substitute for beta 52 for tracking live kick drum

[cioto]

Hello,
I've been using the beta52 to track live kick drums, anyway I'm not satistied by the sound I get. I will buy a beta91 to get the click and the attack, but still the low frequency I get from the 52 aren't so "full" and "round" as I would.
what's your suggestion for a beta52 substitute, to match with the beta91?
I am thinking about the subkick, but I believe it is too big for a live recording use on small stages...

[bishopthomas]

Sennheiser 901. Best kick drum mic I've ever used. One mic, one channel, easy to mix, no phase issues. It has the click of the 91 with the low end of the Beta 52. XLR connector instead of the flimsy Beta setup and the whole thing is built like a tank. It won't work on drums without a hole, so that's the only downside.

[SANDS]

ever try the akg d112?

[cioto]

thanks for the 901 suggestions, I'll keep it in mind.

Yes I have tried the 112, as a single mic setup I prefear it over the beta52, since the akg has more click, while the beta52 has some mid frequency I really don't like.
But has it got enough lows?

More suggestions would be welcome!

[talbe1019]

I really like an RE20 or RE27 in there. A bit more expensive than a 112 or 52 but sounds pretty good to my ears.

[RobAnderson]

Maybe I'm weird, but I like the Sennheiser 421 on kick.

Runner up is the Beyer M88.

I have had good fortune with the times that I have split a house beta52. You do have to be pretty careful how you position it - I think it's pretty directional in the higher frequencies. From my experience, it does not have the low end of an M88.

[trompetfreak]

My first mic to grab is the d112 for any style.
If it's jazz or something requireing (how to spell...), I tend to grab a RE20 or M88.

[Remoteness]

Here's another vote for the M88.

I've been using an M88 on foot and a pair of M160s for overheads for decades.
IMO it's a winning match.

At times we have to go with what the band's tech rider requests.
The Beta52 shows up a lot and we've had good success with this mic.

If a FOH engineer has a request, I will try it before I replace it especially when we're not primary audio for the date. In any event, if it doesn't sound right I do my best to get it replaced with a M88.

An important point that needs to be made is: It is all about how you position the mics in the first place!

[rmx16]

Originally Posted by cioto

Hello,
I've been using the beta52 to track live kick drums, anyway I'm not satistied by the sound I get. I will buy a beta91 to get the click and the attack, but still the low frequency I get from the 52 aren't so "full" and "round" as I would.
what's your suggestion for a beta52 substitute, to match with the beta91?
I am thinking about the subkick, but I believe it is too big for a live recording use on small stages...

M88 and SM91. Been using that combo live for years

Peace

[cioto]

sm91 = beta91?

I forgot to say, I record mainly rock bands, so I want deep low and lot of attack.


...and I add...
I have found these m88 TG versions... are these different from the original?

[rmx16]

Originally Posted by cioto

sm91 = beta91?

I forgot to say, I record mainly rock bands, so I want deep low and lot of attack.


...and I add...
I have found these m88 TG versions... are these different from the original?

shure sm-91 vs. beta 91

[666666]

I've tried assorted kick mics and actually the Beta 52 is my mic of choice. If you're not hearing the frequencies you'd like, you need to look more at the drum itself (heads, tuning, beater, muffling or lack thereof, etc), and also look at mic placement and position. If the drum is set up and tuned well, played well, and the mic is in the "right spot", a Beta 52 should be able to perform just as well as any of the others mentioned here.

Also consider... the D112 is a cardioid and picks up a LOT of bleed... when you go to roll in some upper frequencies later in the mix to get more of a "click" from the kick, you'll have a lot of unwanted cymbal noise etc on there getting in the way, may not even allow you to raise the upper-end at all. A 52 is a fairly tight hypercardioid and helps reject a good deal of that bleed, you'll have a cleaner signal and thus way more control later.

If you are certain that you don't like the 52, then at least make sure you try some other hyper or supercardioid mic. The only "cardioid" mic that seems to work well on drums (in terms of isolating the signal, blocking out bleed) is the 421... this mic performs more like a hypercardioid for whatever reason even though they call it a "cardioid". The 112 though is a nightmare with bleed.

