Microphones microphones again

[aldevis]

Having recently recorded in front of a vintage U47 (doesn't come in leather) a vintage RCA KU3 and a modern AEA, i can say that I still have to find a condenser that makes me happy. At any price.
Scarlett is a £120 interface. Good enough to record for a documentary broadcasted on tv.
Not good enough for an audiophile recording.

I am quite skeptical in shelling out 2K of equipmentthe for a recording that ends up on the internet.

 

[altissimo]

if you're recording alto or tenor sax, you don't really need a mic that's accurate across the full audible spectrum - there's nothing much below 100 hz or above 8 khz that you'd need to capture, so ultra high quality condenser mics may not be necessary. Recording a sax with a condenser mic often has too much top end for most tastes unless you position the mic well away from the bell of the sax, which will usually pick up more spill from the rest of the band or room reflections
These days there's a general trend towards offsetting the sterility of digital recordings by using vintage sounding mics and preamps etc and there's been a resurgence of interest in ribbon mics due to their warm sound. Unfortunately the low output of most ribbon mics (there are exceptions like the Beyer M160) means that high gain low noise preamps are needed like the Cloudlifter or TRP. For loud instruments like a sax this may not be as much of a problem if you're close miking, although jacking up the gain on some cheaper preamps will also increase the amount of hiss - devices that are powered off the usb interface will be more prone to this.
There are ribbon mics that are active and run off phantom power that have a higher output eg the Golden Age R1 Active, Se RNR1, Cascade Fat Head II Active, Royer R122 Active etc -
http://recordinghacks.com/microphones/tag/active-ribbon
and these might be more suitable for folks with preamps that are struggling to provide enough gain for a ribbon mic

 

[aldevis]

To try to be clear:
The OP was about the best achievable at a certain (low) budget.
There is almost no end to improvement. The engineer that worked at my recording, does a modern version of a vintage mastering compressor (whatever it does). It costs about £6k, he makes about two every year and they sell immediately.
In my home studio they would be wasted.
Improvements, in my case, need to be progressive.
There are commercially released albums where the saxophone was recorded through a SM58 on the audio input of my iMac. The Scarlett is an improvement.
A £3k protools system would definitely be better, but do I really need it now? And do most saxophone players need it?
I worked in top studios, and listen to albums, where the recording quality of saxophone is 10 times worse than what I can achieve at home with a £400 line.

Altissimo is spot on about top condensers. They are not my first choice in a studio to record saxophone.
If I want to improve my recording line having a sensible change, assuming that my room sounds decently, I have to look into the £3k range (mics+pre+interface).

One step at the time.

 

[peterpick]

very interesting thread, thanks for sending me here, aldevis. i think i will stick with a dynamic mike for the sake of versatility. i do not generally like condensers (that i can afford and in a domestic environment), due to all the reasons given above and especially unwanted signal pickup. maybe a ribbon one day. but now i must buy some more saxophones!

 

[Pete Thomas]

i think i will stick with a dynamic mike for the sake of versatility.

Very wise. Especially for live use.

A ribbon mic is not very useful live in most cases as the figure of 8 polar pattern will pick up too much from the other side of the mic.

Also for recording a ribbon mic will work best in an ideal acoustic environment. They will pick up any faults with the room ambience, whereas a directional mic is more forgiving of such issues.

 

[peterpick]

thanks pete. yes, my recording environment is not perfect by any means and i have had room effect problems using a side address large diaphragm figure of 8 condenser.

 

[aldevis]

Also for recording a ribbon mic will work best in an ideal acoustic environment. They will pick up any faults with the room ambience, whereas a directional mic is more forgiving of such issues.

True. But a ribbon is more a "bidirectional" than a figure 8. It means that off axis frequencies tend to disappear. A bit of work is needed when positioning, but still much better usable that a condenser

On the dynamic side, many members of another well known saxophone forum recommend this:
http://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=83
But I never tried it.

