# Microphone Recommendations (for Vocal Recordings)



## FredericBernard (Jan 13, 2020)

Hey guys,

I am seeking for a great microphone, for the sole cause of vocal recordings. Just got deeper into writing songs/lyrics, while most vocal artists ask for a composer's vocal sample, so they know which words belong where exactly (especially as some don't read sheet music). Of course the sound quality of a laptop inbuild mic is straight out of question – even for a demo. I don't think that I will use my own vocals in any future productions, but who knows. Because of that fact it's quite hard for me to define a price mark though, but 100 USD or higher is alright. 

Any recommendations for good mics? Does it have to be XLR for a good quality?

Cheers, 
-http://Frederic (Frederic)


----------



## bill5 (Jan 13, 2020)

If I understand this correctly, you're looking for a good vocal mic...but you have no idea who will be singing into it. That makes a mic suggestion difficult to start, but making it harder is you give no other information, like where will this be recorded (a studio? a well-treated room at least?), what kind of music, etc.

And really "a good vocal mic" is far too vague of a request IMO to give much of a meaningful reply. There are many good mics out there, even at the lower end of $100 or so ballpark you suggest, but some mics work well for some and not for others. Of course this won't stop people from throwing out the commonly accepted favorite/trendy mics, but that's IMO worthless to you.

As for XLR, there are some good USB mics, but for the most part, yes, I think it's safe to say you want an "XLR mic." And no offense but it sounds like you need to do a lot more research and learn a lot more about mics in general before going out and buying a mic.


----------



## nas (Jan 14, 2020)

If you want a great all round dynamic mic that has stood the test of time and is inexpensive then go for a Shure SM57, every studio should have at least one They are very versatile dynamic mics. 

A little more and you can check out Shure SM58 or Beta 58 dynamic . 

Another versatile condenser mic is the Rode Nt1A, it's a little bright and can be a little harsh on female vocals but it covers a lot of ground its also has very low self noise. 

A little more and a Shure SM7b might be worth checking out. 

These mics are between 150-400 USD.


----------



## W Ackerman (Jan 14, 2020)

nas said:


> If you want a great all round dynamic mic that has stood the test of time and is inexpensive then go for a Shure SM57, every studio should have at least one They are very versatile dynamic mics.
> 
> A little more and you can check out Shure SM58 or Beta 58 dynamic .



+1 on Shure SM58 for vocals - although as @bill5 notes, response and taste can vary among individuals. Discriminating vocalists have their own favorite(s). One advantage of the Shure models is that you can use them to hammer nails, fight off groupies, and tenderize meat. Depending on output and impredence requirements, you may need to boost the signal into some interfaces. I always have a Cloudlifter CL-1 in my bag.


----------



## dzilizzi (Jan 14, 2020)

So you are just looking for a mic to do guide vocals in that will be replaced by another singer? Do you need to have a mic for the other singer or just for you? If just guide vocals, @nas is right and a Shure SM57 is a decent all around mic. Otherwise, you may want to go for a decent condenser mic. 

XLR connection is the easiest, as you don't have to worry whether you TRS is balanced or unbalanced. Most audio interfaces have at least one.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 14, 2020)

I watched a video a while back where a guy offered that a Shure SM57 + an A81WS windscreen (he claimed that this specific model is better than a cheaper windscreen, it cost $30+) can make the 57 sound very much like the much pricier SM7b. Then he demonstrated this to IMHO good effect, at least as much as one can tell from a compressed YouTube video.

So I did this, and though I've never had an SM7b to compare it to, I really like the quality of the sound that comes out of this combo. It seems to accentuate something akin to the fuller low-end and wide response the SM7b is known for, definitely better than the 57 with a pop filter or a smaller, thinner windscreen, and more rounded than an SM58. Just my amateur experience and opinion. YMMV and all of that.


----------



## MarcusD (Jan 14, 2020)

Lewwit or Aston microphones. Lewwit in particular have some good offerings that are not too expensive and good quality like the 440 pure or cheaper 240.


----------



## FredericBernard (Jan 16, 2020)

bill5 said:


> And no offense but it sounds like you need to do a lot more research and learn a lot more about mics in general before going out and buying a mic.



I have to (respectfully) disagree. The initial question was vague, yes, but I certainly wont need a whole lot of research as you pointed out.

Anyhow, thank you for the excellent advice! I will most likely go with the Rode Nt1A.

Thanks!
-Frederic


----------



## BassClef (Jan 16, 2020)

If you can spend around $300. I'd opt for two mics... a Sure SM58 and a Rhode Nt1A. Those two mics will cover a GREAT many applications.


----------



## FredericBernard (Jan 17, 2020)

...wait a sec...the Rode Nt1A is only about halve price at Amazon etc.

Certainly the one I want to go with though.

Thanks
-Frederic


----------



## cloudbuster (Jan 18, 2020)

FredericBernard said:


> ...wait a sec...the Rode Nt1A is only about halve price at Amazon etc.
> 
> Certainly the one I want to go with though.
> 
> ...


You can't go wrong with the NT1A IMO. Even later on, when you own different mics for every day of the week or hair/eye colors of your singers  it's still a great piece of kit. As someone else mentioned the NT1A is a tad 'bright' but a little EQ takes care of that... I've used mine (2*) for all kinds of recordings and love them to bits ... the low noise floor gives other way more expensive mics a serious run for their money.


----------



## bill5 (Jan 18, 2020)

Respectfully disagree. The NT1A is notoriously harsh on the high end. You'd probably be much better off with the NT1, if you're dead set on a Rode, or any of a number of other comparably priced mics. But again, it depends on the specifics of what/who you are recording. No one mic works best for everyone or every situation, to say the least.


----------



## Diablo IV (Jan 18, 2020)

FredericBernard said:


> ...wait a sec...the Rode Nt1A is only about halve price at Amazon etc.
> 
> Certainly the one I want to go with though.
> 
> ...



NT1A is sht, if I could I would give it to you, then you could tell it is and throw it to the garbage can.


----------



## FredericBernard (Jan 18, 2020)

@bill5 and @Diablo3

Thanks for sharing your ideas on the NT1A.

Basically I need a warm and full sound out of the box, for vocal composer samples, which I send on to singers. Too busy at the moment to do EQ all the time. Though for just samples I need certainly something better than a 50$ USB mic.

Do you think the NT1 is far better, or only in a descent range?

Thanks!
-Frederic


----------



## bill5 (Jan 19, 2020)

In fairness I have not used the NT1, but it seems to be getting universal praise wherever I look, take that for what it's worth (maybe nothing!). I mostly suggested it in case you felt Rode was the way to go.

If warmth is a huge factor, have you considered a ribbon mic?


----------



## Diablo IV (Jan 19, 2020)

I'd get the MXL 770 or 990 or V67G, they aren't as nasty as the NT1A, and the NT1 is just "darker" than the NT1A.

