Post by: ALLEN WRENCH on July 31, 2005, 01:14:08 PM
By screaming... I'm talking a 'Henry rollins (Black Flag - Damaged) / Rage Against The Machine' vocal style.
And yes, everyone already knows that Rage Against the Machine used a hand held 58... or whatever.
Mics on the table are:
U87
Manley Cardiod Reference Mic
58
Beta 58
Royer 121
Input greatly appreciated!
PS
if anyone would like to contact me directly forget about the PMs,
just email ! allen@killallenwrench.com
Post by: nrosborough on July 31, 2005, 01:34:48 PM
cheers,
Post by: Norwood on July 31, 2005, 03:47:44 PM
Post by: redfro on July 31, 2005, 05:28:55 PM
Post by: punkest on July 31, 2005, 05:48:34 PM
Hope this helps
Hans Mues
Post by: CCC on July 31, 2005, 07:15:41 PM
I don't know if I would use a ribbon on a screamer personally, so maybe hide the Royer away (?)
Post by: David Schober on July 31, 2005, 07:43:17 PM
Post by: wwittman on July 31, 2005, 07:43:59 PM
Post by: zetterstroem on July 31, 2005, 07:47:11 PM
http://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics/produkte.php?ProdID=kms 105
i know it sounds nice on other vocal types..... and it takes a 150dB's!
Post by: Ronny on July 31, 2005, 08:24:26 PM
| John Sorensen wrote on Sun, 31 July 2005 19:15 |
Another vote for SM7. Or 58. Hanging a LDC up with a windscreen doesn't fit the vibe for angst-rock usually. I don't know if I would use a ribbon on a screamer personally, so maybe hide the Royer away (?) |
Yep, the ribbon although they sound more natural than many mics won't handle the SPL as good as the others, I'd eliminate it and definitely forget about the Manley, it's better for analysis than tracking. I'd run two takes, one on the Beta 58 and one on the U87, pick between the two. Another option place the U87 in cardioid pattern to the side about 2 feet, with him hand holding the 58, if he doesn't jump around too much you may find that both of these tracks mixed together may sound better than either the U87 or the 58 solo'd.
Post by: ribbonmicguy on July 31, 2005, 09:37:16 PM
I like Re20 as well for the screaming and for screaming up close since proximity effect is very minimal with this mic.
Another mic I would try is the MD441.
Post by: ALLEN WRENCH on August 01, 2005, 10:37:15 AM
And now, come to think of it, I can't remember if Garth had the singer using a SM57 or 58.
Does anyone thing an SM57 would be a viable choice?
- ALLEN
Post by: CCC on August 01, 2005, 10:51:49 AM
| ALLEN WRENCH wrote on Mon, 01 August 2005 15:37 |
An SM7 just doesn't sound good with this particular voice. And now, come to think of it, I can't remember if Garth had the singer using a SM57 or 58. Does anyone thing an SM57 would be a viable choice? - ALLEN |
I've used SM57 for voice in studio sessions. Sounded fine. (also eq'd, de-essed, blah blah blah). When you're done recording you can pound nails with it. It's a dessert topping and a floor cleaner.
Post by: Nathan Eldred on August 01, 2005, 01:07:38 PM
Post by: mattrussell on August 01, 2005, 01:36:58 PM
if you're using a DAW (or if you can afford a few analog tracks) and you can use a mic stand with him, put ALL mics up that you listed--anything that might work really. then, put a pop filter on a seperate stand and have him sing the same verse on each mic as seperate takes, moving the pop filter down to each mic as he goes along. then, have him go back into the control room and the two of you pick the one that works best. in ten minutes or less, you'll pick the best one and have the rest of them back on the shelf for another day.
btw, i've used the beta58 a whole bunch in the studio on vocals. i love that mic. other circumstances than sound led me to using it, but i still go to it from time to time.
good luck and have fun.
matt
Post by: lord on August 01, 2005, 02:09:32 PM
The vocalist can get all over it, and it doesn't poop out.
Post by: mmazurek on August 01, 2005, 04:11:40 PM
I've realized recently that using good quality condensers (personally a Lawson L47/mp works 90% of the time, then an iFet7, etc...) has always worked better.
Distancing the singer with a pop screen and judicious use of compression helps greatly (they seem to love that Distressor).
I started trying this after some general posts (like Mr. Wittman's, Fletcher's, etc...) that have this theme of 'using a good quality large-diaphram condensers through a quality chain', and I realized they're right.
Post by: Vertigo on August 01, 2005, 07:41:22 PM
I did a similar project a couple of weeks ago and did two passes of the vocals. One on the 57 with the pop filter and one with a hand held '58. Combining the tracks together sounded REALLY good. The 57 gave the meat and definition to the tone and the '58 caught the distorted cupped-mic technique that those vocalists like to use. On some songs I nuked the 58 track and brought it in here and there as a backup vocal. It sounded great.