Our very @Juju and @ohig recommended this for live. I have been tempted more than once to get one.
http://europe.beyerdynamic.com/shop/m-201-tg.html

 

[Colin the Bear]

What is a hum buck coil?

 

[aldevis]

What is a hum buck coil?

A thin slice of spiralled cured meat that used to cost one dollar on the 47th street.

AKA Ham Buck Coil

 

[Guenne]

Hey,

I don't have an ideal acoustic environment at all (as you can see in the clips). Wooden floor, wooden ceiling, relatively low room, bare walls.
I have to say that recording with a Nohype LRM-1 and LRM-2 "cheap" ribbon (especially in the Lundahl version) was a big improvement over a condenser Neumann TLM 102.
The Røde NTR ribbon is again a big improvement. It is expensive (I paid €769,-) but for a non-chinese-made ribbon mic, it is on the cheap side, and I think you can hear it sounds very natural (although the recording loses much due to youtube compression).

Cheers, Guenne

 

[Nick Wyver]

What is a hum buck coil?

Try googling humbucker.
Relevant to guitarists.

 

[Colin the Bear]

A little reading on wiki has explained...I think....possibly😵

 

[kevgermany]

A little reading on wiki has explained...I think....possibly😵

It's just a way of winding the coils so that mains hum is generated in both directions at the same time. Each cancels the other out. No hum.

 

[Colin the Bear]

No hum.

So you have to remember the words.

 

[peterpick]

On the dynamic side, many members of another well known saxophone forum recommend this:
http://www.electrovoice.com/product.php?id=83
But I never tried it.

hi aldevis. i bought one of these from thomann. not too pricey and it has a good pickup range for my purposes. it's a bit 'hard' though on the first session, and i'll have to fiddle with eq to tone it down. this is easier when you're doing it for someone else! nevertheless, it's a good thing, i think.

 

[aldevis]

hi aldevis. i bought one of these from thomann. not too pricey and it has a good pickup range for my purposes. it's a bit 'hard' though on the first session, and i'll have to fiddle with eq to tone it down. this is easier when you're doing it for someone else! nevertheless, it's a good thing, i think.

Can you be more precise?

 

[peterpick]

i don't know how, exactly.... it's a subjective response to hearing the recordings back. there were several variables in play, i was using the sml alto and had a hemke 4 reed instead of a rico jazz 3m which i more normally use. that would make things sound harder. by ear alone i would say it had more of a peak in the 1khz region than what i've been using. this would certainly give 'cut', 'edge' or 'presence'. 1 khz is the most general estimate... perhaps in the area from 800hz - 2.5khz. i'll try backing off the midrange around there a bit for next time. what was good about it was that the pickup pattern seemed to cover the sax better at close range than when i was using the rode m3. i didn't try playing the soprano yet - that's always a problem with one mike.

 

[aldevis]

i don't know how, exactly.... it's a subjective response to hearing the recordings back. there were several variables in play, i was using the sml alto and had a hemke 4 reed instead of a rico jazz 3m which i more normally use. that would make things sound harder. by ear alone i would say it had more of a peak in the 1khz region than what i've been using. this would certainly give 'cut', 'edge' or 'presence'. 1 khz is the most general estimate... perhaps in the area from 800hz - 2.5khz. i'll try backing off the midrange around there a bit for next time. what was good about it was that the pickup pattern seemed to cover the sax better at close range than when i was using the rode m3. i didn't try playing the soprano yet - that's always a problem with one mike.

When you are getting bored, please post a clip. I am curious to hear.

 

[peterpick]

there is this available on soundcloud. it doesn't account for context however, perhaps listening to some of the other pieces for comparison would help.

 

[tzadik]

+1 for the EV N/D468.
Very clean, natural sound!

It's not muddy on the low range of frequencies. It does not sound "boxy" on the midrange.
If you like the Shure sound, this is NOT for you.

If you like a clean transparent sound (from a dynamic mic), this is bang for the money!