Problem with reviews on YouTube is that you're hearing your interface, your headphones, etc, not the actual thing. But in real life I would really stay away from anything Rode (based on my NT1A experience... I have 2... but tried to see how they would work as overheads on drums, on vocals you know my thoughts).

Yeah, I wouldn't get an/a usb mike, I have the Blue snowball... it looks AMAZING as paper weight. That's why I haven't thrown it into the garbage can or given it away (plus only 2 positions now work out of 3).

I am very passionate about this and I would be very careful on spending any penny on anything.
At the end of the day only you will know what's good or not, and probably sometimes you will think something is good then a month later or 2 weeks you will realize it is not (after honey moon time).
Then you will realize you wasted time and money.

And yeah, everyone has an SM57, maybe a friend of yours can lend you one so you can tell if that would be ok with you (literally even the guy who maws your lawn has one  ).

I've had a Blue Bluebird, was "great", now I have a Blue Baby Bottle, which is pretty good for the price (both way better than the Rode's). Also, don't get the IK Multimedia XLR...


----------



## FredericBernard (Jan 20, 2020)

@Diablo3 

Information overload, but I really digg the insights!

Cheers!
-Frederic


----------



## SomeGuy (Jan 20, 2020)

I personally recommend modeling microphones for this purpose. Having a blast with my Slate ML-1 & 2 (ML-1 is for vocals, ML-2 for instruments) and notice a big difference between the various mic models that come with the software. I just cycle through the different mics until the vocals sound clear vs the mix and print the vocal down so I dont need to keep the plugin on. This allows me to really craft the vocal sound per song, or even change for verse / chorus, all after recording! Really fantastic. I hear the Townsend labs mic Modeler is even better, but was out of my price range.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 20, 2020)

The XLR plug itself means little, but every mic worth its salt uses that connector.

You can't go wrong with an SM58 or better yet beta SM58. They're very forgiving dynamic mics that have been used on 50 billion recordings and concerts.

But rather than list what I own, which is what people here always do when someone asks for a recommendation (and I have the chafed anus to prove it), you have to think about how you're going to use the mic.

In general, dynamic mics like the SM58 have diaphragms with more mass than condenser mics, which gives them a more smooth sound since they don't react quite as quickly. Condenser mics, which require power (usually supplied over the XLR connector you're asking about), tend to be more detailed because of their lighter diaphragms.

If you're looking at condensers or higher-end dynamic mics, you have to ask whether you're after an accurate mic or a character mic with an opinion. Large-diaphragm condenser mics can give you a larger-than-life sound, for example, or they can be accurate.

You can get lucky and find a name-badged Chinese large-diaphragm condenser mic for $100 that isn't half bad, though, so I wouldn't begin and end my search with the SM58.


----------



## bill5 (Jan 20, 2020)

Polkasound said:


> 1. A good mic. _Don't_ buy a $35 mic. High quality mics start at around the $100 price point,​


Great post but this part isn't quite true, at least not for dynamics, and perhaps even for condensers in rare cases. The isK ICDM dynamic goes for $60 for example and punches far above its price, in fact IMO is better than the much hyped SM58 (which is still a fine mic) and the MXL 67G is a respectable condenser for the same price.

I'm not saying go out and buy a bunch of $9.95 karoke mics, your overall point I think stands, I'm just saying don't get wrapped up in the price tag generally. There is little if any consistent correlation between price and quality beyond those extremes. I've seen people are pleasantly surprised by less expensive mics and disappointed with pricier, trendier ones time after time.


----------



## FredericBernard (Jan 20, 2020)

Hey guys,

Thanks for your advice. I'm still swaying between multiple solutions. Most individuals seem to describe the Rode NT1A as very bright, and the NT1 in general with a more pleasant sound, but still quite bright. So both seem to be rather out of choice for me.

After some research I definitely would love to go with a condenser mic. Possibly in the range of 100 USD till 250 USD as absolute max. No idea if it's known outside Europe, but what do you guys think about the Behringer B2, or any other potential alternatives?

Thanks!
-Frederic


----------



## Henu (Jan 20, 2020)

Diablo3 said:


> NT1A is sht



Nah, NT1A is completely ok if you don't have any other choices around and prefer a condenser. It's a good mike, just a bit overly sibilant at certain area (mostly 7-8k). Just go a bit off-axis when recording. I'm having one permanently rigged for quick vocal demoing at my studio desk and as long as you know how to use it and tame the harshness, it's perfectly fine.

PS: My first vocal mic was a semi-broken Shure beta *something* from the 70´s which I replaced with a used SM58 in the late 90s. In that context, the NT1(a) is completely fine in my books- which, incidentally, was also my first "better" mic nearly fifteen years ago.


----------



## JeffvR (Jan 20, 2020)

Whatever mic you pick, something like an Aston Halo behind the mic will give you a much better recording. Way cleaner, less roomy, more direct sound.


----------



## Diablo IV (Jan 20, 2020)

Henu said:


> a bit overly sibilant at certain area (mostly 7-8k).



Sorry mate, you're right about it being sibilant, but I disagree, sht is sht. Although I am glad you could work it out with that mike. 

I just wish people knew better and stop supporting brands/companies that really just make batches of trash to make an income...


----------



## Henu (Jan 21, 2020)

You may have your opinion on NT1a, but Røde is actually far from being a "trash company"- just ask anyone who is doing professional audio. Try out some of their other mics and see it for yourself!


----------



## Diablo IV (Jan 21, 2020)

Henu said:


> You may have your opinion on NT1a, but Røde is actually far from being a "trash company"- just ask anyone who is doing professional audio. Try out some of their other mics and see it for yourself!



I politely disagree, just check out this video (singing starts at 8:30). Also the guy after the singing, just wants to skip straight to the SE mike since he really has nothing good to say about the Rode one (ofc here we are now talking about Rode in general and not just the NT1a). Plus you can read in other forums how NT1a is never suitable for a serious vocal recording. And not good enough to me == trash. And Rode is not even near "good enough" in my book. Mediocre has to disappear.

Again, if something "good enough" like the Rode Nt1a works out for you for certain purposes, great.
Let's just say if I went to your studio to record some vocals and you showed me your Rode, it'd be out
faster than if you said "aids":


----------



## bill5 (Jan 21, 2020)

FredericBernard said:


> what do you guys think about the Behringer B2, or any other potential alternatives?


General impression of the Behinger lower end is kind of "eh." The C series are less expensive and at least as good near as I can tell, so if you want to go low end, I think I'd opt there instead...the C1 is a very neutral (honest) mic too. Although for almost the same you could get an MXL 67G which specs out a bit better. Although I would opt for isK's "Vibrato" condenser for the same cost over either. I have not used, but I trust isK enough to feel confident about it. In fact, I'm near certain that will be one of my next mic purchases.


----------



## bill5 (Jan 21, 2020)

Henu said:


> Nah, NT1A is completely ok if you don't have any other choices around and prefer a condenser.


? Why would you not have any other choices? Frankly I would choose almost anything else, but I know there are those who like them, to each their own.