If you want hella raw and lo-fi, the AKG D19C is a hell of a lot of fun...
A lot of the screamo guys like to use the PA as an instrument, which is why they sometimes have trouble translating to the studio. They USE the feedback from the PA, and they cup the mic or otherwise try to overload it for distortion and effect. You could try having them do their thing your recording room through a PA with the hand held 58 and add a room mic (ribbon, LDC, SDC). A dose of PA in the room on those kind of tracks can really capture some of what's missing when those guys get into the studio. And the grainy reverbs on a cheap PA powered mixer can sound cool when you capture them in the room.
-Lance
Post by: maxim on August 01, 2005, 11:24:04 PM
Post by: maxim on August 01, 2005, 11:28:38 PM
never a problem with a dynamic, and the rejection pattern allows for the use of monitors, which is even better
just a singer's point of view
btw, i use beyer m69 for this purpose, which is even tighter than most dynamics
Post by: Bill Mueller on August 02, 2005, 07:29:33 AM
| zetterstroem wrote on Sun, 31 July 2005 19:47 |
anyone tried the neumann handheld? http://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics/produkte.php?ProdID=kms 105 i know it sounds nice on other vocal types..... and it takes a 150dB's! |
I was going to bring this up on it's own thread, but this is as good a time as any.
I have had a KMS 105 for a couple of years and I will never use an 87 or 414 for vocals ever again. I have been a live broadcast engineer for years and we always use vocal mics for vocals. I wondered how an excellent vocal mic would sound in a studio setting. Wow. Put up the mic. Record the vocal. No eq, no noise, no problems.
In an environment where isolation is less than perfect, the 105's hypercardioid pattern discriminates against outside noise. It can be hand held with almost no handling noise. The pop filter is excellent, but not magical. You may still need a pop filter if you are working it too close. However, you can just crank the gain in your singer's headphones and push them back a nudge from the mic. It will still sound great because of the directionality.
In a home studio where the air conditioning can come on, this is a god send.
Best Regards,
Bill
Post by: ALLEN WRENCH on August 02, 2005, 09:19:24 AM
SM57 with the Shure pop screen (plus an extra mic stand pop screen) and a U87 on Omni a little more than 3 feet away. Both mics blended together / bringing the U87 up just enough to get a little LDC articulation.
Signal chain is:
API 512c (in a lunchbox... hey I'm not rich!)
2-1176 (slamming it back pretty hard)
Manley Massive Passive (using High Pass filter only at 120)
... and then finally to my fucking piece of junk MCI JH-16 sold to me by Pro Audio Designs.
BTW if anyone's looking for a piece of gear that's promised to be in ABSOLUTELY PERFECT condition but in reality is a total piece of junk... and you want ZERO customer support... Pro Audio Designs is the company for you!!!
Post by: Tomas Danko on August 20, 2005, 01:12:12 PM
Post by: vernier on August 20, 2005, 01:37:44 PM
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep04/articles/classictracks .htm
Post by: originalrecorderman on August 20, 2005, 06:07:48 PM
Post by: bblackwood on August 20, 2005, 06:12:09 PM
Post by: Tim Gilles on August 20, 2005, 07:18:47 PM
| bblackwood wrote on Sat, 20 August 2005 18:12 |
Welcome, Eric! Nice to see you here! |
Hell Yes!!!
A pleasure and privilege.
See ya around campus!
Timbo
Post by: originalrecorderman on August 20, 2005, 09:10:18 PM
Post by: ALLEN WRENCH on August 20, 2005, 10:17:23 PM
The 57 and U87 – omni combo was a big surprise though. Nothing like dumping a bunch of cash on a ‘vocal’ mic to find out that the one you bought for $ 85 sounds better!
Post by: Greg Norman on August 22, 2005, 02:03:42 AM
If the guy isn't going to be right on top of the mic, I love using an RCA BK-5. Its responce with some compression allows the vocal to cut through a thick mix.
Post by: George_ on August 22, 2005, 05:50:08 AM
Post by: King Whistle on August 22, 2005, 01:26:12 PM
All of the cupping etc. barking, howling etc.
So I use it here, into a Demeter vtmp-2a and FMR comp.
I have also used a Shure 545, and it sounds great.
Post by: Ronny on August 22, 2005, 04:19:18 PM
Has anyone tried the Audix mics for the screaming rockers? The OM-6 has a frequency response closer to an LC at 40Hz to 19kHz, off axis rejection is great (beneficial for live stage recordings) and proximity effect that typically has the lows starting to fall off at around 2 to 3 inches from the grille on the SM57 and 58's extends out another 6 inches before tone on the low end starts to drop. I don't track a lot of screamers but it seems like it would be a good choice as SPL is 135dBA. On people that like to eat the mic, I get far less plosive pops on the OM-6, than the 57, 58 or Beta 58.