But again, if you're not happy with what you're capturing, look more at the source sound, not necessarily the mic. In 95% of the cases, it's likely the fault of the source. If the kick has a thick dead head, a huge pillow inside, tons of muffling, a felt pad where the beater hits and a felt beater, and then the drummer doesn't hit hard, you'll never get a "clicky" sound in a million years... you won't get a good sound, period, whether you have a 52, 112, M88 or whatever.

If you find you have drummers come in often that have poor sounding kick drums, you could get yourself a trigger and record a trigger signal off the kick... then you can trigger a sample "click" sound later and blend it in with the mic sound in the mix, etc. I don't like doing this in general, but if you do not have control over the quality of the source kick drum sound, it might be the only way.

[forthemusic.com]

I would have to strongly agree with 666666 on this. Source is everything and most likely in your case the problem.

As a drummer I have been where you are. So, I purchased a Tama Maple Starclassic (22x18) and a Starclassic Performer (20x18), both kits had really great sounding kick drums. I have not had a bad sounding recording since. Live or studio.

To specifically answer your question in case you already have a great drum sound, I would go with the Audix D6. It is already EQ'd for the characteristics most of us want from our kick sound. Plus it's inexpensive, very durable and easy to place.

Along with the D6, I also own an AKG D112 and a Beta 52 for use in my studio and have used the Yamaha subkick and RE20 also mentioned. You can't really go wrong with any of them. I would however say that the Yamaha subkick captures a very specific sound of the drum that you may or may not use all of the time. So, while it is a great tool to have in the arsenal, I would go with one of the others which would be easier to eq for your specific tastes.

Another great shorcut answer to your problem...kick drum samples. I just got into this and been loving it ever since.

Good Luck!

[Jim vanBergen]

I have been using the D6 for years and drummers love the sound.

[talbe1019]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

I have been using the D6 for years and drummers love the sound.

I used one about a month ago...I didn't really care for it, but I know a lot of people that like it. Maybe I will give it a 2nd chance on your recommendation.

[Remoteness]

Even though I don't use the D6 much unless it's on a tech rider it's a really nice mic for the foot.

IMO, more times than not, moving the mic a 1/4 of an inch or so in the right direction will make more of a difference than the mic model you choose.

Originally Posted by talbe1019

I used one about a month ago...I didn't really care for it, but I know a lot of people that like it. Maybe I will give it a 2nd chance on your recommendation.

[trompetfreak]

Tho I have to agree with 666666 (lost count... had more beers than 6-es in his name...). Garbage in --> garbage out.

If the source sucks, you won't be able to get a proper sound out of it!

I just dig what the d112 and m88 (depending on the genre) do to the kick-drum sound... The d112 might not be as tight in pattern, but I hardly use eq on the signal so there are less phase issues.

I tend to use the signal I get. If it's not what I want, I'ts either the musician, the instrument, or me having to put the mic differently or use another mic.

[cioto]

I found a Heil PR40 at a nice price.... could it be a nice one-mick-only for the kick?

[talbe1019]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

Even though I don't use the D6 much unless it's on a tech rider it's a really nice mic for the foot.

IMO, more times than not, moving the mic a 1/4 of an inch or so in the right direction will make more of a difference than the mic model you choose.

Most of the time I don't get a chance to play with the the sound...I usually record multiple bands in a festival type setting. Having said that...I am going to concentrate more on postiion...not that I haven't before, but more so now. Thanks Steve...

[space2012]

i like audio-technica bk1, but for kicks, a 8inch woofer + a DI box.
studio auditions.com

[Jim vanBergen]

Originally Posted by Remoteness

IMO, more times than not, moving the mic a 1/4 of an inch or so in the right direction will make more of a difference than the mic model you choose.

Steve, How TRUE! Once again you have quickly cut thru the BS to the most important point: many mics can do a great job on any instrument these days, if they are positioned well!

I had to try a U-47 on kick one time because I kept on hearing about other people doing it on albums I loved. I found that once it was in the right place, it sounded as good as an RE-20 or M88, as long as they were also in the right place for the drum. Yes, I was dissapointed, but I learned a great lesson, and proceeded to use the U47 on kick for a jazz session where it was ideal! Sometimes our mic choices make subtle differences, sometimes not so subtle- but I realized it was more about the combination of 1) player 2) instrument & 3) type of music, before I needed to consider: 4) mic position 5) mic preamp and 6) microphone.