----------



## markleake (Jan 22, 2020)

@FredericBernard. There's a few websites that list some of the same answers as given here, plus more, with good explanations on why. Just google best vocal mic.

I've always assumed the dynamic mics were better for live environments and such, and the large diaphram condensers better in a studio or home, as they can sound more detailed and be more flexible in a quieter environment. They can perform double duty as an instrument mic, you don't have to be as close, you can change the pattern setting on the mic (assuming you get one that has that, which I'd recommend if you want to use if for more than vocals), etc. They just seem more flexible to me.

I'm far from being an expert though, I'm just a consumer on this. I have some cheap Berhinger pencils (small diaphram) and a cheapish AKG (large diaphram) condenser and use them just occassionally. They differ a bit in noise floor and character, but even in that $100-300 price range these seem way good enough to capture preliminary vocals. Even the cheap Behringers that aren't really designed for it. To me it seems at this price range the cost differences are all about features (e.g. the pattern, a high pass filter switch, etc.), getting a better noise floor, and the build quality and accessories. I'm talking about the "proper" mics here, not the USB ones.

I listened to all the mic demos and such on YT when looking to buy these. And sure, you can hear a difference between many of them. But really, its often very subtle, with the occasional outlyer. None of the differences ever seemed significant enough to me to care much after a while. So I just got a reputable brand which had the features and acceptable noise floor, etc. and that was it. Haven't regreted it at all.

I suggest you go listen to some of the YouTube comparisons. You will quickly realise it probably doesn't matter that much at this price point.

Or another way of looking at it is, if you're gonna be screaming metal vocals into the mic, then get one of the Shure dynamic mics. If you're doing something more detailed and wanna try other stuff with the mic later, get a condenser mic, a Rode or AKG or something.

Sorry for the long post.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 22, 2020)

markleake said:


> I'm far from being an expert though, I'm just a consumer on this. I have some cheap Berhinger pencils (small diaphram) and a cheapish AKG (large diaphram) condenser and use them just occassionally. They differ a bit in noise floor and character, but even in that $100-300 price range these seem way good enough to capture preliminary vocals. Even the cheap Behringers that aren't really designed for it. To me it seems at this price range the cost differences are all about features (e.g. the pattern, a high pass filter switch, etc.), getting a better noise floor, and the build quality and accessories. I'm talking about the "proper" mics here, not the USB ones.



Not necessarily (any of that, actually!). 

Well, let me preface this by saying that for me personally, a relatively neutral-sounding condenser mic would be - and was - the right do-it-all starter mic.

But as I wrote above, dynamic mics have a natural acoustic compression feature because their diaphragms are heavier. That can be put to good use, and it's why they're used on 14.3 billion records that were recorded in studios that also had plenty of exotic mics at their disposal - on both instruments and vox.

A more forgiving mic can also make your life easier if you're not in a very quiet environment.

And these days you can get lucky and find some pretty decent mics for $100.


----------



## Michael Antrum (Jan 22, 2020)

I would suggest you check out the Aston Stealth, it has four settings that change the tone of the mic depending on who/what you are recording giving you pretty much 4 mics in one. Also if you supply phantom power it effectively has a built in Class A gain stage.


----------



## bill5 (Jan 22, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> And these days you can get lucky and find some pretty decent mics for $100.


You can get some outright good, even great, mics for that, on rare occasion even less.


----------



## markleake (Jan 22, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Not necessarily (any of that, actually!).
> 
> Well, let me preface this by saying that for me personally, a relatively neutral-sounding condenser mic would be - and was - the right do-it-all starter mic.
> 
> ...


Well, like I say, I'm just approaching this as a consumer. It does seem like the features play a big part here and the end result is pretty similar between many of these mics. Hence my own (apparently misinformed!) conclusion that the condenser mics are more flexible for home studio. 

I've always disliked the sound of some of those Shure mics used for voice that I hear everywhere on YouTube (when they are used as podcast mics, etc., not so much singing). They sound to me like they mask the detail a bit. This is my personal bias coming into play here I guess, like how we all prefer different sample libraries. And I will admit YT is hardly the best way for me to the best judgement on those dynamic mics.


----------



## Loïc D (Jan 22, 2020)

You can’t go wrong with SM57/58.
Plus they have plenty of other uses.
To me it’s a must have for everyone who’s a bit in audio (yes, even for guitarists, podcast, etc).
I’ve got an old NT1 too and it does the job. It’s not high end but is great value for the price. Note that you’ll need to feed it with phantom power.
Aston has a good reputation too, though maybe a bit more pricey (I don’t own any).
Antipop is mandatory, also part of any studio survival kit.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 22, 2020)

markleake said:


> It does seem like the features play a big part here and the end result is pretty similar between many of these mics. Hence my own (apparently misinformed!) conclusion that the condenser mics are more flexible for home studio.



I think that's a fair statement - that condenser mics are more flexible, especially ones with switchable pickup patterns (which I believe are a little more expensive).



> I've always disliked the sound of some of those Shure mics used for voice that I hear everywhere on YouTube (when they are used as podcast mics, etc., not so much singing). They sound to me like they mask the detail a bit.



That would be the SM7B, which uses the same capsule as the SM57. The SM7B has a little more low end, while the SM57 is a little more midrangey.

There's a YouTube video somewhere of a guy who EQ-ed an SM57 to sound like an SM7B. While I remember having some arguments with his whole approach - and was baffled that he thought the two mics sounded the same even without EQ, when to me it's blatantly obvious which is which - the point that you can EQ mics to sound the same in this context is absolutely valid. (This context = close-miked speech, which makes off-axis response and other differences minimal; and that these mics use the same capsule.)

But most podcasters don't pay attention to the sound anyway.

And anyway anyway you don't even like that sound in the first place.


----------



## markleake (Jan 22, 2020)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> I think that's a fair statement - that condenser mics are more flexible, especially ones with switchable pickup patterns (which I believe are a little more expensive).


OK, glad I'm not too off-track with my thought process. Flexibility is important for home studio. IMO the condenser mics also look cooler. 😎



Nick Batzdorf said:


> But most podcasters don't pay attention to the sound anyway.


I think a lot of them buy these because they are told they are good vocal mics, which is true. Except a lot of them are guys and speak so close to the mic, the mic ends up not suiting them. As you say though, it's easy to EQ the mid-range and lows a bit. I guess that's the original point I was trying to get at... most of these mics will be fine for most people for most purposes.


----------



## rhizomusicosmos (Jan 22, 2020)

Just be aware there have been three versions of the Rode NT-1:

The original NT-1 released in the 1990s
The NT-1A released in the the early 2000s
The updated NT-1 released in 2013
The newest one is apparently quieter and more neutral than the others. SoS review here. 

If I was to have just one large diaphragm condenser, personally I would prefer to have switchable patterns. The option of having figure-8 and omni as well as the standard cardiod just makes the microphone so much more versatile.


