Shure has been a sponsor of the East Bay’s Soundwall Music Camp, a non-profit organization that runs two one-week sessions for campers aged 12-17 on the campus of UC-Santa Cruz.  When Music Director (and drummer) John Xepoleas contacted our editorial staff for a gear assist, we were able to come through for the teen campers.

The campers were there to learn.  But did John discover anything?  Here’s his story:

Shure SM27 Multipurpose Microphone

“About a year ago, Shure sent me a box of microphones to use for the recording classes we offer at the Soundwall Rock n’ Roll Summer music camps. I received the mics in April and since the camps don’t take place until July, I was compelled to check out the goods.

The job at hand was to see how well the mics worked for recording a rock drum set.   I was already using a Beta 52 to mic the bass drum, an SM57 to mic the snare and a set of SM81s as overheads. The box contained three SM27 large diaphragm condenser microphones.  I’d never used or even heard of an SM27.

Round One: The first order of business was to use the SM27s as overheads on a basic 5-piece drum set.  I kept the switchable frequency filter flat and placed the mics about 3 feet apart and 18” or so above the cymbals.  (Figure 1)  I put the Beta52®A inside the port-hole of the bass drum facing the bass drum beater and placed an SM57 about 2 fingers distance off the snare head. I put a couple of Beta 98s on the rack toms, the third SM27 on the floor tom and added an SM 81 to the hi-hat.  All pretty basic drum miking techniques.

Figure 1 – Round One

My next order of business was to fire up my Pro Tools® rig and see what these babies sounded like.  I hit the record button, laid down a couple of simple rock grooves, gave the hi-hat and cymbals a workout and played a few fills around the set.  After about 10 minutes of doing what I love most to do – playing the drums – I put down the sticks, turned on the studio monitors and sat back to hear how it sounded.

To start with, I just listened to the SM27 overheads. To my great surprise, everything sounded really good.  I was missing the punch from the bass drum, so I brought up the channel with the Beta 52A into the mix.  At this point I was only listening to three mics and the drums sounded fat, full and crisp.  I wanted a bit more crack from the snare, so I brought up the snare channel.  And that was it!

With only four mics, I had just about everything anyone could want in a drum sound. The cymbals sizzled and I was hearing plenty of hi-hat.  The toms sounded so full that I thought I left the tom tracks on by mistake.  The snare drum had a nice crack and presence and the bass drum had the perfect amount of attack and bottom end.  I couldn’t have been happier.

For the final step, I added a taste of the tom mics into the mix for a bit more clarity and separation plus a little more bottom end on the floor tom. I also added a tiny bit of the hi-hat channel to the mix with a bit of EQ for some extra sizzle.  This worked nicely to polish and refine the really nice sound I was getting with just four mics.  Success.

Round Two: For this round, I swapped the SM27 on the floor tom for a PG56.

I took the SM27 and placed it at the opposite end of the room – about 12 feet away – facing the kit.  I added some compression to the channel.  In fact, I compressed the heck out of it at about 100:1, then I bashed away for another ten minutes.

When I first listened back, the beautiful drum sound I was hearing before now sounded really crappy.  I realized that the room channel was blasting through the mix with its raw, over compressed sound.  I brought it way back in the mix and was able to find a perfect point where it gave the drums a really nice full open sound and a welcome option to the close miking sound I was getting before.  Another success.

Round Three: Now it was time to put the mics to work on a live jazz recording session.   For this session, the group included acoustic bass, guitar, trumpet and drums.

The drums were a classic Gretsch be-bop set with an 18” bass drum, 12” and 14” toms, snare, and a beautiful set of Zildjian Constantinople cymbals and hi-hats.  (Figure 2) Once again, I used the SM27s as overheads, an SM57 on the snare and the Beta 52A on the bass drum.  For this session, I placed the Beta 52A about 4” away from the bass drum facing the right side of the drum. (Figure 3)

Figure 2 – Round Three: Jazz Set Miking

We sound-checked the drums and they sounded great.  In fact, we only ended up using the snare channel for one song where I played brushes.  The cymbals sizzled, the toms cut through and the snare fit perfectly into the mix.  With the mic placement described above, the small jazz bass drum sounded round and full.

Figure 3 – Round Three: Bass Drum Miking

Miking the rest of the group.  We were all recording in the same room at the same time, so we needed some isolation.  We faced the guitar amp away from the drums and miked it using an SM57 facing the speaker.  The trumpet player was on the other side of the room also using a 57.  The bass player played through a small amp using his pick-up. But in addition to that, we used an SM27 placed directly in front of and about six inches from the strings, with the capsule halfway between the bridge and the bottom end of the fingerboard.  The bass sounded great.  Plenty of bottom end yet plenty of articulation.  When mixing, we were able to find a really a nice blend of the pick-up and mic sound.  Later, a seasoned jazz musician friend of mine heard the recordings and was amazed at how good everything sounded. He said, “I’ve recorded in some of the best studios in the world and haven’t heard the drums and bass sound this good”.  I guess the proof is in the pudding.

Round four: A much different type of session.  This time it was a young talented saxophonist playing along with pre-recorded tracks for his college auditions.

I have a few mics that I would normally use on a saxophone, but I thought I would try the SM27. He played for a few minutes, and then we gave it a quick listen.  He absolutely loved the sound of his saxophone.  No EQ, no fuss, no muss, just his tenor and the SM27.   We both agreed that there wasn’t even a need to listen to any other mics.  I’m not saying it was because of the microphone we used, but he did get into the college of his choice.

Final Round: Recording a twenty-piece big band in a concert hall.  Needless to say, I had to use just every microphone I own.  This time I used a couple of SM81s for drum overheads along with the Beta 52A on the bass drum and a Beta 56®A on the snare.  We used a couple of small condensers on the piano, the bass went direct, and we used a ‘57 on the guitar amp.  We used SM57s for the trumpet, trombone and sax soloists.  (They seem to isolate the sound in this type of setting much better than the large diaphragm condensers)  We also placed two large diaphragm condensers about 10 feet in front of the horn section.  For our room mics we place two SM27s on the concert hall’s back wall – about 70 feet from the front of the stage.  Once again, the SM27s did a great job.  When mixed in with the close-miked instruments, they gave the band a full round live sound with plenty of definition.

And there you have it.  In a short period of time the SM27 has gone from a microphone I’d never heard of to my microphone of choice for many different applications.

LEARN MORE ABOUT SOUNDWALL MUSIC CAMPS, right here.

ABOUT JOHN XEPOLEAS: John started performing and teaching in 1970 and has been an active part of the San Francisco Bay Area music scene ever since. He received his Bachelor of Arts in Music Performances in 1978 and published his first book, Studies for the Contemporary Drummer” in 1991.  He also authored “Lessons with the Greats” in 1993 and was appointed Music Director at Soundwall Music Camps in 1995.  Her performs with The Fundamentals and Fundz Jazz and is available for private and Skype lessons.  More about John here.

While you often see microphone techniques discussed for specific applications, another approach is to learn some general principles that you can apply to any situation. Before we can get into that though, we have to choose the proper mic first. Lynda.com’s Bobby Owsinski, author of the site’s online video series Audio Recording Techniques and the Audio Mixing Bootcamp leads the way.

Let’s take a look at how that’s done.

Choosing The Right Mic

While there may be a mic that works well for many applications, no single mic works great on everything. In fact, thanks to parameters like diaphragm type, polar pattern, and sensitivity, having a nice variety of mics can really make a difference in the final sounds that you’re recording and how they blend together in the mix.

It’s safe to say that most engineers rely on their experience when choosing microphones, but there’s also some sound reasoning behind their preferences. Here are a few things that you might want to consider when selecting a microphone to record with.

Does the microphone complement the instrument that you’re recording?
For instance, if you have an instrument that has a very edgy top end, choosing a mic that also has that quality may have those frequencies further emphasized when recorded. You might want to choose a mic that’s a bit mellower, such as a ribbon. This is one of the reasons that a ribbon mic works so well on brass, for instance.

Will the mic be overloaded by the source?
Some mics just can’t take an extended amount of sound pressure level without generating some sort of distortion. A ribbon mic or many condenser mics won’t work on a snare drum with a heavy hitting drummer for just this reason. That’s why the level of the source always has to be a consideration when choosing a mic.

Does the mic have the right polar pattern for the job?
The directional pickup of the mic needs to be considered before making a mic selection. For instance, if leakage is a consideration, then you may want to try a mic with a tighter directional pattern, like a hypercardioid. If the instrument you’re miking radiates in multiple directions (like an accordion, dulcimer or bassoon), sometimes an omni pattern works wonders. Either way, don’t overlook the polar pattern when choosing a mic.

Is the proximity effect an issue?
If you’re going to be close-miking, will the low-end buildup from the proximity effect of a cardioid mic change the sound too much? If so, this also might be a good place to try an omni, or at least move the mic away from the source a little.

Now that we’ve covered some of the parameters that go into choosing a microphone, mic placement is the next area that can affect the sound you capture. Let’s take a look.

