SomeAudioGuy Mic Shootout

[SomeAudioGuy]

SO then you didn't write this:

Because I am a business owner, I have to look at each investment I make in terms of of ROI (return on investment). When I purchased my Soundelux U99, I thought that my vocal recordings would soar to new levels that would turn heads and would allow me to increase my rates. It hasn’t happened. I haven’t raised my rates on cent because of the U99, unfortunately. In fact, no one has noticed that difference between my Soundelux U99 and my Shure SM7 on songs where I’ve used the SM7 for the choruses and U99 for the verses. If a piece of gear does not allow me to increase my rates, what is the point of owning it? One could argue that an engineer should never stop pursuing the highest level of fidelity possible. I can’t argue with this general philosophy, but if the clients can’t tell a difference, there is no difference. The notion of blindly (and deafly) buying the highest quality gear in the world without much thought should have died just like the big boys studios have died.

Now I'm not trying to pin you here, but I hear a little disappointment. Not to say you were "duped" (I never said duped I said "wowed"), but there sounds like there was an expectation based on reputation there.

And oh if ONLY we all had pipes like LaFontaine, and while he might've started out on simple kit, HE CERTAINLY HAS MOVED ON (and he certainly doesn't seem to mind tubes).

Why do an audio shootout, or ask for samples, if it's not to influence purchasing, to see what different kit sounds like? Alright, I'll say both, because I don't see why they have to be exclusive. Just because someone isn't making money off of their recordings doesn't mean they don't have a plan (business or otherwise).

You are a perfect example of what I was getting at above in this thread. In studio conditions, mics almost NEVER go directly to soundcard. As most VO artists have to start with a hyper simple recording chain (many now just opting for USB mics) I think it's an important to hear these mics in that simple chain (especially when I'm constantly asked if they should buy an expensive mic), you mentioned LaFontaine as a perfect example where to start.
However, as I'm sure you're aware, the second you add to that chain you are influencing that sound. I believe the main reason the U87 has the reputation it does, isn't because the mic is SO great (though it is nice, 5K - 10K bump and all), but because it is used in studios that have a full compliment of gear to back it up. People getting started in VO home recording might have the $3k to buy one, but maybe not the remaining $10K to really achieve that "legendary" sound.

Also voice guys don't just keep to one mic. I worked with a classic working announcer that keeps three for different types of reads (NPR versus Monster Truck announcer). I work with an animation character actor that keeps 6 for all the different voices he does. The most successful VO actors I've ever worked with have also learned how to "work" multiple mics, as you never know what you're going to be put in front of. Many studios out here keep a pretty limited collection. Sort of an ROI thing not to have to spend more than you have to on microphones. Even LaFontaine, whose voice has stayed pretty consistent throughout most of his career, has been known to mic hop (I think he's still on his Manley now).


Oh and I just thought of something else for super cheap recording interfaces, I bought a MobilePre. If I had just spent just $50 more for the FastTrack I would have gotten the following:
-2 more outs
-24 bit/96kHz recording
-SPDIF Digital IO
-MIDI
-Lower Latency (USB2 throughput)
-a 101dB SNR on mic (instead of 88dB), and 103dB on line
-slightly higher preamp gain (>40dB as opposed to <40dB)

Those last two especially will have a noticeable affect on the "quality" of your recordings, and at only a $50 difference. Instead I went with a 410 which had an even higher SNR, a 60dB gain, and more (for admittedly a $150 premium).

[brandondrury]

Now I'm not trying to pin you here, but I hear a little disappointment. Not to say you were "duped" (I never said duped I said "wowed"), but there sounds like there was an expectation based on reputation there.

That's from a different thread in a different discussion that is making a totally different point in a totally different context.

I'm dissapointed that I had to sacrifice $2500 to get one crayon. It sucks spending money when you don't have a lot of money! I'm dissapointed that I have to shell out $2500 to get a "brown". My red (SM7) and blue (AT 4050) only cost me $300 each. My grey (SM 57) only cost me $75.

My situation is dramatically different because I run a studio that records a different group of musicians just about every day. I have to be able to cover my basis. When building up a collection, the whole point (as you know) is to have the right mic at the right time. However, when you take into account the entire client base, the amount of times that the U99 provides an objective improvement in quality is relatively small, but it does happen. Of course the same could be said about any given mic I use on vocals.

In the case of a voiceover dude, the voice is going to pretty much "fixed" (as in not changing much). I realize there are exceptions to this, but a beginning dude could do okay with mic #1 on most things. (And apply the same concept to his monster truck voice). A voiceover dude will have one mic that does sound objectively (more or less) better than other mics on his/her main voice. If a person lucks out and a AT 4050 is right for them, they can sound great for $300 used. If a person doesn't luck out, it'll cost them $2500 to sound good.

Going back to the original discussion about a budget (but real deal, low latency) audio interface. There is no reason to assume that the M-Audio Fast Track is the weak link in the Neumann U87 / M-Audio Fast Track chain without first hearing the vocal. We seem to keep dodging the original issue. Finding the RIGHT mic is the most important thing. The right mic and a $100 audio interface is MUCH better than the wrong mic and a $9,000 Prism converter.

Just because someone isn't making money off of their recordings doesn't mean they don't have a plan (business or otherwise).

No, but different rules apply. A person who records as a hobby can buy a Neve because it makes them feel good to record with it. (That is a benefit and I respect that.) A person who takes out a $100k loan to buy a used Neve console had better have a customer bass willing to pay for that Neve or the bank is going to send the repo man. In other words, the investments made by a business must at least break even in a given amount of time in terms of $$$ not just "owner satisfaction". Eventually you get to the point where you have to weigh the psychological benefits of having the high end gear with what customers / clients feel those gear upgrades are worth. That's the difference.
I'm dying to buy a Focusrite Liquidmix. I can't do it until more recording cash comes in.

