Ribbon for heavies.

[James Lugo]

Yup, R92 is cool. Got some good sounds going with the 57/R92 combo and when I muted the R92 it was like the floor fell out. I really like it, it adds a nice fullness and sounds real.

J

[asagaai]

Originally Posted by allencollins

beyer m160 for ribbom
m201 for dynamic

I find this combo smooth - but the M201 needs a little cut out low and a little boost high.

If anyone interested - the first track on my homepage has electric guitars with this combo-no eq.

Second track- same combo- but I cut a bit of low out and put a little high end in.

Anyways- will give an idea about how the M160 and M201 combined together on distorted elect guitar sound.

These tracks are unfinished projects and are in rough.

GJ
Newcastle/OZ

[soupking]

I think I tried posting to this thread earlier but my internet crapped out cuz I can't find a reply.

I can't believe nobody's mentioned a bk-5, particularly the bk-5a.

I think I said something to the effect that if you don't have a good utility ribbon mic, buy two m160's because to me they're workhorse ribbons. But the bk-5 is the bees knees on anything distorted. Just ask old school Hollywood, they used them in scenes to handle gun blasts. They also are very haunting on things like piano.

James, I think I actually extended the offer to lend you one of mine to see if you liked how it sounds. Well, the offer's still good if interested.

Peace,
-soupking

[picksail]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

That's because it was probably placed the best for where an SM57 typically likes to be placed. All of them sounded too far out towards the edge of the cone, especially the ribbons.

Ya.

I was merely commenting on the examples provided.

Regarding these examples, I think that SPL plays a greater role in the sound than anything.

[Brad McGowan]

Can you explain that a little more, Stewart? I'm not sure I'm following you.

thanks,
Brad

[James Lugo]

They were all actually the distance of the sm7 capsule with the foam head off. The placement wasn't that different off the cone.

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

I think I would like all those sound clips better if the mics were closer to the dust cap. They all sound really dark and muddy to me, especially the ribbons.

Brad

And they are all picking up different parts of the speaker cone, they can't be compared unless they are positioned in exactly the same place. Comparing a mic next to another adds another vaiable to the sound besides the mic difference.

Also, too much proximity effect mudding up the sound. Back off the mics, 2 feet is when proximity is gone for most directional mics. Plus the mic will then pick up the entire sound of the speaker, not just a partial of it.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[James Lugo]

I don't know if I agree with all that. I personally like the sound of up close micing and think it's very common and effective when tracking rock records.

[big country]

the question, is the cone flat or concave ?

humm....

[Kris]

Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo

I don't know if I agree with all that. I personally like the sound of up close micing and think it's very common and effective when tracking rock records.

No doubt, but with a mike like the AEA r84 that has pretty massive proximity effect, backing off a bit might make all the difference.

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

... too much proximity effect mudding up the sound. Back off the mics, 2 feet is when proximity is gone for most directional mics.

There's a way to shove a 57 right up on the cone and tame the proximity effect. Just take a little piece of duct tape and cover up about half of the circumference of the plastic vents on the side of the capsule housing. You'll get less boom, more bite, and (not sure why this is) more gain. If you cover up the entire ring of vents, it gets phone-filtery, which can be cool in the right application. For a more subtle variation, try covering the indentation where the capsule housing joins the body.

[big country]

in theory sm7 arournd the surond ,
412 between
57 close to cone

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

There's a way to shove a 57 right up on the cone and tame the proximity effect. Just take a little piece of duct tape and cover up about half of the circumference of the plastic vents on the side of the capsule housing. You'll get less boom, more bite, and (not sure why this is) more gain. If you cover up the entire ring of vents, it gets phone-filtery, which can be cool in the right application. For a more subtle variation, try covering the indentation where the capsule housing joins the body.

That still doen't solve the problem of only picking up a partial of the cone's response.

If you were micing up a full range monitor, would you shove the mic right up to the woofer, or maybe right up to the tweeter? No, you would pull it back so the entire range of sound can be picked up.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo

I don't know if I agree with all that. I personally like the sound of up close micing and think it's very common and effective when tracking rock records.

Do the players have any input on this decision?

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[big country]

use a barrier to block the other half of the cone

mics paralel to the cone

[Brent Hahn]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

That still doen't solve the problem of only picking up a partial of the cone's response.

If you were micing up a full range monitor, would you shove the mic right up to the woofer, or maybe right up to the tweeter? No, you would pull it back so the entire range of sound can be picked up.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

With all due respect to you, and science, and correctness, sometimes things sound cool when you do them wrong.

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

With all due respect to you, and science, and correctness, sometimes things sound cool when you do them wrong.

Sometimes things sound "cooler" when you do things right.

Bottom line, it's the players call. Not mine. Especially if he's paying the bill.
Somehow when a guy spends $$$ and time on his craft, I don't feel right tossing out his opinion and trying to convince them I'm a better judge of his sound than he is.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[big country]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

Sometimes things sound "cooler" when you do things right.



Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

in your line of work im sure that statement holds alot of truth

[Joe Porto]

If you find a ribbon mic to be too dark or bass heavy, try the back side. The Royer 121 and the AEA R84 both have less proximity effect and more brightness on the back side.

I have gotten away from shoving the mic right in the speaker. An R84 a couple feet back can sound very "real" in a good room.

[James Lugo]

Spent the morning with the 2 mics, I think the R92 is definitely more for me. As far as where to put them I think everyone has their trip and that's what's cool. Hell if everyone did it just the way they did before nothing would progress. Plus it's rock-n-roll, fukk rules!

[fhames]

Crowley and Tripp's Roswelitte Naked Eye Ribbon/Mesa Lonestar

[Brad McGowan]

Whether you like mics close to the speaker or farther away is really a matter of taste and is totally dependent on the player, instruments, room, mic, etc. But one thing you can take away from what Jim is saying is that you owe it to yourself to fully understand the sounds you get when put a mic two feet back from a speaker cab as well as jam it up into the grill. If you aren't intimately familiar with both sounds then how can you really make an informed decision?

Brad

[Brad McGowan]

By the way...I now understand why I read about CLA boosting +gazillion at 8k on guitar tracks he mixes. It's because people put mics right up on the grill but point them at the parts of the cone that are all bass and low mids.

Hey Jim--any tips for miking up a 2x12 or 4x12 cab from a couple feet away? I do agree you get the full sound of the cab and speaker but you also get strange interractions between the two speakers. It seems that there is a focal point, but sometimes it's hard to find. Any tips?

Brad

[picksail]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

Can you explain that a little more, Stewart? I'm not sure I'm following you.

I was referring to the relationship between the size of the room versus the level at which the amp is set in that room.

[picksail]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

By the way...I now understand why I read about CLA boosting +gazillion at 8k on guitar tracks he mixes. It's because people put mics right up on the grill but point them at the parts of the cone that are all bass and low mids.

I would think this has more to do with the guitarist's insistence on setting up his guitar sound for the studio in the same way as the stage.

I prefer close mic'd guitar cabinets to be just that-close mic'd. Never had a problem with that personally.

And I can see where, after all is said and done, adding a boost at 8k might just make the guitars pop out of the mix. Just a little brightness.

Given that mixing is a holistic process one can't ascertain if the 8k on a guitar was added specifically for the guitar.
It's all a balancing act so perhaps he added equal amounts of 750-800hz elsewhere. Who really knows?
Maybe he chose for a specific chorus to add the 8k to create balance among a wall of background vocals and the drum overheads.
I suppose that if we aren't in the room with him mixing a particular song then it's all speculation.

I do feel that no generalization can do justice to any mix.

[James Lugo]

Originally Posted by James 'LA' Lugo

Spent the morning with the 2 mics, I think the R92 is definitely more for me. As far as where to put them I think everyone has their trip and that's what's cool. Hell if everyone did it just the way they did before nothing would progress. Plus it's rock-n-roll, fukk rules!

I apologize Jim that was kinda assholish. I appreciate you taking the time to help me out.

James

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by picksail

I do feel that no generalization can do justice to any mix.

Word!

Brad

[GMo]

My fav for heavy gtr tones : 121,57,421 Use all three mics blend to taste. It's important that the 121 is dead center of cone.Sometimes moving it back 1" from grill cloth is good for the ribbon.Also,121 into TG-2 w/impeadance 300 button in makes a BIG difference in retaining some high end.Sometimes a 609 can work in place of the 421. I also like the 160's. I will say,if placed correctly,the 121 will sound most like your amp compared to any I've tried,though for the heavy stuff (tuned down,Diezel,Ubershall,Rivera,Marshall,etc) a 57,and 421 really help out. I've recorded a LOT of heavy gtr tones,and these are my findings.

[mjlaudio]

I always use an m500 Beyer ribbon for heavies......its got some lowend stuff and some extra edge up top.....like a 160 but with more low end. I never really like royers for guitars they always end up muted or buried when i get tracks to mix.

[DesertDawg]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

There's a way to shove a 57 right up on the cone and tame the proximity effect. Just take a little piece of duct tape and cover up about half of the circumference of the plastic vents on the side of the capsule housing. You'll get less boom, more bite, and (not sure why this is) more gain.

Because you're changing the pickup pattern of the mic when you do this - that's why it "is". When you block off the back-end rejection of a cardiod mic completely, you change it's pattern to omni... when you block it off partially, such as you're doing, you're converting a narrow-pattern cardioid mic - in this case - to a really, really wide cardioid, and under the circumstances you mention, you're getting more "gain" because you're a.) losing the rejection (opposite force) that's normally allowed to come in through the vents - or at least most of it... and b.) as a result of widening the pattern, you're also allowing it to pick up a much wider aspect of the speaker's motion itself - maybe a 3" or 4" wide aspect, if you've got the mic shoved right up against the speaker - instead of just a half-inch to 3/4's of an inch diameter's worth of air movement. The less "boom" you describe is also a function of widening the pattern of the mic (Omni's & wide card's have less proximity effect than hypercard's).