Secrets Of Mic Placement

Quickly finding the optimum position for a mic is perhaps the single most useful talent an engineer can have. You should always trust your ears and begin by listening to how the instrument sounds, find the sweet spot, and begin your microphone placement there. If you don’t like the resultant sound, then move the mic or swap it with another.  EQ should be the last thing you touch.

Microphones can’t effectively be placed by sight alone, which is a mistake that’s all too easy to make. That’s why it’s important to actually listen to the instrument before you place the mic and find the place where the sound has the most balanced representation of the instrument, or the “sweet spot.”

How To Find The Sweet Spot

Depending upon pickup pattern of the mic you’ll be using, you’ll have to approximate the way it captures audio when you’re listening. Here are some tips on just how to do that.

• To correctly place an omni microphone, cover one ear and listen with the other. Move around the player or sound source until you find a spot where the frequencies from the instrument are the most balanced and place the mic there.
• To place a cardioid microphone, cover one ear and cup your hand behind the other ear and listen. Move around the player or sound source until you find a spot where the frequencies from the instrument are the most balanced.
• For a stereo pair, cup your hands behind both ears. Move around the player or sound source until you find a spot where the frequencies from the instrument are the most balanced.

The Sound At The Source

Contrary to what many might think, just having great recording equipment doesn’t automatically guarantee that you’ll capture great sounds. The problem is that you can’t really quantify how much each variable in the recording process contributes to how a recording ultimately sounds, since each situation, even within the same project, is unique. That said, you can generally break it down to something like this:

• The player and the instrument contribute at least 50% to the overall sound (sometimes a little more, sometimes a little less – but always the greatest portion). Simply put, it’s got to be in the fingers (or embouchure, or vocal chords, etc.) first.
• The room contributes about 20% to the overall sound. Even on close-miked instruments, the room is far more responsible for the ultimate sound than many engineers realize.
• The mic position contributes about 20% to the overall sound. Placement is really your acoustic EQ and is responsible for the instrument’s blend in the track.
• The mic choice contributes about 10% to the overall sound. This is the last little bit that takes a good sound and makes it great.

If something doesn’t sound right, there are a lot of things to change before you reach for the EQ. Try the following in this order:

1. Change the source, if possible (the instrument you’re miking)
2. Change the mic placement
3. Change the placement in the room
4. Change the mic
5. Change the mic preamplifier
6. Change the amount of compression and/or limiting (from none to a lot)
7. Change the room you’re recording in
8. Change the player
9. Come back and try it another day

General Mic Placement Principles

Instead of looking at the mic placement used on specific instruments, here are a number of guidelines that work in almost any situation.

• One of the reasons for close-miking is to avoid leakage into other mics so that the engineer can have more flexibility in balancing the ensemble in the mix. If at all possible, give the mic some distance from the source in order to let the sound develop, and be captured, naturally.
• The best mic position cannot be predicted, it must be found. It’s OK to start from a place that you know has worked in the past, but be prepared to experiment with the placement a bit since each recording situation is different. The song, arrangement, player, instrument, recording environment, and signal path all have a bearing on the final sound, and chances are that at least one of those parameters has changed since the last time you recorded.
• If the majority of the sound will come from the room, start getting sounds from those mics first, and then add any other mics that act as support.
• The 200 to 600Hz range is where the proximity effect often shows up and is why many engineers cut the EQ in this range. If a number of directional microphones are being used at the same time in a close-mic situation, they will all be subject to the proximity effect, and you should expect a buildup of this frequency range in the mix as a result. This is another good reason to use a variety of mics and different directional patterns, so that the proximity effect buildup is diminished.
• A huge sound is a larger than life sound, but that doesn’t always come as a result of something being loud. One way to accomplish a larger than life sound is by recording a sound that is softer than the recording will most likely be played back. For instance, sometimes an electric guitar run through a 5 watt amp with an 8-inch speaker can sound bigger than a 100 watt Marshall stack.

The above guidelines can be used in just about any recording application and will help you deliver a sound that goes way beyond the normal cookie-cutter “this is where to put it” mic placement. Good recording!

ABOUT BOBBY OWSINSKI: He is the author of 16 books on recording, music and the music business as well as several outstanding, step-by-step video courses for Lynda.com, including Audio Recording Techniques, Audio Mastering Techniques, Mastering for iTunes and the Audio Mixing Bootcamp.

Learn more at:

http://www.lynda.com/Audio-tutorials/Audio-Recording-Techniques/95612-2.html

http://www.lynda.com/Bobby-Owsinski/1149115-1.html

Contributors: John Born and Yuri Shulman

Shure’s SM7 vocal mic for recording applications, introduced in 1976, is a mic (available today as SM7B) with an amazing history that’s generated a tremendous amount of buzz in the last year or two.

We wondered why. So to find out, we talked to John Born, Product Manager at Shure who answered the question, but advised us that any even lighthearted discussion of the SM7B had to include the SM5 and SM57 microphones.  These two mics were, at different times, the standard by which the SM7 was measured.

Borne of the SM5

The SM7’s story really begins with the SM5 broadcast microphone – a dynamic boom microphone that found a home in many radio and film studios following its introduction in 1966.

Page from the Shure Professional Products Catalog, 1974

While widely accepted in the broadcast and motion picture industries, Shure set out to develop a new microphone offering a smaller footprint (the SM5 was huge – measuring about 10” long) and some of the same sonic characteristics of its newly introduced SM57 in a mic designed to reach beyond the broadcast industry.

According to John, the development of the SM7 went something like this: “A group of Shure acoustical engineers were given the SM57 cartridge element (Unidyne III) and asked, without restrictions on size or cost, to make it better. And they went nuts.”  This may be one reason why John likes to refer to the SM7B as “an SM57 on steroids”.

Variations of the Shure Unidyne III cartridge are used in many of Shure’s dynamic microphones. The SM57, SM58 and SM7B all share a similar acoustic network based on the Unidyne III element, but there are a few differences between the SM7B cartridge and the SM57/SM58 cartridge design:

• The SM7B diaphragm is slightly different and optimized for increased low end response
• The larger housing of the SM7B allows for a larger rear volume behind the cartridge which extends its low end response
• The internal shockmount of the SM7B is optimized to reduce stand vibrations, while the shockmount in the SM57/SM58 is optimized to reduce noise in handheld applications

More from John: “The SM7 was designed as an extended, full range microphone and intended to be universal in its applications. It has a flatter and wider response than its SM57 and SM58 siblings but its frequency shaping switches in the back (selectable low cut and presence peak filtering) allow it to more than adequately fulfill (and enhance) applications where the SM57 or SM58 excel.”

The SM7 debuted in 1976 and eventually replaced the SM5B, which was discontinued in 1986.

Here is KPCC’s Doug Johnson with the station’s SM5B microphone. Big, isn’t it?  

(Photo courtesy: www.courant.org)

What are the differences between the SM7B and SM5B?

• Both are cardioid dynamic microphones intended for broadcast voice applications.
• Both are transformerless.
• The SM7B and SM5B moving-coil cartridges were similar, but not identical.
• The SM7B incorporates a humbucking coil.
• The SM7B incorporates the internal volume of the microphone body as part of the acoustic design of the cartridge; the SM5B did not.

The Thriller Effect

Over the course of past 30 years, the SM7 found its way into the recording studio. Case in Point: Michael Jackson’s groundbreaking album Thriller.  Quincy Jones and recording engineer Bruce Swedien used an SM7 for most of Michael’s vocals and, according to legend, all of Vincent Price’s.

It was a brave choice.  First of all, Michael Jackson’s previous album, Off The Wall, had already become the first solo record to produce four Top 10 singles and a GRAMMY Award for the single “Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough”.  That set the bar pretty high.  But Jackson was determined to do even better and the same production team was put in place to make it happen.  The resulting 1982 Thriller album (remember – this is vinyl) went on to become the best–selling album of all time at an unheard-of 110 million copies sold.

With all the ultra-high-end recording microphones available to the producers, why the unassuming SM7, then a standard for radio and voiceover applications? Here’s what Bruce had to say about it in his track-by-track memoir, In the Studio with Michael Jackson:  “One of my absolute favorite microphones is the Shure SM7.  I recorded most of the big hit records of Michael’s career with him in front of one of my SM7s. I’ve been pretty vocal about how much I love that microphone, it’s a great mic.”

“I was allowed the freedom to make microphone choices, and nobody ever said a word. I just did it. For example, I used a Shure SM7 on most of Michael’s lead vocals — ‘Billie Jean’, ‘The Way You Make Me Feel’ — and boy, did that raise some eyebrows! But I love that mic, and I have six of them. The first one that I bought was in 1977 … one of the first SM7s to be used on a major music project. It’s dynamic of course and it worked just flawlessly with Michael – if you notice you can hear all the lyrics very clearly.”

What are the differences between the SM7, SM7A, and SM7B?

• The original SM7 was introduced in 1976.
• The SM7A revision improved the humbucking coil and the design of the yoke mount. This revision was introduced in 1999.
• The SM7B incorporated a larger windscreen. It was introduced in 2001.

Acoustically, the microphone versions performed identically.

Fast Forward: Most Hyped Mic?