----------



## bill5 (Jan 23, 2020)

rhizomusicosmos said:


> Just be aware there have been three versions of the Rode NT-1:
> 
> The original NT-1 released in the 1990s
> The NT-1A released in the the early 2000s
> ...


 As I understand it, 1 and 3 are comparable, 3 perhaps somewhat better, but again the 1A well below those two, esp harsh on the high end. 



> If I was to have just one large diaphragm condenser, personally I would prefer to have switchable patterns. The option of having figure-8 and omni as well as the standard cardiod just makes the microphone so much more versatile.


Agreed, but some don't have a need for those other patterns, and (as I hear it from those I trust, FWIW) sometimes the more commonly used cardioid pattern, even on the same brand/price level of mic isn't as good.


----------



## Patrick.K (Jan 24, 2020)

Last month, after studying various static microphones for the voice and also for the instruments for a long time, I bought Audio Technica AT 2035.
I am really pleasantly surprised by its quality. No background noise, good sensitivity, fréquency curve, no noticeable bump, and good manufacturing quality.
It comes with a very correct suspension, all for a reasonable price of 140 euros. I hesitated with a Rode NT1, and finally I decided on this Audio Technica.
It is an ideal companion with my faithful Shure sm 57.
In your case this may be an option, but this is only my opinion.


----------



## Paul Grymaud (Jan 24, 2020)

The Big one, available on special order (and delivery...) only






Or the indispensable standard one (unfortunately You have to record on the spot)


----------



## GtrString (Jan 24, 2020)

You should factor in the timber of your voice. A bright mic can be a good match if your voice is deep or has a lot of low mids. If your voice is high middy and thin in the top, a better match might be a flatter mic or a dynamic.

Also how is your preamp situation? Do you plug directly into the preamps in your soundcard or do you have an eksternal mic pre? If you have a mic pre already, you could be fine with an sm57 or 58. If you dont, you might want a condenser.

A solid flat mic that wont break the bank for the demo work you describe, might be the Rode M3. It can be battery powered as well, and sound well rounded and pretty flat. A killer mic for the money.


----------



## sostenuto (May 27, 2020)

GtrString said:


> You should factor in the timber of your voice. A bright mic can be a good match if your voice is deep or has a lot of low mids. If your voice is high middy and thin in the top, a better match might be a flatter mic or a dynamic.
> 
> Also how is your preamp situation? Do you plug directly into the preamps in your soundcard or do you have an eksternal mic pre? If you have a mic pre already, you could be fine with an sm57 or 58. If you dont, you might want a condenser.
> 
> A solid flat mic that wont break the bank for the demo work you describe, might be the Rode M3. It can be battery powered as well, and sound well rounded and pretty flat. A killer mic for the money.



Very helpful Thread, but now (4) months forward, and facing similar situation as OP.
Broad, longer-term 'Vocal' need to add at least one Vocal Mic, but can be many different Vocalists and Styles. Need arises as Shure PG48 (purchased new, long ago & and seldom used) will not produce adequate levels in Reaper v6.11 / Win10 Pro Desktop PC. Just received Focusrite Scarlett Solo 3rd Gen, and waaay low volume on vocal test track.

PG48 is what it is, and now need replacement providing must stronger output. Not sure at all if newer, better dynamic mic will help ? Willing to go condenser, and still tough to choose. Fairly risk averse, so 'mainstream', < ~$200., is target. This is for Home Studio, with full control over ambient noise.

Audio-Technica AT2035 , @ ~ $115. feels comfortable, after reading/rereading entire Thread. Possibly even AT2050 Multipattern.
Would be OK with AKG C5, or Shure SM58, or Beta 58A, _if_ they provide more signal than PG48.

Will appreciate updates for better options over recent ~ 4 months !!


----------



## bill5 (May 27, 2020)

Dynamics are a diff beast from condensers in general, so I would ensure keeping those differences in mind when deciding on one vs the other. But I suggest you consider 2 mics vs 1 as no single mic will cover all the bases - you could argue that with 2 mics or 3 or more for that matter, it's a debate that's subjective as hell - but 2 mics, say a dynamic and an LDC, will give you a great deal more versatility and cover many more bases than 1. You may have to flex your budget, but it doesn't have to be dramatically more.

More specifically, the 58 isn't hotter than the 48 (or it's really close); the Beta 58 is and the C5 even more so, but you're paying for that and obviously I can't say how much you'll notice the diff or it will be worth the cost.

Since you already have a dynamic, I think I'd try a condenser and see how that goes. I can't speak to the 2035, but not hearing good things about the 2050 (a multi-pattern mic). Some modestly priced condensers I would consider include the MXL 67 (only $60 new, insane value for an LDC), the isK Vibrato (also only $60), the sE X1 (about $100) and the AKG 220 ($135).


----------



## sostenuto (May 27, 2020)

bill5 said:


> Dynamics are a diff beast from condensers in general, so I would ensure keeping those differences in mind when deciding on one vs the other. But I suggest you consider 2 mics vs 1 as no single mic will cover all the bases - you could argue that with 2 mics or 3 or more for that matter, it's a debate that's subjective as hell - but 2 mics, say a dynamic and an LDC, will give you a great deal more versatility and cover many more bases than 1. You may have to flex your budget, but it doesn't have to be dramatically more.
> 
> More specifically, the 58 isn't hotter than the 48 (or it's really close); the Beta 58 is and the C5 even more so, but you're paying for that and obviously I can't say how much you'll notice the diff or it will be worth the cost.
> 
> Since you already have a dynamic, I think I'd try a condenser and see how that goes. I can't speak to the 2035, but not hearing good things about the 2050 (a multi-pattern mic). Some modestly priced condensers I would consider include the MXL 67 (only $60 new, insane value for an LDC), the isK Vibrato (also only $60), the sE X1 (about $100) and the AKG 220 ($135).



Great to see your post ! I followed all of your earlier ones. C5 is current dynamic interest, but sounds like it will not improve much over PG48 .... which is OK on DAW #1 into Saffire Pro14 I/F.

AKG P220 looks like very strong choice at the price point !! I trust your comments here and this seems very comfortable. The sE X1 is new to me, but also seems a strong fit for this need.
Finally; was looking very hard at MXL 770, but do not choose to go against your suggestions. Is the 67 preferred or mainly its lower cost?

If you can add just a few more comments on these choices, I will appreciate it greatly. 

Many thanks !


----------



## GtrString (May 28, 2020)

@sostenuto A soundcard like the Scarlett has built in preamps, which is good for condensers. You should track at about -12dbfs, but with dynamic (and ribbon) mics you may want a little more preamp gain to get lower noise at the same level.

Something like a Cloudlifter or Fethead works great as a pre-pre into soundcards, or you could check out the TC-helicon pedals (like the Voicetone T1) for vocals (they tend to provide a hi-fi sound also, though, so dependent if you need that).

If you get the TC, make sure you get an older one where you can adjust the input gain - the new ones have automatic input gain, which can be an issue when you put them in a chain with other things).

