Dubstepforum.com

nnny wrote:Can't take the ES-58 about with me!

Sure you can, once you get the h4n, hehe.

quite some hype about the h1 around here..
I just ordered a DR-05 earlier today.
Every review I saw said the DR-05 is the way to go..
I was originally going to go with the h1, because I just wanted something with good audio quality and simple to use.. but from the reviews they both seem to have the same audio quality, its just the DR-05 has more features and a more solid build.
In one of the videos you could hear the battery clip on the h1 rattling when it was shook, not like you'll be shaking it, but it give you an impression of the overall build quality.

The only concern I have is that the DR-05 is not x-y. I'm planning on just sampling misc sounds (maybe vocal clips) so I could end up with a dull spot in the middle. BUT at the same time that could also give me greater stereo imaging than the h1.. I just have to wait and see!

There are some good ideas listed here - of course none of em mean much without much info...

"Budget" can mean any number of things... to some, budget means 50-100 (dollars/pounds/whatever)... but on the flip side, the budget side of a price range where you actually get a really good sound can easily be a few hundred.


Also - it depends not only what you want to record, but HOW you plan to record it as well. I fully agree that SM57's are the amazing workhorses that everyone claims, and there isn't a professional studio in the world that doesn't have at least 2 or 3 of em. But they are usually used for specific tasks... and while vocals can be one of those tasks, I have found that hiphop mc'ing works better than lyrical singing. Probably because it is more percussive, and the 57's sound at their best when on drums.

That doesn't mean they can't be used to decent effect on anything lyrical... I recently used mine to record my cello - but then again, having a nice & clean pre-amp helped. I had it running through my Allen & Heath mixer. If I still had my Behringer mixer, the cello recording would have been useless with the 57.

^ ability to control impedance on those mics works wonders. Preamp is very useful.

nowaysj wrote:

nnny wrote:Can't take the ES-58 about with me!

Sure you can, once you get the h4n, hehe.

h4n lol? Not following you haha

safeandsound wrote:I am hearing good things about the AT2020 for the money seems like a good buy.

my gf got me this mic for my birthday and it has been doing its job very well!

nnny wrote:

nowaysj wrote:

nnny wrote:Can't take the ES-58 about with me!

Sure you can, once you get the h4n, hehe.

h4n lol? Not following you haha

Can plug better mics into the zoom h4n, like the ES-58.

==

Re the AT2020, I have the 3035 which is similar, has a sightly different capsule. 3035 is a little better than the 2020, but still exhibits that characteristic cheap condensor shrillness.

samkablaam wrote:ive seen 57s and 58s used on vocals. doesnt sound too bad. im sure ive read an interview with flood and he said u2s vocals are all 58s.

disclaimer: i dont like u2.

Watching live bands on Tv or whatever, atleast half of the vocalists will be using SM58s, unless theyre posh boys with their Neumann's or something

Debaser1 wrote:

samkablaam wrote:ive seen 57s and 58s used on vocals. doesnt sound too bad. im sure ive read an interview with flood and he said u2s vocals are all 58s.

disclaimer: i dont like u2.

Watching live bands on Tv or whatever, atleast half of the vocalists will be using SM58s, unless theyre posh boys with their Neumann's or something

58s are dynamic mics.. which are built for that specifically
a condenser mic in the same price range will probably give you a lot more clarity in your recording.

amidoinitrite wrote:

Debaser1 wrote:

samkablaam wrote:ive seen 57s and 58s used on vocals. doesnt sound too bad. im sure ive read an interview with flood and he said u2s vocals are all 58s.

disclaimer: i dont like u2.

Watching live bands on Tv or whatever, atleast half of the vocalists will be using SM58s, unless theyre posh boys with their Neumann's or something

58s are dynamic mics.. which are built for that specifically
a condenser mic in the same price range will probably give you a lot more clarity in your recording.

True true, but dynamics are better all rounders for durability and that. Condensers are for clarity but can be a bit of hassle - usually more expensive too.

Don't always want clarity. Clarity is not the paragon achievement of a mic.

nowaysj wrote:

nnny wrote:

nowaysj wrote:

nnny wrote:Can't take the ES-58 about with me!

Sure you can, once you get the h4n, hehe.

h4n lol? Not following you haha

Can plug better mics into the zoom h4n, like the ES-58.

==

Re the AT2020, I have the 3035 which is similar, has a sightly different capsule. 3035 is a little better than the 2020, but still exhibits that characteristic cheap condensor shrillness.

Ah right sound bro, wish I had that kind of money spare tho! Haha

Looking into the H1. Getting good things said about, for field recording and vocals and fits my budget

nowaysj wrote:Don't always want clarity. Clarity is not the paragon achievement of a mic.

True - but I have found that it is easier to muddy-up a clear sound as desired rather than clean up a dirty one.

Mad EP wrote:

nowaysj wrote:Don't always want clarity. Clarity is not the paragon achievement of a mic.

True - but I have found that it is easier to muddy-up a clear sound as desired rather than clean up a dirty one.

Can somebody explain to me what is meant by what Mad EP and Nowysj said?

It's easier to muddy up (add noise), to a clear sound; than it is to clean up (filter out noise), of a dirty microphone. That makes sense to me, and I think I understand what Mad EP said.

But why would Nowaysj say that clarity is not always something that is needed? Can someone explain that one to me.

desbest wrote:

Mad EP wrote:

nowaysj wrote:Don't always want clarity. Clarity is not the paragon achievement of a mic.

True - but I have found that it is easier to muddy-up a clear sound as desired rather than clean up a dirty one.

Can somebody explain to me what is meant by what Mad EP and Nowysj said?

It's easier to muddy up (add noise), to a clear sound; than it is to clean up (filter out noise), of a dirty microphone. That makes sense to me, and I think I understand what Mad EP said.

But why would Nowaysj say that clarity is not always something that is needed? Can someone explain that one to me.

I believe he just means that you don't always want perfectly clear sounds. Having a mic which is not so clear as another could be of use. You could record the same sound twice, with two different mics, but would sound quite different, know what I'm saying? Sometimes, certain muddy/distorted sounds can work. Although he'll have to clarify that himself

Not just durty, but you want a mic that sounds good on a particular subject. Most mic's have varying frequency responses, they augment some freqs, and cut others. Yes you can eq it later, but I'm not convinced you can get the same results. Plenty of vocal performances are tracked with 58's. Not because they're clear, but because the voice sounds good through them. Same voice on a perfectly clear mic might sound shit. hehe.

Just a minor point, just putting it out there.

Thanks for the tip. I didn't know that different microphones emphasised the tonality of different frequences, so different microphones are good for different things.

First rule of music technology - there are no rules.

I bought a Samson GoMic for $60 and it works perfectly for recording guitar.