While there are legions of true believers still hoping for Shure to bring back the SM5B, the SM7B has achieved a level of popularity and buzz that give it (audio) urban legend status. Used as an instrument mic and a vocal mic in live sound, broadcast and recording, in the minds of many, it is the do-everything microphone that outperforms the industry workhorse SM57.

Posted on www.gearslutz.com

You can hardly visit a mic review site without reading pages of animated and sometimes heated commentary on the SM7B.  There’s even a Shure SM7 joke thread on gearslutz.com with posts like these:

“You know that voice in your head that tells you right from wrong? Well, it was recorded with an SM7B.”

“My SM7B automatically doubled and then quadrupled my vocal takes, translating them into Spanish and Mandarin versions, enabling me to deliver international releases.”

“They say with careful positioning, you can use an SM7B to record the future.”

And that’s not all.   Since the SM7B requires a mic preamp with at least 60dB of gain, there’s almost as much chatter about which preamp or audio interface to use for recording.   Recording Hacks’ Jason Miller covered this extensively in a recent post. His recommendations, including audio tracks using 8 different interfaces, are available here.

We asked John to explain why, 36 years after its introduction; this mic is creating so much noise.  Here’s what he said:

“A combination of things have probably accounted for this consistent spike in popularity. Maybe it just takes this long for a mic to gain acceptance.  Some of it has to do with emergence of podcasting – there’s an appetite for a high quality voiceover mic.  And some of it has to do with Michael’s Jackson’s death – everyone was talking about his recordings and how they were made. Then there’s the fact that this is a $350 microphone that has beaten studio microphones costing ten times as much in microphone shoot-outs.  It’s finally getting the recognition it deserves.”

Shure Artist Relations Associate Ryan Smith agrees: “It continues to be used on major recordings, both as the lead vocal mic and on other applications — guitar amp, bass amp, kick drum, hi-hat, snare drum, horns and many more.”   Death Cab for Cutie, John Mayer, Chevelle, James Hetfield of Metallica, Keith Urban, Jeff Tweedy, My Chemical Romance, Meshuggah, Don Was, Billy Idol and even the Boss have reportedly used the SM7B in either live sound or recording applications.  Rumor has it that Bob Dylan is a fan, too.

You Decide

Clearly, the SM7B has more than lived up to the goals set by the engineers who designed it back in the 70s.  And while it does a good job of masking a poor recording environment, handling a screaming vocal and performing double-duty as a drum or guitar amp mic, only you can decide where it belongs in your rig or mic locker.

You can listen and compare the SM7B to other Shure microphones in the Mic Listening Lab.   Better still, borrow one from a friend and put it to the test.  Remember that good sound is subjective – it’s what sounds good to you.

Helpful Information:

In the Studio with Michael Jackson, Bruce Swedien, Hal Leonard Books, 2009

Best Budget Audio Interfaces for SM7B, Jason Miller, Recording Hacks, June 18, 2012

Reviews:

Shure SM7B vs. Neumann u87Ai, Audio Superfreak, www.soundcloud.com, 2011

Shure SM7 – The Tape Op Review, Drew Townson, July 2003

When it comes to recorded music, the mixdown is the crucial step where the individual recorded tracks of each instrument or vocal are combined to make the finished master.

Much of what we do when we’re tracking a song is designed to give us as much flexibility and control as possible in the mix down stage, for example:

• We close-mic instruments and isolate them from one another to minimize their interaction with each other.
• We record our vocals separately so that only the voice (and nothing else) is recorded.

The end result is more control during mixdown, but all of that freedom can be overwhelming.

Think Visual
In addition to being a musician and an audio engineer, I’m also a photographer and it sometimes helps me to approach the mixdown process visually, imagining a virtual stage where I can place all the elements of my recording.

One of the most powerful aspects of the multitrack recording process is the control we have during mixdown. Isolation of the individual tracks allows us to place them almost anywhere we want. In fact, this freedom makes much of what we do in contemporary music pretty contrived.  If you sat in a performance venue and listened to a drummer onstage, the sound would have originated from one spot. But in recording, the way we place the individual elements of our drum kit our virtual stage makes that kit so much larger.

Three Dimensions
So let’s look at this virtual stage. When I approach a mixdown, I see a structure where I can place elements of my recording. 

First: The X Axis

Aspect: Panorama

The most obvious is the left to right panorama (that’s where we get the term ‘pan’). This is the easiest one to understand because it corresponds so directly to the real world.

Using our pan control, we can place our recorded tracks anywhere on this virtual stage with little regard to the physical constraints of reality. Let’s look at our drum kit example again. We will typically place the kick and snare in the center of our stage, but will often place the hi hat to the left or right. This can certainly make for a more interesting listening experience, but for this to occur in the real world, our drummer would have to be playing a hi hat 30 feet off to the side. The same thing is true with the toms. It is very common to hear a set of toms go from our left speaker to our right speaker in a recording, but to experience that in the live world, the kit would have to be 100 feet across.  We are actually more closely duplicating the experience of the drummer when he plays his kit than what the audience hears. We also take this same approach with acoustic piano when we record it in stereo and pan the instrument left and right. This results in a listening experience much closer to that of the pianist than what his or her audience would hear in the real world.

Second: The Y Axis

Aspect: Frequency

I visualize it vertically from bottom to top.  All of our recorded tracks have frequency characteristics that will allow us to orient them vertically, up and down as well as the left to right that panning provides. Every engineer has their own approach to placing instruments and vocals during mix down. I usually start with the kick drum and bass, with a goal of wrapping the bass around the core of the kick drum. This is that driving force that defines a lot of pop music. I work my way up through the rest of the kit placing them vertically working up through the toms, snare, hats, cymbals etc. and horizontally as discussed earlier, panning the different drums wherever I desire on my stage. As you work through the rest of your tracks, you will begin to “see” how instruments and vocals can be placed horizontally and vertically across the virtual canvas of mixdown.

Third: The Z Axis

Aspect: Depth

The third dimension is the subtler concept of depth, or front to back on our stage. There are a number of tools available to us to give depth to our recordings. One of the most common and obvious tools is reverb. Its main purpose is to give a sense of space to a recording. In the real world, the closer we are to a sound source, the more dry and “in your face” it sounds. As we move away from it, it will begin to take on more of the characteristics of the space around it. You can define how reverberant your virtual stage is. How much reverb you apply to each sound source will help to place it on the stage by varying perceived distance from the listener.

Another subtle way to approach distance and depth is EQ, as sounds very close to us will be distinct with a lot of presence while those more distant will take on a bit of a muffled sound. By varying the tone of a sound source, we give it the characteristics of close proximity by providing it with well-defined presence while pulling down some of the high-end content can give it that muffled, more distant sound. Then of course, there’s volume with voices and instruments closer to us louder than those further away.

The Virtual Stage

Recording, like so many of the arts, has rules that are really much more useful as loose guidelines. Some of the most important advances in any art form have come about when someone took a “rule” and at least bent, if not completely broke it. You may find that an entirely different approach to mix down works for you, but this virtual stage works well for me. It’s easy for me to approach a recording in this way, placing my tracks like chess pieces on a board. Some of these positioning tricks are especially visible, such as placing instruments to the far right or far left in the mix.  Others, like EQ and reverb, are much subtler.

If nothing more, I hope this is a starting point to help you “see” your mix down as you place the building blocks of your recording and structure your finished master exactly the way you envisioned it.

MIKE OVERLIN is the Manager of Worship Resources for Yamaha Corporation of America, and a worship leader with the Free Methodist Church in Southern California. A professional musician all his life, he served two tours of duty with the United States Air Force Band, earned two gold records for audio engineering and is also an accomplished professional photographer.  You can see and hear Mike in action at upcoming Worship Arts Technology Summit (WATS) events, where he leads sessions in the Musician, Audio and Media Tracks.

In the second of our two-part series, we’ll look at the remaining six project studio fundamentals – from considering all-important acoustics to choosing gear that will see you through your sophomore effort and beyond:

1. The right space…
   And the essential gear:
2.  Computer
3. Audio Interface
4. DAW (Digital Audio Workstation
5. MIDI Keyboard
6. Headphones/Studio Monitors

The Right Space

Let’s start with where you’re going to set up.  Ideally, you have a spare room or a basement that can be reserved for your project studio.  If so, you’ll want to think about acoustic foam and other sound absorbers to handle less than ideal sonic characteristics.  While recording is an art, acoustics is a science.

You want the space to be as sound-neutral as possible, limiting sound wave reflections that will make it hard to both accurately capture the music being recorded and mix it later.  Professional recording studios built on floating slabs, like Shure’s Performance Listening Center, require the services of acoustical architects and cost tens of thousands of dollars to build.   Still, don’t let this deter you from making the best of your available space.

Here are some tips for improving your room’s acoustics:

• Cover hardwood floors with carpeting or area rugs.
• Make sure windows are covered with fabric treatments – the heavier, the better.
• If you have a choice between a rectangular room and a square one, choose the rectangular room as square rooms tend to create problematic “standing waves”.
• Some pros advocate the “live end/dead end” arrangement, where the mix area is set up at the dead end of the room and the recording space is in the live area.
• Use acoustic foam if you’re in a more permanent space, but make sure it’s the commercially available professional (and fire retardant) type.
• Experiment: Books in bookcases, floor pillows and overstuffed chairs can go a long way in breaking up offending frequencies.