I have used a Cloudlifter with an SM58 into a Scarlett, and it gives the mic some beef, and lower noise in the recording to boot.


----------



## ReelToLogic (May 28, 2020)

FredericBernard said:


> After some research I definitely would love to go with a condenser mic. Possibly in the range of 100 USD till 250 USD as absolute max. No idea if it's known outside Europe, but what do you guys think about the Behringer B2, or any other potential alternatives?
> 
> Thanks!
> -Frederic



I've recorded male and female vocals with a Behringer B1 condenser mic and have been quite impressed. Clear detailed sound and it comes with a nice shock mount and foam filter all for about $120. When I use an SM58 for vocals I have to mount a separate pop filter to prevent plosives, but not with the Behringer. As you can see here, there are lots of different opinions when it comes to what sounds "good".


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

Trying to avoid duplication of January 2020 posts. 

Was considering AKG C5 because it is a condenser vocal mic, despite its appearance. 
Is this not a solid choice to be considered for my current short list ? 
Recent posts are appreciated and no reason to expand, or critique suggestions made.


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

GtrString said:


> @sostenuto A soundcard like the Scarlett has built in preamps, which is good for condensers. You should track at about -12dbfs, but with dynamic (and ribbon) mics you may want a little more preamp gain to get lower noise at the same level.
> 
> Something like a Cloudlifter or Fethead works great as a pre-pre into soundcards, or you could check out the TC-helicon pedals (like the Voicetone T1) for vocals (they tend to provide a hi-fi sound also, though, so dependent if you need that).
> 
> ...



Looked at Cloudlifter earlier, and seems fine. Price takes me to even better category of Mics ..... but will factor in.


----------



## Stringtree (May 28, 2020)

IF <untreated or unremarkable household space> THEN dynamic. 57, 58, RE-20, SM7B

IF <lots of rockwool panels and larger bedroom OR nice acoustic> THEN condenser

Lol. If I buy another microphone or preamp, I'm out on the street.

Lot of good answers here, but I do have some skin in the game, so yappas gonna yap.

What I learned is that the room in which the recordings are to be made has SO MUCH MORE to do with the resultant sound than do the mics and preamps. Once a reliable space for recording is secured, then the beauty of the microphones and the electronic devices that gently amplify the minute signals up to line level comes forward and becomes apparent.

Lessons learned after burning piles of cash:

Borrow if you can.
Buy used.
Don't buy any garbage, ever. Nobody else will buy it after you realize it's poo and want to upgrade.
Consider how much you will actually use the stuff.
Get two if you can, mics and preamps, that match. Stereo is a thing.
Resist the witchcraft of Gearslutz and other sites.
A very expensive microphone plugged into your 2i2 will not sound remarkable at all.

Of all the mics I have, the ones I use the most are the AKG 414 XLS. I have three of them, and they are like Swiss Army knives because of their switchable patterns. This utility comes into play for live sound and recording all the time. Omni, cardioid, wide cardioid, hypercardioid, bidirectional, and slots in between. Not a mic with a lot of glamour, but takes direction.

KM184 mics. Small and deadly. Great for fast transients like acoustic guitar, strings.

The U87 Ai gets little play, because if I drop it, there goes my new used car. Cardiac, Omni, and Bi.

For untreated rooms, 57, 58, SM7B, Beyer hypercardioid ribbon. Room sound is infectious. Bad. These comparatively insensitive mics will not be able to gulp in big breaths of terrible room, leaving most of the signal comprised of your beautiful musical utterances.

To teach myself, I spent time in a studio that was designed by an acoustical engineer. I trained my ears. I then did the very best I could with my own space to approximate that by watching a lot of videos on the subject, and filling the room with flats on the walls and ceiling that had MASS.

Then I bought too many mics and preamps. Please don't do that. There are a few standouts. I hope you find the ones that make you happy.

Greg


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

Appreciate your sharing results of notable experience and effort !! Will be very difficult to make more than minimal room mods, and accept serious consequences.  Plz take this question in context witjh my limited options ....... recent YouTube Mic


Stringtree said:


> IF <untreated or unremarkable household space> THEN dynamic. 57, 58, RE-20, SM7B
> 
> IF <lots of rockwool panels and larger bedroom OR nice acoustic> THEN condenser
> 
> ...



Appreciate your sharing results of notable experience and effort !! Will be very difficult to make more than minimal room mods, and accept serious consequences.  
Plz take this question in context with my limited options ....... recent YouTube Mic reviews had vocalist with pop filter but surrounded front-to-sides with black, semi-circular cloth material. Does that help somewhat with just single vocals ?

Will not be using Scarlett 2i2, but maybe Clarett 2Pre USB. Is that still poor as You view things ? 
If so, what is minimally acceptable ? Very important for me to sort these issues before moving ahead with any 'quality' Mic purchase. 

Many thanks, and sorry to pester further !


----------



## bill5 (May 28, 2020)

sostenuto said:


> AKG P220 looks like very strong choice at the price point !! I trust your comments here and this seems very comfortable. The sE X1 is new to me, but also seems a strong fit for this need.
> Finally; was looking very hard at MXL 770, but do not choose to go against your suggestions. Is the 67 preferred or mainly its lower cost?


I would not recommend you buy (or avoid) a mic just because I or any one person said so. Opinions are only that; one mic that someone loves, someone else hates. Try to get as many opinions as you can, whether it's through reviews or forums like this (I lean to forums; reviews tend to say all the mics they tried are great)...if you start to consistently hear about a particular mic being good (or not), that I would take more seriously. 




Stringtree said:


> What I learned is that the room in which the recordings are to be made has SO MUCH MORE to do with the resultant sound than do the mics and preamps.


Absolutely!



> Get two if you can, mics and preamps, that match. Stereo is a thing.


Not sure what that means, but it doesn't sound like it's in his budget, and unnecessary anyway. 



> Resist the witchcraft of Gearslutz and other sites.


No idea what that means either, but I would trust GS no more - or less - than this site or others generally.



> A very expensive microphone plugged into your 2i2 will not sound remarkable at all.


If you mean microphones don't automatically sound remarkable just because they're expensive, totally agree, the same as they won't sound terrible just because they're inexpensive. It all varies a lot.


----------



## bill5 (May 28, 2020)

sostenuto said:


> Appreciate your sharing results of notable experience and effort !! Will be very difficult to make more than minimal room mods, and accept serious consequences.


There are ways you can treat your room without spending much money; I suggest looking it up on the net. 



> Will not be using Scarlett 2i2, but maybe Clarett 2Pre USB. Is that still poor as You view things ?


Focusrite makes fine interfaces. You should be fine with either.


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

bill5 said:


> There are ways you can treat your room without spending much money; I suggest looking it up on the net.
> 
> Focusrite makes fine interfaces. You should be fine with either.



