Ribbons really better on digital recording?

[Unknown soldier]

Does the frequency response of ribbons really help get that warmth and softer high end when recording to digital? Especially on guitar as I'm using the usual 57/421 combo and find it a bit harsh at times no matter what I do...

[drBill]

Simple answer. Yes.

[los marbles]

I've found them to help in this regard too. Smoother highs.

[thepilgrimsdream]

My RCA 77ds are heaven

[Fezzle]

+1! , my M160 on certain bits tames all that nasty sizzle and turns into smooth highs my ears can take easily, ribbons rule

[Steffmo]

One more yes. Ribbons naturally roll of where digital nastiness begins.

[binarymilton]

yep. ribbons all the way.

Well, maybe not all the way. But I can't imagine anything that you couldn't record, and get sounding pretty damn nice with some ribbons and some small-diaphragm condensers.

[Joshua Estock]

In short, yes!

Years ago engineers used to run a large diaphragm condenser mic through a console (lots of transformers) onto a piece of tape, which took the edge of the mic. Now most run their condensers into a DC coupled converter, which does next to nothing to the sound of the mic. The result often being bright and harsh. Ribbons usually result in great, natural sounds.

[John N]

Yes and No...

I've had better results with the shorter ribbon types on electric guitar. I did not get pleasing results with my Shinybox 46L (long ribbon with Lundahl transformer) on slightly overdriven guitar amp. I was surprised by how harsh it sounded - although it sounded heavenly on clean Strat arpeggios. I'm sure if I tweaked amp eq and mic placement i could have gotten better results on od guitar but my Joly modded Nady RSM-4 sounds on od guitar with no fuss.

[Joshua Estock]

Originally Posted by John N

Yes and No...

I've had better results with the shorter ribbon types on electric guitar. I did not get pleasing results with my Shinybox 46L (long ribbon with Lundahl transformer) on slightly overdriven guitar amp. I was surprised by how harsh it sounded - although it sounded heavenly on clean Strat arpeggios. I'm sure if I tweaked amp eq and mic placement i could have gotten better results on od guitar but my Joly modded Nady RSM-4 sounds on od guitar with no fuss.

Thanks for the heads up. I was considering pickign up a Shinybox.

Check out the SE Electronics VR series ribbons. I have found a ton of uses for them. I use them more than my 121.

[Fletcher]

Ribbons - as a racial group - aren't necessarily better than any other racial group [condensers, moving coil, etc.]. What matters is [assuming you have a worthy player, which we all know is a pretty large assumption] the sound from the amp, the amp's sound in the room... the aesthetic you would like to achieve from the instrument in the musical arrangement [which very much leads back to the "sound of the amp" thing].

These devices [microphones] are just tools that help you achieve the aesthetic of a recording... you can use any of the fore mentioned types of tools [ribbons, condenser, moving coil] and get great results or shit results depending on what you have in mind, the specific tools you use to achieve the results and the skill levels of all involved... for example... chances are you're going to get different results using a $100 ribbon mic [no brand indictment - just a generic example] than you would a $2000 condenser mic... will the $100 ribbon mic sound better just because it has a ribbon? I think not [but I could be wrong... because YMMV].

If I were going to take this exploratory plunge I would do it with my eyes [meaning ears] wide open to any / all possibilities. That said... 421's can often be brash on a guitar amp... unless they're placed very well they can really bring out the 3kHz stuff in an amp... while 57's often have the ability to sound a bit dull unless they're placed properly. You might investigate placement of the tools you have over trying new tools... or you might want to compare and contrast the new tools to your existing tool set.

Who knows? You could be surprised by the end result [or not... because once again... YMMV].

Peace

[John N]

Originally Posted by Joshua Estock

Thanks for the heads up. I was considering pickign up a Shinybox.

Check out the SE Electronics VR series ribbons. I have found a ton of uses for them. I use them more than my 121.

this was not meant to disparage Shinybox ribbons! rather it was to contrast long and short ribbon designs. The Shinybox is an exceptional ribbon mic with an extended high end and great detail. It makes a great drum overhead or room mic; I've gotten exceptional tambourine tracks from it and would guess it would be great on many sources. It just might not be the best tool for overdriven guitar amp.

[robertshaw]

Originally Posted by Unknown soldier

Does the frequency response of ribbons really help get that warmth and softer high end when recording to digital? Especially on guitar as I'm using the usual 57/421 combo and find it a bit harsh at times no matter what I do...

ribbons are darker so people with no analog experience think they are better than condensers on guitars in digital domain, when in reality they are just not as bright. Back in the 70s lots of records used u87 on gtrs. BIB some old zep etc.....

Its like a akg414. Prior to protools they were staples in every recording studio now it's a mic everyone loves to hate. Sure it's a bright mic but it sounds brighter with digital. On analog tape it sounded tamer so it appears more useful.