Remember, too, that there is no way to soundproof a room.  Sound travels easily through doors, windows, ceilings and floors.  If you have the luxury of setting up your studio on a top floor, you’ll still need to be concerned about who is next door or one floor down.

Tip:  One person’s music is another’s noise, so anticipate issues.  To check volume levels, playback through your studio monitors and listen outside your recording space. If you can hear it, so can your upstairs, downstairs, next-door neighbors and family.  Use headphones for mixing and record at mutually agreeable hours.  No one but you and the drummer wants to hear drum tracks over and over at 11 PM or on a peaceful Sunday afternoon.

The Computer

In a perfect world, the computer you use for recording isn’t the one the family uses for email or eBay purchases.  Even if it is, we’ll bypass the Mac versus PC battle (by this time, we all have our favorite operating system and most of us won’t be moved.) As one engineer put it, “Macs don’t sound better than PCs and PCs don’t sound better than Macs.”

Most people agree that this is what you need to support your recording rig:

• Hard drive: 40 GB
• Plenty of RAM: 4 GB or more.
• Powerful CPU. Minimum: Core 2 Duo processor with the frequency above 2 GHz or higher.

Tip:  Many of us like the convenience of a portable laptop. Philip Lazar at the Institute of Audio Research suggests using a second monitor with a separate mouse and keyboard rather than its onboard trackpad and keyboard for a “nicer, seamless, and more professional workflow.”

Audio Interface

The audio interface is an analog-to-digital converter and has increasingly taken the place of the soundcards built into most computers.  An interface allowed your recording software and computer to process audio in to the computer, as well as out to your speakers.

Some computers come with 1/8” jacks, but if you want multiple inputs for microphones and instruments, you need to add an audio interface. This is where you’ll want to figure out how everything connects and purchase an audio interface that fits your needs. Think carefully about what your needs are.

Here’s Philip Lazar on the subject, “FireWire interfaces fair much better than their USB counterparts in cases of speed, clarity and their capability of daisy chaining multiple interfaces and drives. When shopping interfaces, it’s a good idea to figure out how many PREs you might need, and then add two. Having an extra MIC IN is always better than never having it when you need it the most.”

Having the right hardware for your project can make all the difference.

Digital Audio Workstation (DAW)

A Digital Audio Workstation (DAW) is a system designed to record, edit, and play back digital audio. A key feature of DAWs is the ability to freely manipulate recorded sounds in the same way that word processing programs manipulate typed words.

Recording software allows you to record audio, record MIDI, cut, copy and paste audio or midi sequences, change tempo, change pitch, apply sound effects, use loops, quantize sounds and MIDI, play virtual instruments, play virtual sampler, organize sounds and song information, import/export sounds, play videos, mix, master and much more as technology advances.

There are many working environments out there. For PC users, a popular choice is Windows®- compatible Cakewalk Sonar studio recording software. Steinberg Cubase SX recording software can be used with both Macintosh and Windows. Apple Logic Pro and Pro Tools are widely used.

MIDI Controller

MIDI controllers or keyboards come in a variety of shapes, sizes and prices these days. If you’re a pro keyboard player, you may want to invest in something sophisticated, but for many, a less-expensive 25-key keyboard works well for almost everything.

Some controllers also come with pads, sliders, or knobs on them. When considering a MIDI controller look first at the comfort factor – do the keys feel good to you? Do you need 88 keys or will 25 keys work as well for you? Then look at the size factor – will it fit on your desk? Avoid MIDI controllers that are too complicated. A simple controller is easiest to learn and work with.

Studio Monitors and Studio Headphones

Now it’s time to listen to what you’ve put down and here your options are studio monitors or studio headphones. The choice (and it isn’t necessarily one or the other; you may want both) may depend on where your studio space is located. Some project home studios use headphones for playback since they can practice or record into the wee hours without annoying the neighbors.

Here’s where you might be thinking: “Great! I already have headphones and speakers.”  Not so fast.  Studio monitors and headphones offer a stereo image and a flat, balanced sound that accurately represent the sounds you have recorded and aren’t colored (more bass, for instance) to make the sound more appealing.  According to blogger Michael Walsh in Dubspot, “At first they may not sound as exciting as your other speakers. This is because you’re hearing an honest representation of the music.”

One thing you may also notice about studio monitors is that they’re small. For most home or project studios, 5” models are big enough.  Michael Walsh recalls, “Visiting a producer friend once and noticed that he was mixing tracks with a pair of $20 computer speakers. He could do this because he knew from experience how to EQ his sounds and master his track to rumble a club sound system, so he didn’t need to hear the bass on his home system to know what was happening to the sound.”

Now let’s talk about headphones.  Like many of us, you may have a nice pair of over-the-ear ‘cans’ that get pretty regular use when you’re listening to music.  They won’t be helpful to you in studio, though, since headphones made for consumer listening color the sound. For mixing and monitoring, you’ll want studio headphones that are as neutral and accurate as possible; they’re the ears of your recording system and you’ll make a lot of important decisions based on what they deliver.

Good quality studio headphones, like the ones Shure sells, start at about $100.

Total Cost

Michael Walsh, who is a producer of audio/visual art and writes for soundsdefygravity.com suggests that two very competent systems can be assembled for less than a thousand dollars.  Here are his recommendations:

Around $500

“In this setup, we spent the bulk of our $500 budget on the speakers/studio monitors from Mackie and M-Audio. Both companies make very nice self-powered studio monitors that rate well among producers. The Behringer audio interface is inexpensive but effective for a small home studio. The M-Audio and Akai keyboards are both highly rated and have been used on countless recordings. This package will give a clean sound with a simple yet effective setup.”

Behringer UCA202 Audio Interface

M-Audio Oxygen 25 or Akai MPK Mini MIDI controller

M-Audio BX5 or Mackie MR5 Studio Monitor Speakers

Around $1000

“In this setup, we spent the bulk of our budget on sound – upgrading the speakers to an 8-inch driver that will deliver much more substantial (and clean) low-end sound. We’ve also upgraded the audio interface in this package with the highly rated Apogee One. Apogee is also known for their  DAC (Digital to Analog Converters) that will breathe beautiful life into your speakers. Lastly, we’ve chosen a more elaborate MIDI controller, the MPK 25, which adds pad functionality to our setup.”

Apogee One Audio Interface

Akai MPK 25 MIDI Controller

M- Audio BX8 or Mackie MR8 Studio Monitor Speakers

Editor’s Note:  These are the opinions and recommendations of Dubspot contributor Michael Walsh and do not represent an endorsement by Shure Inc.

Just building a project studio will not transform you into an engineer or producer. You’ll need experience and practice in order to perfect the craft and master the tools that make up the system.

If you’re new to recording, there’s a great new benefit: it’s affordable.  The digital revolution has changed the landscape.

It’s easy to look at this list of gear and feel the need to get more things, more speakers and more components to create sound.

But remember that artists and engineers have managed with much less.  And whether you agree that some of Robert Johnson’s 41 or so original recordings were recorded at the wrong speed in a makeshift studio of two adjoining rooms at the Gunter Hotel in San Antonio, no one can deny the brilliance that shines through those discs 75 or more years later.

Now it’s your turn.

More Resources

There’s a mountain of ever-changing information on the Internet that can give you details on the latest hardware and software, along with pricing and good/better/best recommendations.  We’ve included a few of the sources used for this post, but there are dozens, if not hundreds more.

How to Build a Home Studio for Under $1000

Guide to the Home and Project Studio

How to Build a Project Studio You Can Be Proud Of

Thank the humble tape recorder. And give some credit, too, to the 1960s when rock and roll ruled the AM airwaves and teenagers were learning to play guitar by listening to Beatles records over and over again. Professional recording studios were the domain of major acts, but even then, two-track reel-to-reel machines were recording bands in basements, bedrooms and garages.  According to some, that set the ground for the home studio revolution.

By the 1970s, the first home studios were making their appearance, thanks to Teac’s 4-track reel-to-reel machines and mixers.  The addition of amps and speakers completed the system, but the $10,000 price tag was too steep for the average musician or would-be engineer. Tascam (formerly Teac) further revolutionized recording with its 8-track machines and mixers. The 1980s saw the introduction of MIDI, digital synths, drum machines and some of the first affordable cassette 4-track recorders and mixers designed for quality recording in home studios. When the millennium arrived, all the pieces were in place – powerful desktop computers, soundcards and audio interfaces, recording software, synths and digital samplers – each more powerful and less expensive than before.  The computer became the locus of audio production.

Today, according to one expert, “The home studio has progressed from having perhaps a 16-channel mixer and a few rack effects to having a virtual console of unlimited channels with unlimited inserts, sends, busses going to a full library of effects processors not even Abbey Road could afford.”

In this two-part series, we’ll look at seven project studio fundamentals – from considering all-important acoustics to choosing gear that will see you through your sophomore effort and beyond:

1. The right space…
   And the essential gear:
2.  Computer
3. Audio Interface
4. DAW (Digital Audio Workstation
5. MIDI Keyboard
6. Microphones
7. Headphones/Studio Monitors

Let’s start with the section we know best – Microphones.  (Part II will include all the other essential gear.)