THX ! Trying to put 'reasonable' emphasis on all aspects rather than any single one or two. 
Scarlett SOLO provides 48v to condenser mics, but not acceptable volume with current PG48. 
PG48 just acceptable with current Saffire Pro14 & Reaper on DAW #1. 

Clarett 2Pre USB is reasonable for DAW #2, but others _(RME Babyface Pro LS @ $900.)_ NOT. 
Won't know without trying Clarett. 

Some comfortable possibilities out there right now for AKG220P. Still unsure about AKG C5 ? 
Your timely inputs have been crucial given tight time constraint on Focusrite I/F decision. 
Much clearer now and monitoring Mic choices. 

Have read lots re. Studio acoustic challenges, but little on Vocal-specific details. Lots to follow-up on.
Lifetime in large City locations, but now retired in southwest Utah. Cool place, but tough to ever get hands-on exposure to key Studio hardware. Forum is vital now !

Regards


----------



## Stringtree (May 28, 2020)

I wouldn't disparage any of the gear! Oh gosh. Any of this stuff today will sound great. What I meant about witchcraft was that there's lore that suggests a particular mic or combination will make a singer sound like <artist> because of... well, silly threads that go on for miles.

Sostenuto asked about the padded semicircle that goes around the sides and back of the mic. Given that this area is the rejection area of most cardioid vocal mics, what's really happening? Isn't this region supposed to be down in acceptance anyway? Are these a PORTABLE VOCAL BOOTH?

Podcastage on YouTube does a great job at testing mics! Listen as the mic is rotated through 180 degrees! 

The real business is a little more complicated. Microphones weren't designed to be placed inside audio coffins. I did see an example of some foam contraption that bundled the mic inside a hood like Kenny from South Park. Now that's some nonsense.

If the problem is the sound of the room, then that will enter the front of the mic as well, after bouncing around a few times. If you are doing voice over at a low volume, this will be not so awful. But if you EXCITE the room with loud shouting and singing, things are going to become very resonant and the room's signature will be impressed on the incoming signal, at various phase angles to the original sound, mixing, adding, and cancelling. Yeccch.

I think it's great bill5 aimed a spotlight at things I wrote. I'm no expert. I wanted to share my own experience to help you maybe save some time and cash. I do feel obliged to respond.

Yes, read forums like GS too, because numbers of happy folks add up to a likely good purchase. Just don't get bogged down in minutiae dealing with diminishing returns. Thank goodness that doesn't happen here when talking about sample libraries. 

After the room, after the selection of a mic, there's sometimes the choice of a preamp whose sound will differ from directly plugging the mic into the interface. Certain preamps offer a push-and-pull, harmonic distortion, a pleasing crunchiness. These characteristics are not the hallmark of solid state modern preamplifiers built into interfaces, and shouldn't be expected.

By all means, watch and read all you can on the subject. It's huge. I'm sorry I run on, because I still don't know anything about this. I love it a lot and am enthusiastic about it. Room, room, room. 

 Greg


----------



## Stringtree (May 28, 2020)

It all depends on your intention for the vocals. Any modern condenser mic and interface like the Clarett will have a beautifully flat response. While fine for accuracy, it will not have the elusive "mojo" that many expect from expensive gear, which in the end is coloration, distortion, and character. 

Funny how we fought so hard for lab gear and now have been going in the opposite direction. VST plugins that fuzz-up your tracks. Heee.... What a concept.


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> It all depends on your intention for the vocals. Any modern condenser mic and interface like the Clarett will have a beautifully flat response. While fine for accuracy, it will not have the elusive "mojo" that many expect from expensive gear, which in the end is coloration, distortion, and character.
> 
> Funny how we fought so hard for lab gear and now have been going in the opposite direction. VST plugins that fuzz-up your tracks. Heee.... What a concept.



 Ha! Takes back to aerospace test area electronics lab (even secondary standards lab) with intense focus on measuring, testing, fixing, calibrating some of the best gear available. 
Yeah .... coloration distortion, character .... the dark side ?? 

$$$$ do enter the fray (not back then ) so Clarett is hopefully _acceptable_ for now .....


----------



## Polkasound (May 28, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> What I learned is that the room in which the recordings are to be made has SO MUCH MORE to do with the resultant sound than do the mics and preamps.



This is such indispensable, fundamental advice, I wish microphones came with it engraved into their casings.

I'm working remotely with a relatively well-known pop vocalist on a project who can really belt out high notes. Unfortunately those high notes were coming through with the dreaded "bedroom sound". It didn't take long before "I'm so thrilled to have this opportunity to work with you," turned into "Do you have some laundry you can hang over the door?"


----------



## labornvain (May 28, 2020)

This is a comparison between Neumann U87 and in Rode NT1A.

As you can clearly hear, it's not garbage or whatever else was said. It's a perfectly decent microphone and for the money it's a fucking amazing microphone.

I think I paid about $1,800 for my U87, and about $250 for the Rode.

Despite this, I think I actually prefer the Rode for some things

.


----------



## sostenuto (May 28, 2020)

Only limited solution. but is it fairly useful, given poor room acoustics like @ Polkasound describes ??


----------



## bill5 (May 28, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> I wouldn't disparage any of the gear! Oh gosh. Any of this stuff today will sound great. What I meant about witchcraft was that there's lore that suggests a particular mic or combination will make a singer sound like <artist> because of... well, silly threads that go on for miles.


In fairness, I've seen little of this on any site, including this one and gearslutz. 



> I think it's great bill5 aimed a spotlight at things I wrote. I'm no expert.


 Good Lord thanks but me either lol


----------



## bill5 (May 28, 2020)

labornvain said:


> This is a comparison between Neumann U87 and in Rode NT1A.
> 
> As you can clearly hear, it's not garbage or whatever else was said. It's a perfectly decent microphone and for the money it's a fucking amazing microphone.
> 
> ...


Full confession, I have never used either. But I am repeatedly hearing bad things about the NT1A's harsh high end. FWIW


----------



## labornvain (May 28, 2020)

bill5 said:


> Full confession, I have never used either. But I am repeatedly hearing bad things about the NT1A's harsh high end. FWIW


Yeah, well, it's definitely not a km84. It's definitely got a high-end boost that is not particularly silky. I wouldn't put it on an acoustic guitar, for example.

But I think it gets a bum rap, which is why I posted the video. You can hear for yourself that it's not as bad as the people on gearslutz, which warrants a study of some kind of sociological nature on the hive mind phenomena, claim it to be.

I like to put it on things that are dull sounding, like this old classical guitar that I found in a pawn shop which has a weird little tone that can cut through any mix, but just has no high-end at all.

I've been collecting microphones for 30 years, from the best to the worst. And I've come to think of them all as like little sound effects.

Last year I had a dobro player in who had just changed his strings. I hated it. So I put a ball microphone, like the ones blues harp players use, on it and it sounded incredible.

Of course what most people want in a vocal microphone is something that's going to make them sound like Adele, or whoever the latest thing is now.