[trompetfreak]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

Steve, How TRUE! Once again you have quickly cut thru the BS to the most important point: many mics can do a great job on any instrument these days, if they are positioned well!

I had to try a U-47 on kick one time because I kept on hearing about other people doing it on albums I loved. I found that once it was in the right place, it sounded as good as an RE-20 or M88, as long as they were also in the right place for the drum. Yes, I was dissapointed, but I learned a great lesson, and proceeded to use the U47 on kick for a jazz session where it was ideal! Sometimes our mic choices make subtle differences, sometimes not so subtle- but I realized it was more about the combination of 1) player 2) instrument & 3) type of music, before I needed to consider: 4) mic position 5) mic preamp and 6) microphone.

I think that's the correct conclusion for this question?

[cioto]

I totally agree with the right position,
BUT
when I record, I have something like 3 hours for setting up everything (mics, cables, splitters, multicores, DIs, preamps, soundcard, laptop, sequencer...), so I have not the time to experiment.
And everyday I record different players and instrument, and the possibilities for changing tuning, head, beater... are really few.
So If a mic can make its work faster and with less experiments than another, well I want it to be my mic!

[Remoteness]

Yes, positioning is everything.

We are often in the same situation.
3 or 4 hours for setting everything sounds about right for some of the dates we do.
You may not have the time to experiment, but what does it take to move a mic a quarter of an inch one way or another?

I'm not sure changing heads, beater and such is always applicable, but IMO tuning is.
...And, mic placement is very important - moving a mic just a bit can save you hours of fixing and mixing every time!

No one mic can be thrown up in any position and work like you want it.
It's just the wrong way of looking at it.
Consider adding mic placement and review to the list of things to do when you're on your three hour dates.

Next time you listen to the foot and it doesn't sound right, don't blame the mic until you have tried a couple of different placements. Even my favorite "go to" mics need a little help - the right placement is more important than the mic you're using.

Originally Posted by cioto

I totally agree with the right position,
BUT
when I record, I have something like 3 hours for setting up everything (mics, cables, splitters, multicores, DIs, preamps, soundcard, laptop, sequencer...), so I have not the time to experiment.
And everyday I record different players and instrument, and the possibilities for changing tuning, head, beater... are really few.
So If a mic can make its work faster and with less experiments than another, well I want it to be my mic!

[cioto]

You are so right Steve.
I should change a little my workflow to save more time for check auditions.


Anyway, since I really don't like the sound of the beta52 and have decided to substitute it, I have found two others "usual sospects"...

- heil pr 40 $299 new
- audio technica ae2500 $330 good conditions

I really don't know which one to chose... Maybe I could reuse the heil on guitar amps and vocals as well... while the audio technica may be a little less versatile... but it has dynamic and condenser too... mhhhh....

[cioto]

just bought the sennheiser evolution 901, and recorded the first show, it seems really beautiful, nice and full attack, big lows and at last no more beta52 sound !!

[Jim vanBergen]

Cioto,

So happy to hear you found a mic you love! Good news!

JvB

[bishopthomas]

Originally Posted by cioto

just bought the sennheiser evolution 901, and recorded the first show, it seems really beautiful, nice and full attack, big lows and at last no more beta52 sound !!

I don't want to say I told you so, but....... Just kidding. I'm glad you're happy with it. Keep on recording!

[fallforward]

Make your own sub kick. I made one from stuff I had lying around and it sounds great. I use a beta 91 on the inside and just set that in front of the kick. It has great rejection also which makes it ideal for live recording.

[LX3]

The e901 and the Beta 52 are totally different kinds of mics (one's a PZM, the others a dynamic) so it's no surprise to me that you're getting a different kind of sound. If you've never really liked the 52, then at least the 901 is going to be something else...

I like the 901 as well (kind of wish I'd bought one instead of the "industry standard" Beta 91) but for me it's a risk when used all on its own. Whereas I can usually get what I need out of a 52 all on its own.

(Then again, I don't like kick drums that just go "click" or "splat" - which the 91 excels at).

As I said before, for me, I find the damping and tuning of the drum - and the abilities of the drummer - to be way more influential than mic choice. If a Beta 52 actually sounds bad in the "normal" position, it's never been the fault of the mic.

Glad you found what you were looking for. I can tell you that although I also quite like the AE2500, it wouldn't have got it for you if you didn't like the 52.