A smooth vocal Mic

[jacobq]

What is a good vocal mic that does not have that grainy type of sound on extended notes? It is hard to explain but most LC mics have a grainy type sound that irritates the hell out of me. I guess for rock vocals this is a good thing. But for slow ballads I am searching for something that has a more soft silkier sound that is not so grainy. I like Sarah Mcglaughlins vocals but I even hear this grainy qaulity on her songs, which an m149 was used. Is this something inherent with all tube mics? Would a U87 or clone have a less grainy sound being that it does not have a tube?

I would not consider the 87 as grainy.

But, from the way I ready your post I think a Shure SM7 might be what you are looking for.


To bad "grainy" can mean a million things to a million people.

Can you gove an example?

D

[kittonian]

We've got a WAV file posted of exactly what you are asking about that shows off the Peluso 22 251 (which I use almost exclusively on vocals - and which is being heavily discussed in the so much gear forum) on our website. Feel free to check it out and see if it's what you are after. http://www.audiolot.com/proaudio/sales/peluso

[Doublehelix]

I own (and love) a U87, but have a Blue Bottle in for audition right now, and all I can say is "wow"! It is rich and smooth...beautiful!

From reading your post however, it sounds like you might want to consider trying out a ribbon mic for this application. Very smooth and rich without any high-end harshness. Not sure if you would consider that "grainy", but to me the sound of a good ribbon mic on vocals is anything but grainy.

Good luck!

[Lagerfeldt]

U87, actually I prefer the U89 for some stuff (especially voiceover).

[jacobq]

For example the song "Angel" by Sarah Mcgluaghlin. On my monitor speakers, a pair of B&W CDM 9NTs, I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distortion of some type.

Now take for example Karen Carpenters vocals on some of her hits. Either the original ones or the remasterd 1992 versions. This is what I am trying to achieve.I know alot of it had to do with the outboard gear but it started at the mic. And that is the basic sound throughout that the engineers had to work with.

U87s were very popular around the time The carpenters were at their peak.That is why I suggested a U87 for this sound. Some may consider Karens music cheesy which I do not. But I am mostly focused on the incredible purity of the sound of the recording. And how to get there.

[Midlandmorgan]

Originally Posted by jacobq

For example the song "Angel" by Sarah Mcgluaghlin. On my monitor speakers, a pair of B&W CDM 9NTs, I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distotion of some type.

Now take for example Karen Carpenters vocals on some of her hits. Either the original ones or the remasterd 1992 versions. This is what I am trying to achieve.I know alot of it had to do with the outboard gear but it started at the mic. And that is the basic sound throughout that the engineers to work with.

U87s were very popular around the time The carpenters were at their peak.That is why I suggested a U87 for this sound. Some may consider Karens music cheesy which I do not. But I am mostly focused on the incredible purity of the sound of the recording. And how to get there.

I think 99% of that was Karen...I don't have any real information, but it seems to me she could have sung into an RC Cola bottle and sounded spectacular...

On TV appearances, I saw here using RE15s or 16s, (no Ashlee Simpsonism...real performances) and she sounded the same.

[daaronhoffman]

I bought a mic recommended by a friend/producer in Nashville.
The maker is John Downs.
www.bigmics.com

These are LC tube(telefunken). Very Smooth and Big!
I couldn't be more happy. I think he's selling them for around $2k

Vince Gill and Amy Grant's latest album uses them.
As well as James Taylor.....etc. very large list.

He's mainly worked "underground" with them.
Brown Bannister, Chuck Ainly... gave input on what they wanted in the mic.
Basically a BIG sound without all the frills on the outside. He's using normal casing and storage to keep the cost so cheap. The guts are top notch though!

I highly recommend them!
I don't have any examples right now.

No, I'm not a dealer or in any way get money from this. Just a very pleased owner.

Aaron

[danickstr]

air is also at fault for causing the grit at the top. some vocalists can sing without as much air as others. babs S. is a good example, especially in the 80's stuff. no real airyness there, she seemed to control it out. EQ can take it off the top too, but I think its a cool sound, so i usually try to enhance it. who can figure?

[µ¿ z3®ø™]

all i can say is......
ribbons.
probably one of wes dooley's.

[Punchmo]

Originally Posted by jacobq

On my monitor speakers, a pair of B&W CDM 9NTs, I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distotion of some type.

I have a 5.1 sytem based on CDM 9NTs in my home. They are very unforgiving speakers in the high mids. If high mids are smooth on these, IMHO they are smooth.