However, as I'm sure you're aware, the second you add to that chain you are influencing that sound. I believe the main reason the U87 has the reputation it does, isn't because the mic is SO great (though it is nice, 5K - 10K bump and all), but because it is used in studios that have a full compliment of gear to back it up. People getting started in VO home recording might have the $3k to buy one, but maybe not the remaining $10K to really achieve that "legendary" sound.

I agree with you here, but you forget the most important part. The million dollar engineer that is using that $3k mic, $3k compressor, $3k EQ, etc. In concept you are right though. The average home studio human has no business pumping that much cash into a mic until all links in the chain are equal.

It's clear we have extremely similar views on this, but maybe the wording of the usual Fasttrack / U87 statement was taken the wrong way. (After 2 years now, I'm used to getting hammered on my blogs and articles so I've gotten a little better at writing in a way that is unhammerable. Some asshole somewhere will take whatever I say the wrong way.) I'm sure you are dealing with the same on your blog.

Brandon

[Picksalot]

I wish you had a "normalized" recording of the Aires. It's the only one that sounded like a normal human being. All the other had extremely hyped presence/bass, good for dramatic effect, by unless someone's ear is right against your larynx, they don't sound like normal voices. The Neumann was rather nasal and sort of electronic sounding to my ears.

The noise floor for the Aires would probably be a problem if the volume was normalized, but still, I think it would be instructive. It was several dB below all the other mics. People often perceive "louder" as "better." This makes the shootout biased.

Maybe you should follow your advice that "even though it's phantom powered, the Aries really is meant to be passed through a preamp just like the Dynamic mics it competes against" and re-record it normalized and to those specs.

[SomeAudioGuy]

Originally Posted by Picksalot

I wish you had a "normalized" recording of the Aires. It's the only one that sounded like a normal human being. All the other had extremely hyped presence/bass, good for dramatic effect, by unless someone's ear is right against your larynx, they don't sound like normal voices. The Neumann was rather nasal and sort of electronic sounding to my ears.

Well never having heard me in real life LOL. If I'm being honest I kinda feel the Neumann is the most accurate. The Aries does sound the least hyped, but I just can't love the sound of that little condenser. I find it harsh and flat.

Originally Posted by Picksalot

The noise floor for the Aires would probably be a problem if the volume was normalized, but still, I think it would be instructive. It was several dB below all the other mics. People often perceive "louder" as "better." This makes the shootout biased.

Welcome to voice over. Currently the most popular vo mic in LA is the 416. Originally designed to be used METERS away from it's source in outdoor broadcast, I now watch people swallow that mic on a daily basis. The loudness wars didn't stop at radio pop. Thanks to people brick wall limiting mics like the RE20, everyone wants to sound big now. I try for accuracy whenever possible (the main reason I prefer mics like the 414 and u89 over the u87 and 103), but at the end of the day fragile egos still need to be stroked.
Also a little consideration for the audience. Actors are not the best engineering students. Trying to fully explain the science behind what we do isn't practical. They need to focus on the performance, not the gear (look at the popularity of USB mics and "podcast" kits). These recordings will not be mixed, so having a higher noise floor is simply unacceptable. We're really wanting the cleanest recording we can get that sounds like the actor, and doesn't have any distracting artifacts.

Originally Posted by Picksalot

Maybe you should follow your advice that "even though it's phantom powered, the Aries really is meant to be passed through a preamp just like the Dynamic mics it competes against" and re-record it normalized and to those specs.

And that's where we come back to MY audience.
The inspiration behind this article was a woman coming to me in tears after spending THOUSANDS on gear, and not knowing what to do with any of it (though digital audio is "SO EASY" nowadays). She got hosed at Guitar Center.
I really wanted people to hear that simple works fine for getting a clean dry recording of the voice. Throwing preamps, or compressors into the mix sort of defeats the purpose of doing the mic shootout.
I did a follow up later putting a budget condenser (MXL 990) up against an SM57 on a budget preamp (Behringer T1953) . Keeping the "closet recording booth" setup, the SM57 sounded great, much better than the 990, but the hiss of the preamp was completely unacceptable. That leaves one in the precarious position of needing to recommend a "nicer" preamp to drive a $100 mic.

Looking back at this (as I did it a while ago) my main problem with this shootout is that I DID follow my own advice, and kept everything down to it's lowest common denominator. Giving up on the Aries, but also not lighting up the 416 (which can actually sound pretty sweet). I just didn't want people getting overly excited about a $1500 mic, when most of my audience records on Snowballs.
Since, I've been trying to educate actors where possible, but the search continues for the perfect VO rig, that's affordable, and doesn't need hours of instruction for a liberal arts/theater/film major...

[Picksalot]

Thanks SomeAudioGuy for your reply. First off, I should have thanked you for doing the shootout. We all appreciate the time and effort it takes to do these.

I listened to the shootout to hear how the different mics sounded. I was not aware that the shootout was intended to be used as a comparison for "voice over" purposes.

I listened to the shootout for the purpose of audio accuracy, so I generally like the "least hyped ... and flat" mic. Sometimes reality is harsh. I fully agree with your reasons regarding mic selection for voice over purposes, fragile egos, etc.

I'm more interested in mics for acoustic guitar, than for voice. When I saw the Neumann 184 listed, I thought this would be a good opportunity to hear how it sounds on a voice rather than a guitar. I did find the results informative.

Picksalot