Audio 101 - Microphone basics

General hip-hop discussion.

Moderators: TheBigSleep, stype_ones, Philaflava

Post Reply
KaeoFLUX
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:23 pm

Audio 101 - Microphone basics

Post by KaeoFLUX »

Now, we could talk about microphones, and miking techniques for days. However, this will be a simple introduction.

Firstly,

There are 5 basic directional patterns:

Image

Omni
The simplest mic design will pick up all sound, regardless of its point of origin, and is thus known as an omnidirectional microphone. They are very easy to use and generally have good to outstanding frequency response. If you wanted to mic an entire room, perhaps band practice or something, with one mic, omni would be perfect for this.

Bi-directional (also known as "figure 8")
This is the way any diaphragm (I will explain diaphragm) will behave if sound can strike the front and back equally. The fact that the mic accepts sound from both ends makes it difficult to use in many situations. Most often it is placed above an instrument. * Personally I have never used a bi-drectional pattern. You may find it useful in some cases - especially if you dont have multiple mics.

Cardioid
This pattern is popular for sound reinforcement or recording concerts where audience noise is a possible problem. Now, the point of a cardiod pattern is to pick up sound from directly where it is pointed. The reality is that the pattern is not entirely directional, and you will still pick up sound from the rear of the diaphragm, especially low frequencies.

Regardless, a cardiod pattern is the most usefull for studio operations. Whether it be a guitar, vocals, drums, whatever.. a cardiod will usually work best for you. Its unidirectional and isolates your target, rejecting most unwanted noise.

Supercardioid
A polar pattern name used to describe the pickup pattern of some microphones. The Supercardioid pattern is very similar to, and often confused with, the Hypercardioid pattern. The Supercardioid pattern is slightly less directional than the Hypercardioid pattern, but the rear lobe of sensitivity is also much smaller in the Supercardioid .

Hypercardioid
A polar pattern name typically used to describe microphone pick up characteristics. Hypercardioid patterns are similar to Cardioid and Supercardioid patterns in that the primary sensitivity is in the front of the microphone. They differ, however, in that the point of least sensitivity is at the 150 - 160 and 200 - 210 degree positions (as opposed to directly behind the microphone in a Cardioid pattern). Hypercardioid microphones are thus considered even more directional than Cardioid and Supercardioid microphones. Hypercardioid microphones are frequently used in situations where maximum isolation is desired between sound sources.


*the only time I've ever used Hypercardiod is on a film set with a Shotgun mic. The Hypercardiod pattern is very directional, and you can pick up a conversation 30 yards away if you point the mic directly at the person's mouth. However, you have to be careful.. as you can see, the Hypercardiod pattern picks up sound at 180 degrees.

Okay now we have a basic grasp on different directional patterns. Maybe later we will talk more about a "stereo pair" (basically, this is acheived by placing 2 cardiod mics next to eachother, and angling them so you have 180 degrees of peak signal. Label one Left, and the other Right, and you can mic something in stereo.. like an orchestra for example)

A quick list of mics:

The all time favorite:

Image

The SM58 has a dynamic cardiod pattern. It is unidirectional, ruggedly built, it isolates sound pretty well, and shit, you can mic just about anything with this thing. If you can only buy one mic, and you are broke as fuck, buy this one. It is used for live vocals 99 times out of 100.

SM57:
Image

Much like the 58, the 57 has a slightly wider frequency response, and is usually used for micing instruments like guitars, snares, and bass. The 57 is a touch more directional than the 58, and its "hotter". Its not quite as warm, and does best when placed close to the signal.

SHURE KSM44

Image

I love this goddamn thing. So this mic has an even wider frequency response - 20hz - 20khz (it is said that the human ear cannot process anything lower than 20hz or higher than 20khz.. you will not encounter those frequencies).

The main difference between this (a "studio condenser") and a mic like the 58, is that the KSM has a Large Diapragm. This enables the mic to pick up more sound, and reproduce it much more accurately, although its a bit more fragile. Also, it requires Phantom Power.

This mic can be set to Omni, Cardiod, and Figure 8 patterns. It is great for vocals, instruments, or pretty much any miking situation.

Okay yall those are the basics..

Any questions?
Last edited by KaeoFLUX on Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Hasenfefer
Posts: 8907
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 9:49 pm
Location: south florida
Contact:

Post by Hasenfefer »

Any questions?
haha yes, why do you spell miking with a k instead of a c? :)

good shit man.