[rlnyc]

Originally Posted by jacobq

What is a good vocal mic that does not have that grainy type of sound on extended notes?

Almost any ribbon microphone. AEA R84 comes to mind.

Best regards,
rlnyc

[Punchmo]

I have an E47 that sounds beautiful on most lead vox. I have a rok project with vox od's into an E47 going on at the moment. The lead male singer listened to several work mixes and said that they are too clean and pristine. Have been using a SM7 since which HE loves.

The E47 won't sound grainy unless you overdrive the pre by design or not. Of course, each vocalist has a voice that needs matched with a mic. A ribbon can just be the ticket

[steins]

Originally Posted by jacobq

What is a good vocal mic that does not have that grainy type of sound on extended notes? It is hard to explain but most LC mics have a grainy type sound that irritates the hell out of me. I guess for rock vocals this is a good thing. But for slow ballads I am searching for something that has a more soft silkier sound that is not so grainy. I like Sarah Mcglaughlins vocals but I even hear this grainy qaulity on her songs, which an m149 was used. Is this something inherent with all tube mics? Would a U87 or clone have a less grainy sound being that it does not have a tube?

Oh, the search for the perfect vocal....

To me, an U87 into a Neve 1073 sound good always, no matter what´s in front of the microphone. When we got time to experiment, we find things like:

- AEA R84 into a Great River is a perfect combo for the given talent.
- M149 into whatever preamp is a perfect combo for the given talent. (Really, the M149 is a great vocal mic for those talents who takes the time to "get to know" the microphone.....)
- A SM57 in the control room is just what the track needs!
- A scratch vocal done with Neumann 184 set up as acoustic guitar mics, ends up on the record.

Or like last week: Female singer, hars voice, none of our usual "go-to" chains worked..we ended up with a TLM103 into a Millennia STT-1. The TLM103 saved the project, the preamp could have been just about anything, altough the STT-1 sounded great.

What is a "grainy" sound? Sometimes, I can´t hear the difference between tube mics or solid state mics! But I think I can hear the difference between a good sound and a bad sound. "Grainy" to me is usually something inherent in the talent´s voice.

Have you tried some ribbon mics? I think you´ll be very pleased.

Sorry fo the rambling....I´m halfway through a bottle of wine

Stein Tore

[Fruition2k]

Hard to squeeze grain out of an M269/U67, if you did it would be a first..ribbons are also smooth but you did mention extended top. A U87/67 to 16 trk 2" would be closer the sound, (I've never heard any 87 grainy right off of a 2").

I've been tempted to have my 269 upgraded to the .9 micron mod by Tony at SPA for the ultimate top or should I say depth and clarity, but for a small private project studio I cant justify it yet.

[jacobq]

I am beginning to beleive that recording to tape is also what plays an important part in trying to reach the sound I desire. God knows I cannot afford a studer of any type.
I just purchased a 5012 Portico so I may try a U87ai and one of the ribbon mics that are popular right now among the members.

[midnightsun]

A U89 will give any voice its best shot at being pleasing to the ear for broadcasting. If I am in a hurry and don't want to screw around I will pick up a U89 for anything and especially vocals and I know it probably be okay or even great, but never a bad choice. There are other mics that might sound better for specific applications but might also sound bad for a specific application. The u89 and the u87 both have color. One man's color is another man's graininess. I really like ribbon mics on some voices and but find that they can make certain smooth, pretty voices sound edgy to my ear. There are times that I am tracking a folk or blues singer and I want to capture the grit-- it seems that the U89 pretty's things up too much.

[oceantracks]

Originally Posted by jacobq

For example the song "Angel" by Sarah Mcgluaghlin. On my monitor speakers, a pair of B&W CDM 9NTs, I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distortion of some type.

Now take for example Karen Carpenters vocals on some of her hits. Either the original ones or the remasterd 1992 versions. This is what I am trying to achieve.I know alot of it had to do with the outboard gear but it started at the mic. And that is the basic sound throughout that the engineers had to work with.

U87s were very popular around the time The carpenters were at their peak.That is why I suggested a U87 for this sound. Some may consider Karens music cheesy which I do not. But I am mostly focused on the incredible purity of the sound of the recording. And how to get there.

The Carpenters almost always used U87s, according to Richard.
TH

[jjblair]

The Manley Gold Reference. Very open, airy and smooth with no grain at all.

[jjblair]

Originally Posted by Fruition2k

I've been tempted to have my 269 upgraded to the .9 micron mod by Tony at SPA for the ultimate top or should I say depth and clarity, but for a small private project studio I cant justify it yet.

