I love doing artist interviews.  It’s not just sitting down and picking the brains of our endorsers that I find engaging.  In a way, it’s a bit like doing live sound.  We Artist Relations guys often function as interviewer, camera operator, and audio engineer when we go out and shoot interviews.  There is a rush in getting everything set up quickly and making sure it all looks and sounds decent for those ten to fifteen minutes you’re hosting artists. It has been a learning process for me – much of what I’ve come to know has been through trial and error.  Like live sound we have our good and bad days.  Fortunately we’ve gotten some new production tools that have made things easy.

Shure has added quite a few broadcast production tools in the last two years and it’s been fun for me to get to know them in this capacity.  They’ve sure made my job easier.   Here’s a rundown on the gear we take to the gigs.

Mics:

VP89M medium shotgun

RPM89S short shotgun cartridge

WL51B or MX150 lavalier mic

A dynamic mic – SM57, SM58, or Beta57A

My first go-to for a mic is the VP89M.  I just love it.  I’ll engage the low-frequency roll-off because we’re working with human voices.  The mic sits in the A89M-PG pistol grip mount, made by Rycote.  In the event we find ourselves in a small space where I’m very near multiple subjects I will swap out the medium shotgun tube for the short one.  This gives a wider pickup pattern.  Lavalier mics come in handy for very noisy environments.  Some on our team prefer them over the shotgun mic.  I’ll use them if I have to, but I’ve had interviews where some unpredictable element has caused me headaches.  People move lapels, scratch necks, shake their heads vigorously, wear noisy jewelry…trying to plan for those unknowns takes time I’d rather spend getting to know the interviewee, conversing, finding a good starting point for the interview.   Of course, the most dead-simple thing to do is put the UR3 plug-on transmitter right in to the back of a mic, and for that having a dynamic mic is handy.  However, it is really only for single subject interviews and, like the lavalier, I’m dependent on the subject’s behavior.

Wireless:

UR3 plug-on transmitter

UR5 portable diversity receiver

UR1 or UR1M bodypack transmitter

Most of the time I’m using the UR3 and the UR5 together.  The UR3 fits right at the bottom of the A89M-PG pistol grip holding the VP89M shotgun mic.  The UR5 has a shoe mount and fits our HD DV video camera and our photographer’s DSLR for when he’s shooting video.  The best practice is to turn on the UR3 with the RF off.   We do an on-site scan with the UR5 receiver to find an open frequency, then sync the transmitter and turn the transmitter’s RF on.  This is to avoid stepping on anything that the show might be using at the moment.  In the event we prefer to use lavalier mics, we’ll have a bodypack transmitter in the kit.

Monitoring:

SE earphones (interviewer’s preference)

SRH240A or SRH440

If I’m flying solo I’ll just do my monitoring from the camera with my SE425-CL earphones.  I use those most of the time.  We also have a set of SE315-K earphones in the kit in the event that we left our personal earphones at home.  Earphones are not for everybody, so if we’re going to have Paul Natkin shoot the interviews on his DSLR we know to bring some headphones.  Those are usually SRH240A or SRH440.  Those take up much more space in an audio kit than earphones though.

The goal is to be set up and ready to go inside of five minutes if need-be.  The options available in our audio kit have been honed over time, though I expect that new situations will cause further changes over time.  Right now the main concerns are finding some place with decent lighting, enough space to get a tripod set up, and an area where the artist will be comfortable.  That’s very important.  If you’re going to go for great lighting but there is no place to sit or elbow room to move it’s likely that information sought will be in shorter supply.  I try to remain empathetic and listen for a natural point to start and end the interview.  Having the tools to execute the technical side of the interview without too much effort allow for the human side to show itself.  Hopefully that’s reflected in the finished interview.

Richard

Bill Gibson has spent the last 30 years writing, recording, producing and teaching music. He is well known for his production, performance and teaching.

Bill is Developmental Editor for Hal Leonard Performing Arts Publishing Group, President of Northwest Recording, serves on the National Advisory Board for the P&E Wing of the Recording Academy, is an instructor for Berklee College of Music and the Art Institute of Seattle. He has authored over 30 books, including his most recent book with Quincy Jones (Q on Producing) and his upcoming work with the legendary Bruce Swedien (The Bruce Swedien Recording Method).

1. Does the directional characteristic make a difference in the sound of the mic?

Absolutely!

