PaulyD wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 21:33 |
The word on the street is the NS-10 mic thing was started by Michael Wagener, and, when Yamaha saw what he was doing, developed the SubKick. good things about them. Most places sell it for $300 USD. Paul |
compasspnt wrote on Sat, 25 November 2006 17:23 |
A Microphone. |
wwittman wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 14:32 |
It FASCINATES me that the people who seem to think they need a mud-only 'microphone' to pick up sub-sonic frequencies, seem to be the same people who think they need to filter the bottom out of all of their sounds to "make them fit"! |
James Duncan wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 22:50 |
I get what William is saying *philosophically*, but once you hear what one of these bastards does to the sound of a kick drum, you will see what it can do!!! It adds a special "something" to the kick. That is all I can say. |
Podgorny wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 22:11 |
Have you ever actually tried a subkick? It really works quite well. |
Podgorny wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 22:11 |
But judging by the fact that you're still using an RE20 on kick, I assume you're not going for that kind of thing. |
Podgorny wrote on Sun, 26 November 2006 22:11 |
All I know is, I haven't used a kick drum sample on any rock stuff I've done in the last year. |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 17:34 |
Maybe you should try an RE20! |
wwittman wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 19:50 |
ALL of the adjectives and descriptions you use for what the 'sub-kick' gives you, seem to equate to more bottom. Which is LOGICAL. I still say I get the same thing with EQ (and with fewer problems) |
Podgorny wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 22:55 |
You know full well I'm not going to question your ability to get great sounds. After all, you're William Wittman. But I contend that utilizing the sound of the drum's resonant head to fill in low end and adding low end via equalization will yield vastly different results. If you're happy using your methods, then by all means, keep doing what you're doing. I just think it's borderline arrogant to completely disregard a widely accepted technique, simply because you don't like it. But then, I guess that's kind of the bread and butter of internet forums, isn't it? |
rankus wrote on Mon, 27 November 2006 14:09 |
The earliest I have heard of using a speaker as a mic was the Beatles when they tried one on Sir Paul's bass ... Dunno what their success was. |
compasspnt wrote on Tue, 28 November 2006 10:22 | ||
99.whatever% of Beatles recordings do NOT have this technique employed. |
wwittman wrote on Sat, 02 December 2006 01:03 |
it WOULD take some extraordinary effort to make Russ Kunkel sound bad. |
Barkley McKay wrote on Sun, 03 December 2006 08:20 |
...did all that make sense? |
Bang wrote on Tue, 02 January 2007 10:11 |
The one I got here is an 8inch Goldwood sound. It does the trick and I don't recall it being too pricey either.. |
Bang wrote on Tue, 02 January 2007 10:11 |
I should point out that when A/Bing the woofer microphone wired to a 1/4" to DI, vs to an XLR, we liked the DI version better. |