Microphones

If you’re going to be recording a vocalist, instruments or sampling your own sounds, you’re going to need a good quality microphone. Your options are determined by what you’re recording and how much you have to spend.

High-end condenser mics, typically used in recording applications, can cost thousands of dollars, but good quality dynamic microphones, like Shure’s SM58 (vocal) and SM57 (instrument), can perform a multitude of tasks in your studio. Condenser mics are popular in studio applications – and they don’t have to be budget-busting.

Since this article is about building a small budget project studio, we decided to sidestep the big studio honchos we know, and direct our questions to a pair of Shure Associates, Chris Lyons and Michael Johns for their suggestions on mic choices for project studios.   We wanted to know what mic or mics to consider first … and what to add later.

Here’s what we learned from Michael and Chris.

First of all, you cannot go wrong starting with an SM57.  It has the reputation as the “do everything workhorse” and it really does work well with almost any voice or instrument, plus it’s super-affordable.  If you can only afford one microphone, make it an SM57. The great thing is that no matter how many microphones you eventually own, you’ll need at least one and possibly several SM57s in your locker. You might as well buy the first one right now and get started.

Next, let’s say you have a little more money to throw into the kitty.  There are two possible directions you can take:

If you want to go with a condenser mic, which gives you that added crispness on vocals and especially string instruments, go with an SM27.  It’s a great sounding mic, real versatile.  Colbie Caillat recorded the vocals on her latest album with an SM27.  That’s a really good choice.  The retail price is $299 and it includes a shock mount, which is great.

If you prefer a dynamic microphone sound, which some people do, go with the SM7B.  It’s about the same price as the SM27 – but is has a different sound signature than a condenser and depending on the type of music and what you’re recording, it might be a great choice.  Some of the most popular recordings have been made with anSM7B– including Michael Jackson’s “Thriller”.

It’s a great mic for people who are doing rap and heavy metal screaming- type vocals that would tend to overload a condenser.

The third mic we’d add later on to give yourself more versatility is a small diaphragm condenser like the SM137. A pencil style, probe-style condenser, this a mic you’d use primarily for instruments but it makes a great drum overhead mic and works especially well in a stereo pair. If you’re stereo-miking a piano, for example, a couple of SM137s with a stereo mount make a really nice stereo set-up. The mic retails for about $180 so it’s really affordable.

The thing to avoid is you don’t want to pick a microphone that has a really pronounced sonic character.  Some people are really big fans of mics that have that, but generally those mics tend to be less versatile.  It may sound magical on acoustic guitar or voice, but it doesn’t work well on other instruments.  You don’t want to over-emphasize any one thing – you’re looking for balance and consistency because that’s what makes a mic flexible in lots of different roles.

If you stay with that strategy going in, you’ll be able to handle almost any miking tasks, vocal or instrument and later on, you can certainly add those more unique application-specific mics.  You’ll have built that foundation of ‘do everything workhorses’ that can handles lots of different roles.

Tips:

Record each voice and instrument (or sound source) separately.

Maintain a consistent sound level. Make sure your sound sources do not move in and out of the pickup areas of the microphone. Movement (i.e. varying distance from the microphone) will change recording levels, which are hard to fix later.

Keep the microphone away from reflective surfaces. Reflections caused by hard surfaces, including even tabletops and music stands, can affect the sound quality captured by the microphone. This is also called reverberation and if you want this effect, add it later.

Place the microphones far from unwanted sound sources. Be sure to also point the microphones away from any unwanted noise. Make a few sample recordings of the chosen recording area, with the microphone facing different directions, to find the quietest possible placement.

Place the microphone only as close as necessary. Too close a placement can color the sound source’s tone quality (timbre), by picking up only one part of the instrument. But too far away means you will pick up more ambient sound.

Less is more. Fewer microphones mean fewer technical issues and, for the purposes of capturing clean sound, less pickup of background noise.

Keep the 3-to-1 rule in mind. When multiple microphones are used, the distance between microphones should be at least three times the distance from each microphone to its intended sound source. For example, if two microphones are each placed one-foot from their sound sources, the distance between the microphones should be at least three feet. If each microphone is just two inches from an instrument, they only need to be six inches apart.

Resources

There’s a mountain of ever-changing information on the Internet that can give you details on the latest hardware and software, along with pricing and good/better/best recommendations.  We’ve included one of the sources used for this post, but there are dozens, if not hundreds, more.

Guide to the Home and Project Studio, TweakHeadz Lab

FREE downloads from Shure:

• Home Recording and Podcasting
• Introduction to Recording and Sound Reinforcement
• Microphone Techniques for Recording

Read More

Building a Project Studio for $1000 or Less, Part II 
In the second of our two-part series, we’ll look at the remaining six project studio fundamentals – from considering all-important acoustics to choosing gear that will see you through your sophomore effort and beyond.

 “…the computer music market went from just under $140 million in sales in 1999 to almost a half-billion dollars in 2008.”

 Consider this: According to the Los Angeles Times, over half the commercial recording studios in the L.A. area had closed or been sold to artists for private use. And NAMM, the trade association for music manufacturers, reported that the computer music market went from just under $140 million in sales in 1999 to almost a half-billion dollars in 2008.  Recording software like Avid Technology Inc.’s Pro Tools, Steinberg Media Technologies’ Cubase and Apple Inc.’s Garage Band perform many of the tasks of old-school studio consoles and tape recorders at a fraction of the price. 

 Carr puts it this way: “Some people call it the triumph of the amateurs — the ultimate democratization of the means of production. Others say it’s the end of pop music as we know it.¹”

 Most Shure customers agree with the former and not the latter.  That’s why “How do I connect a microphone to a sound card?” has held a top ten position question among 3,658 questions in shure.com’s Technical FAQ (Find an Answer) section since 2002.

 In this post, we turned to Shure Associate Gabe Benitez for an overview of the basics.   First, we’ll cover some fundamental concepts.  Then, we’ll move on to considerations when using an XLR-to-USB adapter.

 Fundamental Considerations

 The growing popularity of home studio recording consistently raises the question of interfacing professional microphones with computer sound cards. Unfortunately, sound cards are rarely designed for professional microphone use. They often provide poor, low level and noisy sound that doesn’t match the quality of the recording package or the mic.  The good news is that properly interfacing a mic to a sound card isn’t that difficult.

 In order to interface a microphone to any device, we have to consider the electrical and mechanical compatibility between them. Here’s what that means:

 Signal level  

This is the actual voltage that comes out of a source or is needed by a receiving device, for example a sound card. Professional microphones put out a very low voltage in the range of 1 millivolt (1/1000th of a volt). Sound cards on the other hand require levels in the order of 10 millivolts (ten times as much!). So the first step is to increase the level before we get to the sound card.

 Impedance  

This is similar to resistance and its vital when interfacing two circuits. The relationship between the source impedance (microphone) and the load impedance (sound card) will determine how much of the energy coming from the mic is actually transferred to the sound card. Load impedance should be around ten times the source impedance. Professional microphones usually have between 150-600 Ohms. Soundcards have between 600-2000 Ohms. In most cases impedance will not be problematic.

 Connector and wiring scheme  

This is probably the most visible of the problems. There are more than a few connector types in the audio industry. Professional microphones use XLR connectors. Sound cards, due to space constraints, are equipped with a smaller connector, usually a 3.5mm “miniplug”. Although these look the same from the outside, there are at least three different types and multiple wiring schemes. Unfortunately, there is no standard for sound cards. Some are balanced, others are stereo, and others provide bias in separate wires. On most sound cards there is a line input next to the mic input that has the same connector. The line input is far more standardized than the mic input. This, as it will be explained later, will let us properly connect a microphone to the sound card.

 Dynamic vs. Condenser

Connecting a condenser mic to a sound card requires power, while a dynamic does not. Although sound cards can provide bias, they will not provide or have the capability to supply the phantom power that is needed for condenser mics. If you want to use a studio-grade condenser microphone, you will need an external power supply.

 This may all seem a little daunting, but there’s a simple way to connect just about any microphone to a sound card and that’s by using an external microphone preamplifier that has a line and/or a USB output. If you use the line output, connect it to the line input of the sound card. If the preamplifier has a USB output, even better – avoid the sound card and go directly to the computer through the USB port. These preamplifiers come in different shapes, forms and prices (with some as low as $40) and many will let you connect a dynamic or condenser microphone (if they provide phantom power) and gives you the ability to get the professional sound that you would expect from your Shure microphone.

 XLR-to-USB Adapter

No Sound Card Required

 Shure introduced the X2u XLR-to-USB adapter in 2009. You already know about interfacing a professional wired microphone to a computer sound card (by reading the section above). But now, let’s think about external digital devices that allow you to bypass the computer sound card altogether.

Remember that signal level is the actual voltage that comes out of a source. In some cases a microphone’s output signal may be too low and must be increased before it connects to a sound card. If the increased signal is too high, distortion may result. If the signal isn’t increased enough, it can quickly become noisy.