It ain't going to happen. But it really does amaze me how close these cheap microphones have started to get.


----------



## Stringtree (May 29, 2020)

bill5 said:


> In fairness, I've seen little of this on any site, including this one and gearslutz.



I'm completely interested in fairness, and I think I was winding up for my screed, so it wasn't the best framing. Mea culpa, bill5. 

A common bit of sage advice is that Michael Jackson used the SM7 on the Thriller album, or Bono uses a Beta 58, or Frank Sinatra preferred a U47 for some recordings, Taylor Swift likes the Advantone CV-12. 

This unnecessarily clouds the waters for someone new to microphones, and suggests a bunch of random microphones at widely different price points to someone not familiar with what these mics are. Or were, in some cases.

I humbly suggest that what happens even more often is there is an aura of mystique and nostalgia that is pumped into old hen's-teeth mics that are the price of a new car. This fetishizing of unobtainable stuff is constantly reinforced by bashing the "re-issue," the modern "equivalent," or some poor thing that has been given the same name and differs from the originals because of design, or more often, by time's effects on those originals.

Examples include C12 variants, the U87 Ai, C414, KM184, and so many others. 

The first "great" mic I got was the TLM 103, and then I heard other ones. Not so great. Eek.

The TLM 49. There, that's the sound. Do I use it a lot now? Not so much. Long-form reading.

MD 441. I love the Swiss Army possibilities. Nice mic. 

Horses for courses. There is so much to confuse someone who just gets to watch videos with lower-bitrate audio, and hear long-held opinions that don't consider anything made currently on par with what once was. Also, the market is flooded with mass market and boutique offerings that make the head spin. 

Lots of marketing is done by putting a face on a piece of gear. Always the case. Whose oats? The guy with the hat and the long locks. 

Greg


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

More cool, experiential info ( that I suck up like a blotter ) and helps deal with the vast marketing mist seen /heard daily. While this moderates much info seen searching, it makes things even more difficult to sort ... _personally_. When I try to place myself in in terms of Your comments, and those by @ bill5, I'm left with a tough 'bottom line' ..... _pick my price point and purchase something_ ! I get it, but remains difficult even with posted names of decent choices. Let me 'splain plz ....

While current PG48 is barely workable, a better dynamic may not provide sufficient output into current mic amp / I/F. Not sure why new Scarlett SOLO barely provides anything audible, but does not.

This tends to push me to condenser even though single vocal is only main goal. Scarlett SOLO may be OK with condenser and 48v power ? I am realistically in <$200. range, so options like Aston Origin are simply too many $$$. 
@ bill5 provided a helpful set of current options, but picking one almost come down to throwing a dart at the wall. Initially focused on AKG P220, but cannot explain why, other than brand name and cost. I mentioned AKG C5 more than once, but doesn't get much encouragement. MXL 770 gets attention, but get sense of lesser quality. se X1 is still unknown for me.

Enjoying this discussion thoroughly, and trusting my immediate solution will become clear soon.

Regards


----------



## Stringtree (May 29, 2020)

I can't go back five pages now, but did you ever say what kind of vocals are going to go into the chosen mic? Are you a Leonard Cohen, or a Don Henley? A Chet Baker or a Tom Waits? David Sylvian or Bob Mould? 

Low, high, loud, quiet, basic-all-rounder?


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

I realize this is vital for decent choice, but definitely adding new Mic for limited situations when Home Studio guests include vocalist ...... most likely female. Genres most likely Pop, Jazz, lite Classical, maaaybe lite rock. Large, rectanular, high, sloping-ceiling, carpeted room. Otherwise non-acoustically treated. External sound limited to very limited instrumentals ..... guitar, bass. My sound is all DAW-VSTi instrument sources ..... piano, synth, some orchestral.


----------



## Stringtree (May 29, 2020)

This is only what I personally would do, given your situation. I love reading about this stuff, so I hope some others will help out too. 

I would take your limited budget and get a great dynamic mic. A studio standard. A good all-round vocal mic that can be pointed at things without teeth and still do a great job. SM 58, SM 57. MD 421. EV RE 20.

It might be that your space isn't ready for a studio condenser. 

In a couple months, if I had a few hundred bucks, I would get a hefty preamp like the ISA One, that could really jack up that dynamic mic and give it different voices. Learn what's happening with the singing and with the room. 

Buying a super-sensitive cheap condenser and wrapping it in a sound shield and going to all these lengths to work at cross purposes, IMHO, will do a lot more harm than good. 

Lunch time takes me away from microphones, and I would much rather eat tech than food sometimes, but hey. 

Doing rock and jazz vocals, you're going to want a little something more than an objective and flat input. You can do this on the fly, on the way in, or in post-processing. 

Choices, choices. I'd start simple with a quality transducer that shows up in many of the desert island mics list, then build from there. 

Just a schlub here. I really want you to succeed, be happy, and make music that makes you want to make more music!!!

Greg


----------



## dzilizzi (May 29, 2020)

Female singer with a Pat Benatar vocal range here. I spent a bit of time at a Guitar Center trying out mics and ended up with an AT3035. I works with my 6i6. I haven't really tried it with my solo, as I picked up a Slate Digital VMS ML-1 before I got the solo. It is very flat and I actually like it without all the reproductions. The only problem I've really had with it is when I belt, I have to change the settings because it is too hot. It can't handle quiet to loud as well as I would like. So a lot of editing to make it work. 

That said, I also have a couple of XML condensers that I got on sale through Musicians Friend for about $100 each that actually sound good. 

The problem you may have if you are recording others is every voice is different so some mics will work well for some singers and not for others. Also, did you try getting a new cable for your current mic? Sometimes it is just the cable.


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> Female singer with a Pat Benatar vocal range here. I spent a bit of time at a Guitar Center trying out mics and ended up with an AT3035. I works with my 6i6. I haven't really tried it with my solo, as I picked up a Slate Digital VMS ML-1 before I got the solo. It is very flat and I actually like it without all the reproductions. The only problem I've really had with it is when I belt, I have to change the settings because it is too hot. It can't handle quiet to loud as well as I would like. So a lot of editing to make it work.
> 
> That said, I also have a couple of XML condensers that I got on sale through Musicians Friend for about $100 each that actually sound good.
> 
> The problem you may have if you are recording others is every voice is different so some mics will work well for some singers and not for others. Also, did you try getting a new cable for your current mic? Sometimes it is just the cable.



Great to see your thoughts ! Shure PG48 was purchased new, _with cable_, and carefully stored.
Not much wear & tear after amazing wife lost her Pink Ribbon battle. 

Current scenario is most likely male friends with female wife /partner vocalist. Since AT3035 is no longer produced, not sure what replaced; but was very close to AT2035 before this Thread drew my attention. No doubt it will work with SOLO, but maybe a better preamp ?

Slate VMS ML-1 is interesting, but need to research valid hook-ups. Assume maybe VMS-ONE ULTRA LINEAR MICROPHONE PREAMP ??