Omnidirectional Mics hear equally from all directions, not rejecting sound from anywhere in the 360-degree sphere around the capsule. They have an open and natural sound and they’re used frequently in the studio when the engineer wants to include the sound of the room in the recording.

The danger in using an omnidirectional mic is that any room sound (ambience) that is recorded is there to stay. For most people it’s safer to record with a more directional microphone (cardioid or hypercardioid) and add any ambient sound artificially during mixdown. However, in a controlled and well-tuned acoustical environment, an omnidirectional mic is frequently the way to go because the close-miked vocal sound it captures is more open and less cluttered in the low and low-mid bands than a cardioid mic used in the same way. A singer who moves in very close to the omnidirectional mic sounds very intimate while retaining a more natural and clear tone.

Cardioid Mics directional characteristic prefer the front of the microphone (on-axis) and they reject sounds coming from behind the mic (off-axis). Microphones with cardioid polar patterns, such as the Beta 58 or SM58®, are typically better suited to close- than distant-miking applications. These mics exhibit frequency response characteristics that roll off in the low band to compensate for their susceptibility to the proximity effect—the boomy, bass-heavy sound we hear when a voice or instrument is extremely close to the mic (within less than a couple inches or so). Because they prefer the on-axis sounds, they help reduce the relative levels of room ambience and other sounds that are off-axis.

Bidirectional Mics are most sensitive to sounds in the front and back of the mic but they exhibit almost complete reject of sounds that come from the sides. Some large-diaphragm condenser mics, such as the KSM44, can be set to bidirectional configuration and ribbon mics, such as the KSM353 and KSM313, are naturally bidirectional. These mics are well suited to miking solo instruments or voice, but they also provide an efficient and convenient way to close-mike two vocalists—or other instruments—at the same time. Bidirectional mics exhibit the most extreme proximity effect, in comparison with cardioid and omnidirectional mics. Therefore, the close-miked sound they provide is sometimes too boomy and full to be useful. From a more distant perspective, however, bidirectional mics provide a very nice, full tone, which includes a little more acoustical ambience than a similar cardioid mic.

In a live sound reinforcement application, omnidirectional mics are the most prone to feedback. They don’t reject sound from any directional and are inappropriate for most applications. Also, keep in mind that floor and stand monitor positions are usually different depending on the mic choice. When using a cardioid pattern, there is usually less feedback with the monitor directly in front of the vocalist. When using a hypercardioid pattern, the monitor should be placed slightly to one side or the other in front of the vocalist for minimal feedback. If you look at the polar response graph for the specific mic, you’ll notice exactly where the mic is least sensitive—that’s the right spot for the monitor.

A mic like the KSM9 is a great choice for vocals in a live setting. It sounds like a studio condenser mic and it offers pattern selection between cardioid and hypercardioid.  The flexibility provided by selectable patterns makes a mic that would already be exceptional, even better.

Keep in mind that every singer is different. If you have a choice of mics and directional characteristics, simply select the pattern that sounds best for the vocalist or choose the pattern that provides the best feedback rejection. In the studio, a mic like the KSM44 is an excellent choice because the selectable pickup patterns let the engineer choose the texture, tone, and feel of the vocal track by simply changing between any of these directional characteristics.

2. Is handling noise really an issue? Aren’t all mics about the same?

Yes. Handling noise is an important issue, especially in a live setting.

Many studio mics aren’t designed to be handheld. They’re placed in specially designed shock mounts that protect them from vibrations, bumps, and thumps. However, mics that are used in a live handheld environment must contain ample internal shock mounts and vibration control.

If you line up ten different mics on stands, you’re likely to notice dramatic differences in the sound caused by simply removing each mic from its clip. Some mics even rumble in normal handheld use. They don’t sound good although they don’t sound terrible, but the amount of handling noise they produce makes them completely unusable. Just shifting the mic in your hand causes a dramatic rumble—the sound of putting them in and out of the clip is unacceptable.

Mics that exhibit excessive handling noise also pick up excess amounts of noise from anything that moves on, or vibrates, the stage, such as footsteps, the kick drum, the bass cabinet, dancing, and so on. One of the reasons for the popularity of the SM and Beta series mics from Shure is excellent design of their internal shock mounting systems and their minimal handling noise.

