: | ||
== What to do now == | == What to do now == | ||
So for me, the Neumann KMS105 is a keeper. | So for me, the Neumann KMS105 is a keeper for most of my gigs, but I could be very happy with the Sennheiser e 965. If I routinely played on louder stages, I'd want the Sennheiser MD 445. | ||
<!-- | |||
The Rode S1 and the Shure Beta 87a are redundant, so I don't need to keep them. | The Rode S1 and the Shure Beta 87a are redundant, so I don't need to keep them. | ||
--> | |||
The Audix OM5 would be a great addition to anyone's gig bag | The Audix OM5 would be a great addition to anyone's gig bag and an expensive alternative to the Beyerdynamic M88. For open stage events, I have several EV N/D767a microphones. Unfortunately, they've been discontinued. I prefer them to the Shure Beta 57s and Beta 58s. | ||
For instruments, I can use a couple of Neumann KM184s or AKG C451s. There is even a preset for the latter to be used with acoustic guitar. I think there's a notch at 200hz to alleviate boominess from the sound hole. | For instruments, I can use a couple of Neumann KM184s or AKG C451s. There is even a preset for the latter to be used with acoustic guitar. I think there's a notch at 200hz to alleviate boominess from the sound hole. | ||
=== | === As Time Goes By === | ||
In 2004 I wrote: | In 2004 I wrote: | ||
:I'm not an audiophile. I don't have a trained ear. I will never be hired for my vocal skills. The primary expression of my musical voice is my Guitar. Do I need to spend double the money on the Neumann vs. the Rode S1 (that I liked)? Probably not. | :I'm not an audiophile. I don't have a trained ear. I will never be hired for my vocal skills. The primary expression of my musical voice is my Guitar. Do I need to spend double the money on the Neumann vs. the Rode S1 (that I liked)? Probably not. | ||
| Line 174: | Line 175: | ||
=== Why spend the money? === | === Why spend the money? === | ||
The difference is subtle. If I was still working through a conventional PA, much of the difference would be lost, imperceptible. I know from experience, I wouldn't be able to hear it in the monitors. But with the L1™ , I can hear the difference. I used the Neumann last night at a gig. (Picked it up on the way there). I really enjoyed it. | The difference is subtle. If I was still working through a conventional PA, much of the difference would be lost, imperceptible. I know from experience, I wouldn't be able to hear it in the monitors. But with the L1™, I can hear the difference. I used the Neumann last night at a gig. (Picked it up on the way there). I really enjoyed it. | ||
A couple of days ago I traded in a beautiful 8 year old PRS McCarty to get a PRS Brazilian series Custom 24. Interestingly, the new guitar has the "sparkle and shimmer" that the other one lacked. This is a subtle nuance that could easily be lost in a conventional guitar amp. The L1™ seems to transparently make it louder. If you hear those kinds of differences in your instrument or voice, then you might make similar choices given the same options. | A couple of days ago I traded in a beautiful 8 year old PRS McCarty to get a PRS Brazilian series Custom 24. Interestingly, the new guitar has the "sparkle and shimmer" that the other one lacked. This is a subtle nuance that could easily be lost in a conventional guitar amp. The L1™ seems to transparently make it louder. If you hear those kinds of differences in your instrument or voice, then you might make similar choices given the same options. | ||
| Line 183: | Line 184: | ||
You will probably play and sing more. But you may find that you end up upgrading the input since the amplification of it (the source), is so faithful. That was unanticipated, and the heart of the warning. | You will probably play and sing more. But you may find that you end up upgrading the input since the amplification of it (the source), is so faithful. That was unanticipated, and the heart of the warning. | ||
<!-- | |||
In closing | In closing | ||
I hope that all of this is useful to you, and that I have provided a little of the experience in a meaningful way. I will have all of these microphones in my possession for another couple of days. So if there is anything specific I can try for you, or if this raises questions... just ask. | I hope that all of this is useful to you, and that I have provided a little of the experience in a meaningful way. I will have all of these microphones in my possession for another couple of days. So if there is anything specific I can try for you, or if this raises questions... just ask. | ||
--> | |||
| Line 192: | Line 194: | ||
This is not all that interesting, but I thought you might want to know. | This is not all that interesting, but I thought you might want to know. | ||
First - a disclaimer: I have no formal background in testing methods or sound for that matter. I was going to try to be scientific about this, testing and measuring with a sound level meter and a real time analyzer, but in the end, I just tried each microphone against its nearest competitors and listened. | First - a disclaimer: I have no formal background in testing methods or sound for that matter. I was going to try to be scientific about this, testing and measuring with a sound level meter and a real-time analyzer, but in the end, I just tried each microphone against its nearest competitors and listened. | ||
Physical surroundings: 20' x 40' room. The L1™ was about a foot out from a fairly reflective wall facing into the long dimension of the room. The sides of the space are reflective too. | Physical surroundings: 20' x 40' room. The L1™ was about a foot out from a fairly reflective wall facing into the long dimension of the room. The sides of the space are reflective too. | ||