Thank-you so much for taking time ! Your vocal experience is truly valued. I am more than capable of beating this topic to death .... _maybe already have_ .... and need to get on with a purchase now, with much better perspective in recent days.

Very best regards


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> This is only what I personally would do, given your situation. I love reading about this stuff, so I hope some others will help out too.
> 
> I would take your limited budget and get a great dynamic mic. A studio standard. A good all-round vocal mic that can be pointed at things without teeth and still do a great job. SM 58, SM 57. MD 421. EV RE 20.
> 
> ...



Thank-you for specific Reply to my situation ! Of the Mic choices, SM 58 is most realistic, yet with reasonable concern about usage with Scarlett SOLO. I am Focusrite loyalist, so ISA One is a solid choice ..... $$$$ disclaimer.  Not totally out of question as having reviewed along with .... Warm Audio WA12 MkII, Golden Age Project Pre73 MkIII, Grace M101. Hoping for some trustworthy EBay choices ....

THX!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 29, 2020)

Neumann KM-84 would be an unconventional choice for voice, since it's really an instrument mic.

I have a fortuitously matched pair of Oktavas that sound very similar, and they're great. But I wouldn't normally think of using them on voice.


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

THX Octavas are very recently of interest and will check further.


----------



## Stringtree (May 29, 2020)

I'm afraid I'm the one who brought that little 84 Neumann cigar through security. Somewhere I lost the plot, but it has beautiful characteristics when used for voice over at about a meter, and the current-production KM184 is disparaged as a poor replacement. I started going off on mics I was happy with instead of focusing on the OP. I promise I will extinguish it in the next trash can.

And yeah, the Warm Audio or Golden Age preamps would give you even more Whomp on vocals. Something like the Grace or Millennia pre is not mojo, but transparency and accuracy. I want a couple, just for that. Not for voices. Unless they were classically trained ones.


----------



## dzilizzi (May 29, 2020)

sostenuto said:


> Great to see your thoughts ! Shure PG48 was purchased new, _with cable_, and carefully stored.
> Not much wear & tear after amazing wife lost her Pink Ribbon battle.
> 
> Current scenario is most likely male friends with female wife /partner vocalist. Since AT3035 is no longer produced, not sure what replaced; but was very close to AT2035 before this Thread drew my attention. No doubt it will work with SOLO, but maybe a better preamp ?
> ...


Yes, the Slate comes with a pre-amp. Or at least mine did. But the price has come down a bit since I got it. You also might want to talk to Eric at the JRRShop. He has a NOS mic that can do simulations as well that I think he makes. Haven't tried it yet but it is one my list. IK Multimedia and Antares both make mic modeling software. My ears aren't good enough to really tell the difference but others seem to like it. 

Eric is @UncleE over at KVR. He posts sale threads here but I don't see him around here much otherwise. He is really helpful and won't try to sell you something you don't need.


----------



## bill5 (May 29, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> The problem you may have if you are recording others is every voice is different so some mics will work well for some singers and not for others.


That's worth repeating. So many times I've seen people ask stuff like "what's a good mic for female singer" - there's no such thing because there's no such thing as a "female (or male) voice." They vary a lot.

Also agree with Stingtree that without room treatment, getting a condenser is probably pointless, so I wouldn't go for the AKG 220 till you do something about that. Remember condensers can pick up voices better but that means they also pick up noises you don't want a lot better too.

I could be wrong but I have to wonder if the mic is the problem (assuming loudness is your only complaint and you are fine with its overall quality). You could of course get a mic or two and if it doesn't sound any better, return it. Oh IMO Sennheiser make great mics too; in fact I prefer the 835 over the Shure SM58, same price.





sostenuto said:


> helpful set of current options, but picking one almost come down to throwing a dart at the wall.


Welcome to the world of microphones.  It really is like throwing a dart at the wall. One mic that someone says is amazing, someone else will say they hated. Also in my opinion the differences in mics tends to be exaggerated, often quite a bit so (that doesn't mean there aren't differences). Inexpensive mics can sound great and out-perform pricier ones. Not always so of course, my point is you can't just go by price.

I would just read what you can find on the net, also browse gearslutz.com, tons of gear talk there, see what names keep popping up.

Good luck!


----------



## sostenuto (May 29, 2020)

dzilizzi said:


> Yes, the Slate comes with a pre-amp. Or at least mine did. But the price has come down a bit since I got it. You also might want to talk to Eric at the JRRShop. He has a NOS mic that can do simulations as well that I think he makes. Haven't tried it yet but it is one my list. IK Multimedia and Antares both make mic modeling software. My ears aren't good enough to really tell the difference but others seem to like it.
> 
> Eric is @UncleE over at KVR. He posts sale threads here but I don't see him around here much otherwise. He is really helpful and won't try to sell you something you don't need.



Thanks so much ! 'Wide Awake in Dreamland' playing right now !! !988 was 'a very good year' 

Take care


----------



## sostenuto (May 30, 2020)

Final niggle _hopefully_ _ _
Stumbled on Lindell 6X500 hardware Mic Preamp/EQ during eBay searches ..... @ $299.
*I have this as *_Plugin Alliance_* - VST* and inserted in Reaper PG48 / Scarlett SOLO Audio Track. Seems to produce definite volume increases, as well as other vocal FX. Must trust my 'seasoned' ears on this, yet wondering if others here feel it can get somewhat close to the pre-Reaper '_hardware'_ result ?

Asking due to more serious attention now to quality Mic Preamp .... Would be cool to have this be a decent near-term tweak prior to any new Mic purchase. Saves much vs Focusrite - ISA One !!


----------



## ReelToLogic (May 31, 2020)

I just came across this awesome vocal microphone camparison at Sweetwater. They compare 50 vocal microphones with the same male and female vocalists and include links with the actual audio clips. To my ears, a little EQ could make many of these mics sound quite similar - even those spanning a wide price range. A pretty useful review for those looking to purchase a vocal microphone.








Sweetwater's Vocal Mic Shootout


With 50 microphones ranging from $49.99 to $8,995 (on both male & female voices), Sweetwater has put together one of the largest comprehensive mic shootouts ever. Start listening now!




www.sweetwater.com






And the comparison test below (for recording acoustic guitar) uses an even wider range of mic types.









Choosing the Best Microphone For Acoustic Guitar - 32 Mic Shootout... | Sweetwater


Check out the Choosing the Best Microphone For Acoustic Guitar – 32 Mic Shootout page at Sweetwater — the world's leading music technology and instrument retailer!




www.sweetwater.com


----------



## bill5 (May 31, 2020)

ReelToLogic said:


> I just came across this awesome vocal microphone camparison at Sweetwater. They compare 50 vocal microphones with the same male and female vocalists and include links with the actual audio clips. To my ears, a little EQ could make many of these mics sound quite similar


To my ears, they already do  And caveat, I think only one of them is in the OP's range (the C1). Great idea, I just wish they'd do one with mostly more inexpensive mics.


----------