 Here’s what an adapter like the X2u does to solve this problem: The Shure X2u allows the gain to be changed before the analog to digital conversion. There is a signal LED to indicate proper signal level and distortion. Using the LED allows the user to avoid both distortion and noise optimizing the microphone signal for recording.

 Computer sound cards have impedances and connection schemes that adapt to many consumer microphones. Professional microphones have impedances and connections schemes that are designed to interface with professional microphone mixers.

 The X2u has a standard, pin 2 hot, female XLR connector and it also has an input impedance designed to work with many types of professional microphones. These built-in plug-and-play features make devices like the X2u easy to use.

 The X2u provides +48V of phantom power which feeds any modern and even some vintage condenser microphones. The Shure X2u uses your computer’s USB for power. It’s a good idea to turn off phantom power when using a dynamic microphone to extend it the life of your laptop battery.

 The X2u is designed to substitute your computer sound card by providing an external professional microphone input and a headphone output. The headphone output is connected directly to the microphone input.  That’s how zero latency monitoring is achieved. Use the headphone output to monitor both the signal recorded and the signal played back from the computer.

 Easy and Budget-Friendly

 Constructing a well-equipped recording studio twenty years ago ran into the millions of dollars.   Today, you can start small and still be professional with a computer, recording software (ProTools 10 for Students runs for about $300) and bundles like the SM58/X2u XLR-to-USB adapter, available just about anywhere for less than $200.

A single pair of multipattern condenser microphones can provide at least five distinct overhead drum miking choices with surprisingly different sonic characteristics.

To demonstrate these different sounds, we recorded a drum kit with a pair of KSM44A overhead microphones five different ways. The drums, the room, the preamps, cables, and composition remained the same. The only variable was the position of the microphones (and in one case, the polar pattern).

How different can a single pair of microphones, in the same room with the same drums, really sound? As you listen to the tracks below, consider the following:

• Width of stereo field
• Mono compatibility
• Susceptibility to comb filtering / phase coherency problems
• Amount of ambient or room sound captured
• Ease of setup

XY/Coincident Pair

The XY or coincident pair approach wins points for its guaranteed mono compatibility. Because the two capsules are so close together (“coincident”), sound waves from every drum and cymbal impinge upon the two mics’ diaphragms nearly simultaneously, avoiding any risk of comb-filtering due to partial cancellation of out-of-phase waves when the two OH tracks are heard in mono.

A consequence of coincident positioning is that the resulting stereo field is narrow, even when the two OH tracks are panned hard L/R. This is a good choice for arrangements in which the drums play a supporting role, or when mono compatibility is critical.

Overhead microphone height is an important consideration in this and every technique. If the mics are very high, the capsules will point straight over the sides of the of the kit, essentially putting the entire instrument off-axis. This will result in an overly roomy sound.

Lowering the microphones, or using an angle less than 90o can result in a more direct sound, although the kick and snare will always be off-axis.

Regardless of height, I recommend mounting the XY array directly above the snare drum, to ensure that the snare is centered in the stereo image.

Mid-Side

The M-S technique, like XY, ensures mono compatibility. And like XY, it produces a relatively narrow stereo spread.

A primary benefit is that the perceived size of the space can be changed at mix time, by varying the amount of “side” channel in the mix. This is often described as adjusting the “stereo width,” but to my ear the drum kit doesn’t get any wider. The high and low toms don’t get farther apart. The room gets bigger, but the drums sound less direct.

The challenge of M-S is that one of the two microphones is not pointed at the drum kit. The figure-of-8 mic is positioned so the drums are in the mic’s null point; the microphone hears only reflected sound. If you are recording drums in a small or untreated room, chances are this reflected sound is not what you want on your record.

But if the room does sound good, M-S is a great way to combine a dry, direct sound — the Mid mic — with as much room ambience as suits the rest of the production.

Recorderman

The Recorderman technique is probably the newest and least-known technique here, although it is conceptually similar to the overhead configuration of Glyn Johns’ more-famous approach.

It requires two Cardioid microphones. One is suspended 32” above the center of the snare drum, pointing straight down. The other is positioned near the drummer’s right shoulder, pointing directly at the snare drum from 32″ away.

This technique requires that the kick drum is also equidistant from both microphones. This can be checked by taping the two ends of a length of string to the center of the snare and kick drums, respectively. Pinch the string together at the point where it touches the mic above the snare, so that both legs of the string are taut. Move that point of the string in an arc toward the drummer’s right shoulder to find the perfect location of the second microphone — at a point where it, too, is 32” from the center of the snare, and equally distant from the kick as is the first microphone.

The two tracks are panned L and R, although not necessarily 100%. Extreme panning of Recorderman overhead tracks can leave a hole in the middle of the stereo field.

Mono compatibility is not guaranteed, except for the kick and snare.

Because the microphones are relatively low, they will hear primarily the drums themselves. Cymbals will be understated, as will the sound of the room.

This is therefore a great way to combat some of the problems that plague live drum recording in home or project studios:

• Small, untreated rooms that don’t sound great
• Untrained drummers who bash their cymbals

Even in large, purpose-built studios, the Recorderman technique is a useful way to capture dry overhead tracks that can be supplemented with more-distant ambient microphones, should the arrangement call for a roomier sound.

ORTF

With a stereo bar, ORTF becomes very easy to use. Once the two microphones are locked into position — with capsules 17cm apart, at 110o– the single stand can easily be raised, lowered, or angled to tune the array to best suit the size of the kit, the sound of the room, and the desired amount of ambience in the recorded track.

Due to the wide spread of the microphones, it is likely that most of the drum kit will be between them, off-axis. This approach, like mid-side, is less likely to succeed in a small or untreated space, because the microphones will mostly hear reflected sounds. Moving the array closer to the drum kit, whether from behind or over the top, will result in a drier sound.

The ORTF stereo image is wider than XY, MS, or Recorderman, but not unbelievably so. Perhaps because the microphone position simulates human ear position, the resulting stereo field seems very natural and realistic, and generally collapses to mono without significant problems.

AB/Spaced Pair

The AB or Spaced Pair approach is among the simplest stereo techniques to understand, but it presents the most problems in practice.

Because the microphones are far apart, AB arrays are susceptible to comb filtering. The risk can be mitigated somewhat by keeping the two microphone capsules equidistant from the center of the snare drum — but even then, the mic placement should be auditioned (in mono) to reveal possible problems with the kick, toms, or cymbals.

Aside from phase-coherency challenges, AB is a powerful technique, with a large palette of sonic colors. By lowering the array, or angling the microphones in toward the center of the kit, room sound can be minimized. Conversely, there are numerous ways to use an AB pair to capture a roomier, indirect sound: by raising the microphones, moving them further out toward the sides of the kit, angling them to point straight down, or changing from Cardioid to a wider polar pattern.

AB arrays can produce a wide stereo image, simply because drums or cymbals very near one of the two microphones will be perceived to come from only that side of the stereo field. This can result in an unrealistically large-sounding drum kit, if the overhead tracks are panned 100% L/R.

Head to head Comparison

Here’s how the techniques compare:

Cheat Sheet

• To minimize room sound, lower the OH microphones and point them toward the center of the kit.
• To maximize room sound, raise the OH microphones, angle them away from the drums, or use wider polar patterns.
• To minimize cymbal sound, try Recorderman.
• To ensure mono compatibility, use XY or MS.
• For the widest possible stereo spread, use AB.
• Avoid phase coherency problems with kick and snare by keeping them centered between the OH mics.
• Dry overhead tracks can be optionally supplemented with room mics.
• A pair of cardioid mics provides several distinct, viable OH sounds.
• Multipattern LDCs provide even more options.

About Matt McGlynn

Matt McGlynn is the founder of RecordingHacks.com. The site contains a searchable archive of specifications and insider information for over 1000 microphones, both contemporary and vintage, as well as in-depth reviews, a microphone sale-price finder, and a frequency-graph overlay comparison tool.

What Is It?

Roswellite ™ is the trademarked name of a nano-enabled ribbon material that is used in Shure KSM313/NE and KSM353/ED ribbon microphones.

Roswellite™ is also known as “acoustic nanofilm.” It’s an extremely strong, low mass, superelastic, paramagnetic composite with high inherent conductivity and shape memory properties. Roswellite™ replaces the “foils” typically used in ribbon microphones.

Roswellite ™ can withstand windblast, plosives, phantom power applications, and high sound pressure levels, even at low frequencies.

Why is it called Roswellite™?

Apparently, the development team considered the new ribbon material “out of this world” and gave it a tongue-in-cheek moniker to match.

Remember Roswell? You probably associate it with the alleged recovery of alien debris from an object that crashed near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947.

According to the United States military, debris was recovered from an experimental high-altitude surveillance balloon. But steadfast UFO proponents believe that a crashed alien craft and bodies were recovered, and that the military engaged in a cover-up. The incident has turned into an enormous pop culture phenomenon.

By the way, Shure Incorporated has no official (or even unofficial) position on the controversy.

What are its advantages?

It is stronger and more responsive than the “foils” that have been traditionally used in ribbon microphones. For this reason, it’s essentially a permanent ribbon in the same way a capsule or element in any condenser or dynamic microphone is.