KaeoFLUX
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:23 pm

Post by KaeoFLUX »

Hasenfefer wrote:
Any questions?
haha yes, why do you spell miking with a k instead of a c? :)

good shit man.
haha i knew that was coming

not sure

micing just looks weird

2root2
Posts: 1347
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2004 6:01 am

Post by 2root2 »

KaeoFLUX wrote:micing just looks weird
looks like mice.

for this reason i avoid using it altogether.

unAuthorDeezy
Posts: 367
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2004 1:35 pm
Location: The Brain Kave, NY
Contact:

yo k

Post by unAuthorDeezy »

yo k, what kind of mic is a rode nt2... going by your diagramsim not sure what kind of condenser mic it is... cardioid, cardiac, trapezoid, creepozoid... hahaha, hola back, i dunno if this info will effect me, but i got a rode nt2.... that shit good? sounds good to me. ha

btw... i may have to hit u up about remastering my album... im adding a couple joints takin away a few and prolly gonna re-release it on sum semiofficial tip. get at me. pz
unAuthordox's "Help... The Ep LP" available at www.ughh.com/store, www.cdbaby.com/cd/unauthordox, www.towerrecords.com
-"fuse one... dood smokes a blunt like a chick holds a virginia slim. "

KaeoFLUX
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:23 pm

Re: yo k

Post by KaeoFLUX »

unAuthorDeezy wrote:yo k, what kind of mic is a rode nt2... going by your diagramsim not sure what kind of condenser mic it is... cardioid, cardiac, trapezoid, creepozoid... hahaha, hola back, i dunno if this info will effect me, but i got a rode nt2.... that shit good? sounds good to me. ha

btw... i may have to hit u up about remastering my album... im adding a couple joints takin away a few and prolly gonna re-release it on sum semiofficial tip. get at me. pz
The Rode nt2 is a large diaphragm studio condeser, just like the Shure KSM44 above. The freq. response is 20-20 like the Shure as well. The Rode has Omni and Cardiod patterns.. no Figure 8 which you probably wont need anyways.

I've recorded vocals on the Rode and it sounds great. Its lacks a little high end brightness and brilliance, which in my opinion makes it a great hip hop vocal mic.. but not the best for all around use. Regardless.. a great mic at a great price.

Oh and hit up my email about that mastering and shit

flux@kaeoflux.com

Raphael De La Ghetto
Posts: 4851
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 3:52 am
Location: Upper Beaches, Toronto

Post by Raphael De La Ghetto »

I'm not too familiar with mic's and technical shit, I decided to pic up a mic and wanted to know what your opinion on it was, Kaeoflux.
I have an Apex 460.
Good? Bad?

Walter Sobchak
some schmuck
Posts: 1937
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 6:23 pm
Contact:

Post by Walter Sobchak »

what are some good compression settings for vocals? ive seen them posted for drums and eveyone says vocs need them too.
Image

KaeoFLUX
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:23 pm

Post by KaeoFLUX »

MASTER416 wrote:I'm not too familiar with mic's and technical shit, I decided to pic up a mic and wanted to know what your opinion on it was, Kaeoflux.
I have an Apex 460.
Good? Bad?
Ive never used it, but here is what I've heard:

Lots of users complain about a "weird" high end.. almost false brightness. Also problems with sibilance. This is probably due to the Apex having a professional and high end design, but its built with cheap parts. Tube mics usually demand quality parts. Lots of people who have the Apex reccoment modifications or retrofitting if that's your cup of tea.

High end engineers dont like the Apex as is, out of the box. Although according to a few tests, the Apex has done very well with vocals, and for the price, it competes with mics at threee times the price.

All in all, it seems like you got a very idiosyncratic microphone, so it will all come down to two things 1) your preference, 2) your chain (outboard gear like compressors and preamps, pop filters)

peac!

p.s. compression settings for vocals. There is no such universal "great setting", but try this:

Threshold: -10 or -8 db
Ratio: 5:1
Attack: 2
Release: 60

That should hold your loud pops down a few db, but shouldn't crush your sound (unless your signal is too hot..)

Personally, I have had great results with a post-recording hard limiter, usually at about -8 db, depending on your levels. I'm not a fan of over-compressed vocals. (its all about technique on the mic! compress yourself)

Orale Holmes
Posts: 4445
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 11:04 pm
Contact:

Post by Orale Holmes »

mics are less of an issue...concentrate on preamps and mixdowns.