Ribbons were always used.... m160, BBC coles 4038 were popular back in the day. But only recently has it become a real fad, they were not used nearly as much in the older days. The 121 has really popularized ribbons on gtrs. I personally think the mic sounds bad but it is warmer than a condenser but warm with mics is just another word for not as bright. m160 is a much better mic, the midrange/topend smoothness is so much better than a 121. And it actually has good bottom end too. 121 will go out of style like avalon, bla mods, tlm103, 87ai and all the other internet hyped gear.

[Steffmo]

Its almost like no one ever wants to admit the relationship between or gear and our ears. Each one effects the other.

For years no one wanted to admit that they MIGHT be aware of the fact that after 200 plays 2' MIGHT lose some high end. If you listen to the party line, no one EVER considered that when they tracked a high frequency oriented instrument a tad brighter at the get go.

Well I did, and a lot of other cats did to. Because they told me they did.

This of course is the opposite, we tend to find that often in digital recording the high frequencies remain intact, and additionally tend to be unflattering. So we gravitate to a microphone that makes our recording sound.....nice.

So often when either of these to realities are mentioned I see engineers disavow the practice. You got me as to why, it seems like good engineering to understand the parameters of the gear and the medium. I remember Mike flicker writing about his practice with Heart of preserving the main tracking reel after making the slave because everyone noticed how much high end was lost in the overdubbing process. So why is it so hard to admit that oe MIGHT have cut it a pich bright with that in mind?

It just comes back to one simple statement....if it sounds good it is good. And the resurgence of the ribbon mic is because as a tool it fills an important usage in digital recording. and if that is because ribbons have a softer top end.....so be it.

[Unknown soldier]

thanks for all the responses. I do need to expand my mic collection so I'm looking at the beyer M160 or the Royer 101. If you had to pick one to use on both clean and distorted guitar, what would you choose?

[Steffmo]

Both are great mics. The Royer is more durable.

[Tom Hakala]

LP filter is my new best friend.

[ivmike]

I find the high end to be smoother with my ribbon mics on drum overheads, guitar amps and such.

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Tom Hakala

LP filter is my new best friend.

And it also works on those nasty sounding dynamics and capacitor mics.

Rather than "compensate" for your crappy sounding digital rig and it's associated ear ripping top end, fix the rig and you will find you won't have those problems requiring filters anymore.

[ThatGuyintheBack]

I looked at the Shinybox and the Fathead. I bought a Fathead and am using it w/ a 421 and get GREAT sounds. I highly recommend. My set up is all digital.

[Trakworx]

I think there is some oversimplification in this thread.

IME, when close micing, figure 8 ribbons usually sound dark due to their strong proximity effect. Moving them back yields very different results. Distance = EQ.

But it's more than just frequency response IME. Even if you flatten out the freq response with an equalizer, the ribbon usually sounds less brittle/harsh than other mics.

Smooth texture is a hallmark of good ribbon mics and is the number 1 reason, in my book, why they pair so well with digital recording.

J~

[andychamp]

Originally Posted by Unknown soldier

thanks for all the responses. I do need to expand my mic collection so I'm looking at the beyer M160 or the Royer 101. If you had to pick one to use on both clean and distorted guitar, what would you choose?

Not knowing the 101, I'd say go for the Beyer. It's really got a classic and very flexible tone.
I agree with Robertshaw's description of it, but beg to differ regarding the 121.
Especially with regard to modern highgain tones and lower tunings, I feel the Royer's got a certain ...liveliness... in the lower mids I haven't yet heard from another mic...something reminiscent of a big feline's purr in its balance.
If the player avoided dialing in any mud at the amp, that is. If he didn't, you're even more f***ed than with some other mics.

[filipv]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

ribbons are darker so people with no analog experience think they are better than condensers on guitars in digital domain, when in reality they are just not as bright.

exactly

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

ribbons are darker so people with no analog experience think they are better than condensers on guitars in digital domain, when in reality they are just not as bright. ...

Wrong.

Originally Posted by Trakworx

I think there is some oversimplification in this thread.
...
But it's more than just frequency response IME. Even if you flatten out the freq response with an equalizer, the ribbon usually sounds less brittle/harsh than other mics.

Smooth texture is a hallmark of good ribbon mics and is the number 1 reason, in my book, why they pair so well with digital recording.

J~

Right.

There's something to be said for the diaphragm/ribbon element response of a mic, and how that correlates to "harshness". A sensitive, fast response (think SDC, but pertains to LDC's too) can pick up a ton of detail and add clarity, or could be perceived as 'harsh'. A slower, less sensitive ribbon element can help tame that harshness and sound a bit softer or more mellow, or come across as too dark or dull.

[robertshaw]

Originally Posted by audiogeek

Wrong.

Wrong!!!? great explanation?

lol

when you finally get a chance to do a record on analog tape for your first time.
record with some ribbons and some known bright condensers and get back to us.

Wrong...will be right

have you ever actually recorded anything?

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

when you finally get a chance to do a record on analog tape for your first time.
record with some ribbons and some known bright condensers and get back to us.