Roswellite™ overcomes the strength, fragility or application limitations associated with traditional “foil” ribbon microphones. And it has other advantages in processing: The shape memory feature of the material, and its extreme durability and elasticity, and the manner in which it is manufactured afford far greater piece-to-piece consistency.

What is “shape memory”?

Shape memory is the ability of a material to return to a predetermined shape after distortion. It offers characteristics that favor a specific or multiplicity of shapes and states.

What does it sound like?

There are some slight differences that tend to be subjective. At moderate volume levels, a “foil” ribbon will sound similar to a Roswellite ™ ribbon. At extreme SPLs, the Roswellite ™ ribbon is able to maintain its integrity, so the dynamic range is significantly improved. It’s one reason why a Roswellite™ ribbon placed in or near a kick drum has such a clean, solid sound.

What is the maximum SPL that it can handle?

There is evidence that the material behaves linearly up to very high levels – probably well past 146 dB at any frequency.

Do any competitive ribbon microphones use Roswellite™ ribbon material?

No. The technology was developed and patented by Soundwave Research Laboratories. Shure Incorporated acquired the patent-pending technology and manufacturing processes in 2009.

Here’s a rudimentary primer for miking the rhythm section: guitars, bass, piano, and drums.

This quick overview should help minimize the deer-in-the-headlights feeling you may experience when faced with a daunting live-sound situation – like when you put up an open mic on a stage peppered with monitors, only to elicit the screeching howl of the dreaded feedback monster.

Start with the Right Mics

The best way to figure out where to place a mic is to listen to the source – in this case, the instrument or amplifier. Try using only one ear to simulate the mono pickup of a mic, and listen up close and also from a few feet away. How does the instrument radiate sound? Put the mic where the instrument sounds best to your ear. Sometimes two mics are necessary to capture the full range of a particular instrument.

You’ll always need to use unidirectional microphones in live situations, for isolation of sound sources and to avoid feedback problems with the monitors.

If you have problems with the monitors, mics with a tighter pickup pattern (hypercardioid or supercardioid) are best. For area miking (that is, drum overheads), you can use a transducer with a wider pickup pattern. In most circumstances, you will want to put the mic as close to the instrument as possible without interfering with the player’s range of motion. This will ensure a more focused sound with less ambient reverberation and bleed from the other instruments onstage.

The Match Game

Mics have different frequency response characteristics that make them more or less appropriate for specific applications. Analyze the quality of an instrument’s sound to decide which mic best suits the job.

If the instrument is soft, a tight-pattern condenser might be just the thing for getting a hotter output.

If the instrument is loud, choose a mic that can handle high SPLs.

Is it bright? Try a mic that will impart a little warmth.

Does it have lots of midrange? Perhaps a Shure SM57 would be a good match.

Does it sound bassy? Try a large-diaphragm dynamic to capture the lows fully.

Guitars

Electric guitars

The electric guitar is perhaps the simplest instrument to mic, given that an instrument mic aimed at the amp’s speaker always does the job well.

There are two primary schools of thought for miking a guitar cabinet. Either point the microphone straight into the cabinet and directly at the speaker’s voice coil (the advantage being consistency of sound), or put the mic on the edge of the speaker and angle it into the voice coil (for less spiky mids). In both cases, you should place the mic right up against the grille.

Consider this type: Unidirectional dynamic microphone

Shure mic: PG57, SM57

Acoustic guitars

Any condenser microphone works well for miking an acoustic guitar, as long as the stage sound isn’t too cluttered or loud. If the volume is cranked up and the guitar needs to go through the monitors, you may prefer a dynamic mic with good high-end response to get sufficient gain before feedback.

If the guitarist has a pickup, try taking it direct. If the sound is too dry and the guitarist is using a lot of effects or EQ at the amp, you may need to mic the amp, using the same approach as for miking an electric guitar amp, and combine that sound with the direct signal. You could also mic the guitar itself and blend that with the direct signal for a fuller sound.

Consider this type: Condenser or unidirectional dynamic microphone
Shure mic: PG81, SM57, KSM32

Electric or Acoustic Bass

Electric Bass

Although it’s standard practice to send the bass direct through the P.A., in some circumstances an engineer will also mic the bass cabinet. The mic you choose should capture lots of low end. Large-diaphragm dynamics are good choices.

If the bass cabinet has a mix of 10-inch and 15-inch speakers, you have a couple of options. For more low-end oomph, put a mic on the 15-inch speaker. If you’re a funky slap-and-pop bass player, try putting a mic on one of the 10-inchers or on the horn for more high-end definition and better transient response. Keep in mind that the direct injection (DI) box will give you plenty of low-end fundamentals and that extra twang, so a little lower midrange support from a miked cabinet can fill out the sound.

Consider this type: Unidirectional dynamic microphone
Shure mic: PG52, SM57, Beta 52®A

Acoustic upright bass

It is desirable to take a direct signal from an acoustic bass pickup, though most double-bass players (especially jazz cats) wrinkle their noses at DIs because they never sound the way players like them to sound. In such a case, you should also mic the bass. It’s prudent to retain the option to use the direct sound, however, because in a loud situation where you may not get enough gain or definition from the mic, you can still boost the level to give the bass presence in the mix.

The output of an acoustic bass is relatively low, so you have to put the mic in as close as possible. Unidirectional mics are prone to proximity effect (a boost in the low frequencies) when placed very close to a sound source, so you may need to roll off some of the lows. You can fasten low-profile microphones to the tailpiece, to an f hole, or to the ridge that’s just above the waist of the instrument. Don’t clip them on the bridge – that can inhibit vibrations.

Consider this type: Condenser microphones – cardioid instrument and gooseneck types
Shure mic: KSM32, KSM44, KSM137, KSM141, Beta 98H/C

Keyboards

Electronic Keyboards

Most engineers prefer to get a direct feed on electronic keyboards. If the keyboardist has an amp and prefers that sound, you can mic the cabinet (as you would a guitar amp with a Shure SM57) and combine that sound with the direct signal.

Going direct or using a direct box is generally better, because you tend to get a cleaner sound. In the case of a Fender Rhodes suitcase piano, try going direct and miking the speakers on the piano to represent the Fender Rhodes sound fully.

Consider this type: Dynamic instrument microphone
Shure mic: SM57

Grand Piano

For miking grand pianos, engineers often favor condenser mics. Ideally, you should use a pair of mics to capture the low and high strings Place one mic several inches over the bass strings and the other over the high strings, and angle them apart for greater separation. The closer you get to the hammers, the more attack you’ll get; the farther away from the hammers, the mellower the tone will be.

If the environment is loud, try securing the mics inside the piano and closing the lid for greater isolation. You could also clamp the mics to the soundboard (using a piece of foam to protect the wood) with LP Claws or similar mic clamps. A single SM58 pointing into one of the soundboard holes will also do the trick if you have only one input and the piano is going through the monitors.

Consider this type: Condenser instrument microphone
Shure mic: PG81, SM81, KSM44

Upright Piano

Open the top and place a split pair of microphones inside, aiming slightly toward the hammers to capture both the low and the high keys. Condensers are preferable, but SM57s work quite well, too. You could also mic the piano from the back, taking time to find the sweet spot. Remember to listen – and to think from the mic’s perspective. Another option is to take the front off by the player’s feet and to mic the strings from that angle (if the player isn’t stomping the pedals or the floor too vigorously, that is!).

Consider this type: Condenser instrument microphone, dynamic instrument microphone
Shure mic: PG81 , SM57, KSM44

Drums

Drum sets vary in size, number of components, tonal quality, and head configurations. But most standard kits have a snare drum, a bass drum, a floor tom, one or more rack toms, a hi-hat, a ride cymbal, and a crash or two.

Snare Drums

A fat but crisp sound is desirable for snare drum, and a Shure SM57 is the workhorse for capturing this essence. A Beta 58A® can also sound very good on snare.

Place the mic at about 11 o’clock from the player’s perspective, between the hi-hat and the rack tom, about two inches from the head and angled toward it.

For more lows, angle the capsule closer in toward the head; for a crisper attack, move the mic slightly farther from the head and point it more toward the center of the drum.

If you want to get some extra sizzle from the snare wires for a funky sound, put an additional mic on the bottom head, pointing up at the wires. Use a dynamic that has a lot of high end and flip the phase of the mic on the bottom head to avoid phase cancellation.

Consider this type: Dynamic microphone
Shure mic: PG57, SM57, Beta 58A®

Kick Drums

A punchy kick-drum sound with a lot of low-end oomph makes the rest of the band really pump. Quite a few mics are designed specifically for kick-drum miking, including the Shure Beta 52®A.

Usually a kick drum will have a hole in the front head. Put the mic just inside the drum to start. For more attack, move the mic closer inside and aim it at the beater. For a fuller, rounder sound with less attack, draw the mic back farther and angle it slightly away from the beater. If there is no hole in the front head, start with the mic about two to four inches in from the rim and point it at the head, adjusting the angle to get the desired sound. Listen up close to the drum with one ear as someone plays, find the spot where it sounds the way you like, and put the mic there. Refrain from placing the mic at the very center of the drum – that’s a dead spot.