Don't go to a thinner diaphragm. Just have them bypass the hi freq shelve. BTW, there's a reason that it's called "Stephen Paul syndrome" when thin diaphragms lose their elasticity and stick to the backplate. CK12s and K67s sound very bright and open with 6 microns. .9 seems ridiculous and begging for trouble, if you ask me.

[warhead]

Originally Posted by jacobq

For example the song "Angel" by Sarah Mcgluaghlin. On my monitor speakers, a pair of B&W CDM 9NTs, I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distortion of some type.

Could it be a compressor distorting? EQ?

War

[µ¿ z3®ø™]

Originally Posted by warhead

Could it be a compressor distorting? EQ?

War

or poor conversion.
i've often thought that it sounded like digititus.

[wwittman]

I recently recorded Sarah, and one interesting thing was that she really likes (and says she's "used to") rolling LOADS of middle out of voice when she's singing... she really likes that ultra-hollow quality... without what she calls the "honky" part.

That's a part of where that "smoothness" comes from (in addition to her incridibly beautiful voice)...

for smooth vocal mics you might try a Gefell UM-900 or a Brauner VM1

[Ker]

Originally Posted by wwittman

I recently recorded Sarah, and one interesting thing was that she really likes (and says she's "used to") rolling LOADS of middle out of voice when she's singing... she really likes that ultra-hollow quality... without what she calls the "honky" part.

That's a part of where that "smoothness" comes from (in addition to her incridibly beautiful voice)...

for smooth vocal mics you might try a Gefell UM-900 or a Brauner VM1

Actually, it's funny that I should catch your post because I was researching the UM900 recently and saw that article about "Cyndi Lauper's favourite mic" over and over again, but didn't realize that you were the one who was being interviewed!

In any case, as a result of that article, I've been listening to Cyndi Lauper's "At Last" album over and over to see if I could get an idea of what the UM-900 sounds like. Was that album done with this mic? (really great work btw, however it was recorded).. In particular, I like "Walk on By" and "La Vie en Rose" as clear examples of Cyndi's voice through the mic, but don't know if it was indeed a UM900.

Since you mentioned them both, how does the UM900 compare to the VM1? I know the VM1 was used to record all of the Keane album through a Tubetech MEC1A, and I find that the vocals are very close-mic'd and in your face, like the singer is singing in your ear, yet smooth and not sibilant, though perhaps scooped in the midrange. How would the UM-900 differ from this? (I was thinking to get the UM900 as a "U47" sound, "big" i.e. fuller midrange, but was perhaps not expecting to be able to get that same Keane sound as well, which is "whisper" close - I'd expect heavy compression to make the mids too muddy).

I'd be really thankful for any insight you might have.... thanks!

[DAWgEAR]

I've used a U87ai and I would call it somewhat hot, sizzly edgy, but not at all grainy. The sound may not suit your preferences for the application, but it's a very clear and detailed sound.

To me "grainy" conjures an image of low resolution harshness. If I may mix audio with visual metaphors, the U87ai is like a crystal clear and detailed photo of a shiny bright red sports car. You may or may not like the bright red color, but you can see the car very clearly in all its detail.

On the other hand, "grainy" would be a photo -- even a photo of a mellow old pale blue sedan -- that has been faxed and photocopied a few too may times.

I've owned two of the lower end Rode mics and they sound "grainy" to me. Poor detail. And hot, sizzly, and edgy to boot. Like photos of said bright red sportscar that have been faxed and photocopied. Harsh and hard on the eyes ... er ... ears.

The Soundelux ifet7 is a mic that is superbly detailed and smooth, but less hot and sizzly than the U87ai. Beautiful highs and solid mids. Clear, rich, and creamy with just a hint of sizzle.

For what it's worth, that's my take based on my limited experiences and at this stage of my jouney.

[missilanious]

"I begin to hear this harshness on some of the extended notes of her vocals. It is almost like a very slight distortion of some type."

Your actually hearing a vocal technique. The bone in your nasal cavity much like soundboard in a paino when having lots of air pushed through it vibrates and actually sounds alot like slight transformer breakup in the top end, like you hit a pre a little to hard. I'm working with a very talented clasicly trained female vocalist that does this alot when sustianing notes, at first it bugged me cause it sounds like a slight breakup, then she did it live which reassured me it was a technique not breakup. And by the way she is a big Sarah Mcglockland (sorry about the spelling), and Tori Amos fan.

[danickstr]

the old u87s dont sound like the new ones, so if someone says u87, you have to assume its new, since the guys who konw the difference refer to the old one as old.\
have a great day