PHRO1
Posts: 1354
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:38 pm
Location: 1976 GOLD RING PIMP LIMP GROUND SHAKER

Post by PHRO1 »

NICE , THANX

sneed
Posts: 7190
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2004 1:25 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Contact:

Post by sneed »

I dunno about your SM 57 and 58 comparisons...

SM 57's and 58's are the same mic, just one has a ball pop filter over it (the 58) and the other doesnt, but can also be screwed open halfway up the handle, and be taped a certain way to allow a a better miking angle for a snare (or even a sloppy drummer)

their polar patterns and frequency responses are exactly the same...


you'd probably then say to yourself this questions: "well if they are the same then why make two different kinds?"

well the SM58 with the pop filter is more or less a VOCAL MIC, so the pop filter screen on windscreen blocks your P's and whatnot...it can also handle more stage abuse...

the 57 is like the way it is, because it's better for miking and a pop filter renders useless and just gets in the way, also if you were to take off the 58s windscreen and accidentally hit it with a drum stick you'd prolly fuck it up a lot more than you would just hitting a 57...

Employee
Fast Eddie
Posts: 77225
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 1:56 am

Post by Employee »

MASTER416 wrote:I'm not too familiar with mic's and technical shit, I decided to pic up a mic and wanted to know what your opinion on it was, Kaeoflux.
I have an Apex 460.
Good? Bad?
Apex is carp, bro. No offense. They're like that new Scion sports coupe. Look flossy on the outside, but suck on the inside.

DeffEnders
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 12:59 am
Contact:

Re: yo k

Post by DeffEnders »

KaeoFLUX wrote:
unAuthorDeezy wrote:yo k, what kind of mic is a rode nt2...
I've recorded vocals on the Rode and it sounds great. Its lacks a little high end brightness and brilliance, which in my opinion makes it a great hip hop vocal mic.. but not the best for all around use. Regardless.. a great mic at a great price.
I just read this in theMay/June Version of TapeOp:

(Interview with guys from hotel2tango studio)
Efrim Menuck: Can we all agree, however, that the Rode NT2 is an excellent mic?

Howard Bilerman: ...We put the Rode side by side with a U87 that someone brought in to record with.

A Neumann U87?

H: Right, so basically a mic costing about four times the price of the NT2.

Thierry Amar: Yeah, and we tested them for about an hour with different voices.

E:I mean, A/B-ing it, you could hear the mute switch, but otherwise you couldn't tell the difference. Mute switch notwithstanding the difference was inaudible.
Hmmmmm. Sounds like a sweet mic for around $700 list (The U87 costs around $3,200 list). I have only worked with an NT2 once but I liked what I heard.

Also BSW lists the NT2 as having multiple polar patterns including omni, cardioid, and figure 8.

KaeoFLUX
Posts: 1623
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:23 pm

Re: yo k

Post by KaeoFLUX »

DeffEnders wrote:
KaeoFLUX wrote:
unAuthorDeezy wrote:yo k, what kind of mic is a rode nt2...
I've recorded vocals on the Rode and it sounds great. Its lacks a little high end brightness and brilliance, which in my opinion makes it a great hip hop vocal mic.. but not the best for all around use. Regardless.. a great mic at a great price.
I just read this in theMay/June Version of TapeOp:

(Interview with guys from hotel2tango studio)
Efrim Menuck: Can we all agree, however, that the Rode NT2 is an excellent mic?

Howard Bilerman: ...We put the Rode side by side with a U87 that someone brought in to record with.

A Neumann U87?

H: Right, so basically a mic costing about four times the price of the NT2.

Thierry Amar: Yeah, and we tested them for about an hour with different voices.

E:I mean, A/B-ing it, you could hear the mute switch, but otherwise you couldn't tell the difference. Mute switch notwithstanding the difference was inaudible.
Hmmmmm. Sounds like a sweet mic for around $700 list (The U87 costs around $3,200 list). I have only worked with an NT2 once but I liked what I heard.

Also BSW lists the NT2 as having multiple polar patterns including omni, cardioid, and figure 8.
these guys are fuckin tripping.

the U87 kills the Rode, sorry. (But again who knows what preamps and such there were running through)

I've also heard people say the Studio Projects B2 ($200) sounds identical to the U87. It's like, damn, leave the 87 alone mangs!

Post Reply