Consider this type: Kick drum microphone – dynamic or condenser
Shure mic: PG52, Beta 52®A, Beta 91

Toms

Miking toms can pose a challenge if a drummer has a lot of cymbal stands. Fortunately, you have the option of clip-on tom mics well as mic- that come in handy for fastening tom mics in place and neatly out of the way. Place the mic near the rim of the drum, pointing down at the head, and adjust the angle and distance for more low end or more attack. If you want greater separation, angle the mics apart.

Consider this type: Dynamic or condenser microphone
Shure mic: PG56, SM57, Beta 98AD/C

Hi-Hat and Cymbals

The use of overhead mics is standard for capturing the cymbals and the overall kit sound, and a split pair will pick up both sides of the kit. Condenser mics are ideal for overheads because of their excellent high end and natural transient response.

If you have only one overhead, place the mic centrally over the kit, and move it around to compensate for the playing style and the kit’s characteristics (that is, quiet ride cymbal, loud snare, and so on). Just keep the overheads out of the monitors to avoid feedback. If the hi-hat needs more bite, place a small-diaphragm condenser mic a few inches above the hi-hats, angled at the area just below the cup.

Consider this type: Condenser microphone
Shure mic: PG81, SM81

Finally…

Miking stage instruments is a subjective art, and there are nearly as many opinions as there are engineers. By now, though, you’ve picked up enough pointers to start miking the most ubiquitous instruments in standard venues.

If you have some time and the luxury of access to a variety of live-sound mics, the next step is to experiment a little with selection and placement before you have a show.

Keep in mind the constants – namely, the proper etiquette for avoiding feedback, and close miking with unidirectional mics for maximum pickup and isolation. Use this article as a guide, but remember: ultimately you should rely on your ears to determine the best mic placement for optimum sound.

About Karen Stackpole

Karen Stackpole got started in live sound reinforcement in 1988 and expanded into studio work in 1991. In 1997 she launched Stray Dog Recording Services, a mobile recording business, in addition to working on projects as a freelance live sound and studio engineer and drum tech.

Karen is an active member of Syn-Aud-Con and the Audio Engineering Society and is also a performing and recording drummer/percussionist. As a freelance writer she regularly contributes to Electronic Musician and DRUM! Magazines. In 1999 she joined the Sound Arts faculty at Expression College for Digital Arts and directs the Studio Maintenance course.

Visit Karen and Stray Dog Recording Services on MySpace .

SN thanks Karen and Electronic Musician magazine for allowing us to adapt the content that appears in this article.

Learn which microphone characteristics influence the way microphones sound, and how you can use these characteristics to help choose the right microphones for a variety of applications.

But what about ceramic microphones, crystal microphones and ribbon microphones? They all co-existed in the 1930s and 1940s, and some types are, in one application or another, being used today.

This month, we are talking ribbon microphones, honoring the debut of Shure KSM313 and KSM353 models. In addition to a little old-fashioned research, we prevailed upon Chad Wiggins, Product Manager for Wired Microphones, to help us understand the reasons behind the re-emergence of these premium mics in the Shure line-up.

Back in the Day

In the early 1920s, German physicist Walter Schottky and inventor Erwin Gerlach co-invented the technology that made the ribbon microphone possible. Considered by many the warmest sounding microphone, ribbon mics were adopted by the broadcast and recording industries.

The first commercially produced ribbon microphones appeared in the early 1930s. Back then, RCA was the market leader with a pipeline into the broadcast market that was fortified by a substantial advertising budget. Western Electric was the only other manufacturer to compete successfully with RCA, but their one ribbon microphone targeted just the motion picture industry.

Shure entered the ribbon microphone field with the introduction of the Shure Model 300 Microphone in 1952 and in 1954, the 333 Microphone. It was targeted at radio, television, recording, live performance and house of worship applications.

Even so, ribbon microphones often are associated with “The Golden Age of Radio”. And when you think about it, it makes a lot of sense. Performers on the live radio programs of the 30s and 40s could stand on either side of a bi-directional ribbon mic and be heard equally well.

The popularity of other types of dynamic microphones signaled a decline in market demand for ribbon mics generally, and Shure ceased production in the 1980s. Other, smaller companies continued to produce ribbon mics. In 2009, Shure acquired Crowley and Tripp’s El Diablo and Naked Eye ribbon mics and re-entered the field.

What is it?

The ribbon microphone is also known as the velocity microphone. A ribbon microphone is actually a type of dynamic microphone. It uses a thin conductive “ribbon” placed between the poles of a magnet to generate voltages by electromagnetic induction. A ribbon mic is usually bi-directional; it picks up sound from both sides of the microphone.

The Myth of “Old Technology”

It’s true that ribbon microphone technology, which also produced ribbon loudspeaker technology, was developed almost 90 years ago, but the same is true of traditional dynamic and condenser microphones. It’s a contemporary of those technologies.

Ribbon mics are dynamic microphones because they feature moving conductors. A ribbon microphone operates under the same principle as the dynamic mics. There’s a magnetic gap and a conductive material that’s moving within that gap.

In commercial terms, the relative success of the dynamic and condenser mics we know today is a result of the fragility of ribbon mics. They just weren’t as durable.

Common Applications

Ribbon mics are found most often in the controlled environments of recording studios. They’re well suited for speech, guitar amps, brass, woodwinds and secondarily, vocals and drum overheads. These are the traditional applications for ribbon mics, but in a related article in this issue, you’ll find them on stage as well.

A ribbon mic works well for any sound source that has a harsh frequency—a snarl, bleat or something in the “nasally” range. It has a very mellowing quality on sound sources that tend to sound harsh.

The Evil Twins: Breaking and Bending

How fragile were the ribbon mics of days past? According to Shure’s Chad Wiggins, very. Here were two common pitfalls.

Breaking: Traditional ribbon microphones will break if presented with an air blast or a dramatic, immediate change in air pressure. The tension has to be exactly right for it to maintain the right output level and frequency response.

For instance, a traditional ribbon mic would never be placed inside a kick drum. The combination of an enclosed space and low frequency is lethal to most ribbon mics. (Because the new Shure ribbon mics use a different ribbon material, they are not as susceptible to this calamity.)

Bending: The ribbon material can stretch over years of use. Non-use (for instance, storing the microphone on its side allowing the ribbon to sag) or prolonged use can cause this to happen. The result will be a different frequency response and a different output level. (And again, the Roswellite™ ribbons in the new Shure mics have shape-memory, which mitigates this potential problem).

Technology Changes the Game

When new nanomaterial ribbon elements were introduced in 2007, ribbon microphones began to shed their fragile image. Their popularity increased, particularly in recording applications, when engineers were able to take advantage of what Chad Wiggins calls their “super-duper ultra-unique sound quality.”

Ribbon microphones also are used to counteract the problems associated with digitally recorded music. Digital is very linear, which tends to sound sterile. Artists and engineers often look to transducer types to impart some warmth into their digital recordings.

Negatives and Positives

* According to Wiggins, “the sound quality is natural and very, very pleasing. It’s a characteristic that just can’t be duplicated with any other type of microphone.”

** Advances in ribbon material havemade some microphones (including KSM313 and KSM 353) more durable, but they’re still ribbon microphones. They should be treated with the kind of care afforded a $1300 mic.

*** Traditional ribbon mics have a relatively low output level and require a very quiet mic pre-amp that could offer enough clean gain to bring the level up.

What’s New and Different

The Shure KSM313 and KSM353 microphones use Roswellite ™ ribbon material, so neither is as fragile as traditional ribbon mics. Additionally, they’ve been engineered to match the output levels of the Shure workhorse SM57 and SM58 models.

The KSM313 has a true “Dual-Voice” ribbon assembly. The frequency response that comes from the front of the microphone is different than the frequency response that comes from the back of the microphone. It has a very traditional ribbon mic sound signature, which means some of the highs are rolled off. That’s the effect that tames the squeal of the bow of a violin, the honk of a tenor sax, the blare of a trombone. But when the microphone is turned 180o, it has a little bit of that rising frequency response.

The KSM353 has a uniform, symmetrical frequency response. The front and back of the microphone are exactly the same. That’s important because the KSM353 is more pure — particularly useful for stereo miking applications.

It has a rising frequency response – a high frequency sensitivity beyond what is normal for a ribbon microphone. That gives it a degree of clarity that’s similar to a condenser microphone (you get that last octave) while still maintaining that round, velvety warm tone that’s so characteristic of ribbon mics.

What’s so great about ribbon microphones? They make the warmest, mellowest, roundest, most pleasing sound you can imagine.

Listen for yourself at Shure’s Mic Listening Lab.

Resource Room

There is a dearth of information on ribbon microphones, both online and in the reference books we typically recommend. Over time, the re-emergence of these microphones is likely to remedy that problem.

While the few articles found online tend to be historical or scientific, here are two you may find helpful in gaining a broader perspective on the subject:

Classic Ribbon Mics
Ribbon Microphone Wiki

Our thanks to Chad Wiggins, Shure Product Manager for his helpful tutelage. Also to Mike Dorrough, radio mic historian, and NAB Lifetime Achievement Recipient (for his advances in audio processor technology) for his assistance.