Wrong...will be right

have you ever actually recorded anything?

I usually agree with you robertshaw, but this time...

FWIW, I record to analog tape a lot here, and have for many years. My ribbons work extremely well when tracking to tape. Guitar/bass cabs, acoustic instruments, vocals all love the ribbon/tape combo.

A properly calibrated tape machine is not so dark that I'd change mic choice over it, and a properly placed ribbon mic is not so dark that I'd change recording format over it.

My MX-80 24 track is only -0.5dB at 20kHz running at 15 IPS. I think the impression that tape is always dark comes from use of improperly aligned machines, worn/dirty heads, old tape, hearsay, etc.

Likewise, I think the impression that ribbon mics are always dark comes from people trying to place them the same way they would place other types of mics, which is often too close due to figure 8 ribbon's extreme proximity effect.

IME ribbons, condensers and dynamics are just as useful on analog as they are on digital recording. YMMV I suppose.

Best,

J~

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by Steffmo

One more yes. Ribbons naturally roll of where digital nastiness begins.

Generally speaking, I suspect what most folks in the know probably think of as digital nastiness begins at a frequency precisely half the sample rate -- and proper anti-alias filtering should have bandlimited the signal going to ADC to prevent that frequency or any above from reaching the converters.


With a properly functioning, professional digital audio recording system, you should be able to judge whether or not to use a particular mic simply by listening to the signal before it hits the ADC. If a given mic complements the source as desired, great. If not, keep rummaging through the locker.

Of course, we could probably say something parallel for a properly functioning, top-quality professional analog audio recording system. (Now, my old analog machines, OTOH... )

[Unclenny]

Originally Posted by Unknown soldier

I'm looking at the beyer M160

We just tracked a wonderfully bright mandolin with a 160.......it was a match made in audio heaven.

Originally Posted by Fletcher

chances are you're going to get different results using a $100 ribbon mic [no brand indictment - just a generic example] than you would a $2000 condenser mic... will the $100 ribbon mic sound better just because it has a ribbon? I think not

I did go with a popular low end ribbon just to see if it would make me smile. It did not.

Originally Posted by Tom Hakala

LP filter is my new best friend.

We are old friends.

[Steffmo]

I really don't think anyone who has made a career of 2" tape thinks of tape as dark....I never did. But some engineers did feel that a certain amount of high end information has lost after 200 or so plays. A lot of producers, if they had the resources, would try to preserve the high end on the original tracks by doing the overdubs on a slave reel and only running the master to transfer the overdubs.

Similarly I worked with a few guys that would print the high end a tad....just a pinch....realizing that some was going to be lost. Now before people start with the "no self respecting....nonsense, I've seen people do some pretty radical things with tape machines to get the sound they wanted at the end of the day. And I'm not talking about nobodies. All this was, and is, part of the "art" of recording on tape. and art that does not really exist in digital/

At any rate, maybe its right, maybe its wrong, maybe its true or not, but at some point a perception was created the ribbon were a better "fit" for certain things with digital. It doesn't really matter, because your perception, in the middle of a tracking date, is your reality. Try a ribbon or 2, try a condenser. use what sounds best.

Originally Posted by Trakworx

I usually agree with you robertshaw, but this time...

FWIW, I record to analog tape a lot here, and have for many years. My ribbons work extremely well when tracking to tape. Guitar/bass cabs, acoustic instruments, vocals all love the ribbon/tape combo.

A properly calibrated tape machine is not so dark that I'd change mic choice over it, and a properly placed ribbon mic is not so dark that I'd change recording format over it.

My MX-80 24 track is only -0.5dB at 20kHz running at 15 IPS. I think the impression that tape is always dark comes from use of improperly aligned machines, worn/dirty heads, old tape, hearsay, etc.

Likewise, I think the impression that ribbon mics are always dark comes from people trying to place them the same way they would place other types of mics, which is often too close due to figure 8 ribbon's extreme proximity effect.

IME ribbons, condensers and dynamics are just as useful on analog as they are on digital recording. YMMV I suppose.

Best,

J~

[audiogeek]

Originally Posted by robertshaw

Wrong!!!? great explanation?

lol

when you finally get a chance to do a record on analog tape for your first time.
record with some ribbons and some known bright condensers and get back to us.

Wrong...will be right

have you ever actually recorded anything?

While I always find your not-so-subtle attempts to condescend humorous, I also often disagree with your opinions, and this is no exception.

Yes, yes, I work with tape. Today, and for many years before DAW's could be found at Best Buy. I also work with digital. And condensers and ribbons of many varieties.

I'm actually not even sure if there's enough substance in your original post to either agree or disagree with you... so let's just move along.

To reiterate what I said in my previous post (for those of us that didn't get it the first time *ahem*), ribbons tend to have a slower, less sensitive response than the diaphragm of a condenser. This can sometimes, in certain contexts on certain sources, be perceived as "less harsh". This is a trait of the microphone, regardless of the media type.