Anyone know the SM7 and 1084 vocal EQ settings on Thriller?

[andonwego]

SM7 --> 1084 --> 1176

I assume the SM7 was in low cut and mid-boost.

Settings on the pre/EQ?

[ballison]

really?

[edva]

At that time in his career, it would have been hard to make MJ sound anything less than fabulous. Possible I guess, but the engineer would have had to have been deaf and stupid, and as we all know, he wasn't. Any mic, any pre, and it still would've sounded basically like that. That was what we used to call "real singing". IMHO.

[Ward Pike]

With Bruce Swedien's incredible ears and experience, I doubt EQ was even necessary. I would venture to say it was more a combination of choosing the right microphone and the right pre, and I say with certainty that someone with Bruce's ability and genius picked the unlikely candidate of a dynamic SM7 without knowing what the voice would sound like in the final mix just from hearing MJ sing acoustically (i.e. without any electronics such as mic's pre's and playback through speakers) in person.

Just my 2 pence worth!

[andonwego]

Originally Posted by ballison

really?

Honestly why not? It would really help with understanding the mechanics of the sound. Vocal sounds from songs from that era on his albums that were done with different microphones all have a sonic signature that's very much their own. The compressor adds something too. The 1084 wouldn't have been used if it didn't have a certain desired sonic signature. Just curious about how the EQ may have been set.

Re: the 'gear matters less than talent' theory, refer to recordings made prior to Off The Wall vs. Off The Wall. Different engineers, mics, pres, EQs, compressors, consoles, give, well, honestly a different sound. Hearing yourself in headphones changes with all those variables, and singers do sing differently based on what they hear in their headphones. Differences can be in pitch length, intonation, all sorts of things. It's not all down to over-the-years changes in voice and/or changes in lessons/technique.

Change an EQ setting on a singer in a vocal session and watch what happens. New performance perspective. Sound goes directly into the brain and causes a butterfly effect of reactions.

It's not nearly as subtle a difference as a lot of people say. Less of an art and more of a science than people seem to suggest. Even changing headphone volume or vocal mix level has immediate effects on vocal intonation.

Just my 2 cents but I can't imagine I'm alone on this.

[Peter Stengaard]

I use that chain a lot and it always works. Sometimes other stuff is even better but if u can't make it sound good with those ingredients it's cuz your singer isn't very good. Maybe add a little 3.2 to make it cut and take out a bit of low end to make it easier to compress and mix

[Killahurts]

Originally Posted by andonwego

Change an EQ setting on a singer in a vocal session and watch what happens. New performance perspective. Sound goes directly into the brain and causes a butterfly effect of reactions.

It's not nearly as subtle a difference as a lot of people say. Less of an art and more of a science than people seem to suggest.

Bold of you to post this here, and well put.

[andonwego]

Originally Posted by Peter Stengaard

take out a bit of low end to make it easier to compress and mix

On the 1084 or with the low-cut switch on the back of the SM7, or both?

[dabigfrog]

you're missing the most important piece....MJ


MJ > Sm7 > 1084 > 1176


THAT'S HOW YOU GET THAT SOUND!

[Fezzle]

Michael Jackson was such a good singer, the mic and then pre would have been the choice for his range, again I would doubt much if any EQ was added, yeh probably a low cut.. maybe a little top shelving .. but honestly that sound is michael jackson.. give the guy SM58 and MOTO pre's and it would still sound immense

[themaidsroom]

I listen to
"human nature" alot lately as much to hear greg phillanganes
as michael......when michael starts letting go and really emoting at the end
of the track it just blows me away........"baby be mine" also has some fantastic
singing......i discovered that track for the first time at the gym the other day
having bought the record in 1983........

i love the sm-7.....i have one in nyc and gave the one I have in London
away.......need to get another.......
the mic blows me away as I have posted many, many times before....with
a great pre a little hi end boost, it holds its own with 47's and 251's......
amazing.....



be well


- Jack

[bcgood]

My 57 with the new split screen pop filter I got rocks even more!

To the op, I'm pretty sure the settings where flat on the SM7. Also, Bruce has said before that he prefers the original SM7s to the newer Bs.

It's obvious that he used some low cut and boosted the highs. SM7s take eq great.