3. How close should the lead vocalist be to the mic?

This question is usually borne out of the frustration that the sound operator feels when working with a singer who has bad mic technique.

It’s common for an inexperienced sound operator to tell the singers to just stay close to the mic (within an inch or less). That’s definitely not the best approach, but it puts control in the hands of the sound operator.

Vocalists must learn to move closer to the mic when they are quiet and farther away when they’re loud—the actual distances depend on exactly how quiet and how loud. In addition, speaking too close to the mic can decrease intelligibility and clarity. The overall volume of the house mix, the size of the audience, and the acoustics in the room are also considerations in mic technique.

Work with each singer to determine the mic technique that works the best for him or her. Determine three ranges of mic distances for three separate purposes:

The “I’m singing background” distance—usually 1.5 to 3 inches (2 fingers to 4 fingers).

The “I’m singing a quiet, intimate lyric” distance—usually 1 inch or less (1 finger or less).

The “I’m really belting it out and I don’t want to hurt someone’s hearing” distance—usually 6 inches to arm’s length, depending on the singer, the song, the instrumentation in the band, and the size of the room.

4. Our lead singer gets lost in the mix and yet there are times when she’s way too loud. How can I get a smooth and even vocal sound, like the sound I hear on professionally produced recordings?

Considering that your singer has good mic technique and you’re riding the vocal levels to help with global differences between levels for speaking and belting, the sound you’re looking for is probably a result of compression. A compressor is an automatic volume control that responds to the strength of the incoming signal. The sound operator sets a threshold level. When the signal strength exceeds that threshold, a built-in amplifying circuit—typically a VCA (voltage controlled amplifier)—turns the signal down.

A compressor is essentially an automatic sound operator. Like you, it turns the signal down when it’s too loud and then back up to where it started when it’s not too loud. The attack time, release time, and ratio controls let you determine whether the compressor acts like a Masserati or the giant in Jack and the Beanstalk.

Compressors only turn the signal down—they don’t boost levels. However, the effect of compression is to enable the nuance in the vocals to be heard better. Because the loud parts are turned down, the entire channel can be turned up. The gain reduction meter indicates the amount of gain reduction. If it shows that the channel is being turned down by 6 dB at the loudest parts of the performance, then the entire channel can be boosted at the channel fader or at the “Makeup Gain/Output” control on the compressor. This results in the loud passages being the same volume as they would have been but the softer passages, vocal nuance, and emotional inflections have been turned up by 6 dB—they are, therefore, more audible to the audience.

Setting up a compressor is really pretty simple:

1. Set the ratio control to determine how extreme the action is—typically between 4:1 and 7:1 for vocals. If the ratio is x:1, for every x dB that exceeds the threshold, the VCA will only let 1 dB through.
2. Set the attack time—typically between 5 and 10 milliseconds.
3. Set the release time—typically about 1/2 second.
4. Adjust the threshold so that there are times when there is no gain reduction and times when there are about 6 dB of gain reduction.
5. Boost the Makeup Gain/Output control to makeup for the gain reduction.

Often, recordings are extremely compressed. In a live setting, be aware that if the compressor is reducing the gain substantially during a performance, once the performance is over, the VCA will let the signal return to its original level—this can easily cause massive feedback. The amount of compression you use in a live performance is dependent of the amount of gain before feedback in your system. In a live application, it’s usually best to compress by 6 dB or less.

5. Should I always buy a mic with a flat frequency response curve?

No. Part of the reason for differences in response curves is the intended application. If you use a mic with a flat frequency response on a live, close-miked vocalist, the sound will be thick and muddy because of the proximity effect. If you use a mic that’s designed for close-miking, for instance, a distant mic on an acoustic ensemble, the sound will be far too thin and weak.

The SM58® or Beta 58 have frequency response curves that roll off in the low end with a presence peak in the high end. This fact doesn’t make it a lower quality mic than a mic like the KSM32 or KSM141 that exhibits a flat frequency response—it just makes them better suited to close miking than distant miking.

When a handheld vocal mic is close to the singer’s lips—within a few inches—the proximity effect rounds out the lows so they are essentially flat. Low frequency response is determined by mic distance. The built-in presence peak helps provide a clear and understandable vocal range. Notice that these presence peaks are typically between 4 and 7 kHz—strategically positioned in the range of vocal sibilance and intelligibility.

Mics with a flat frequency response curve are best suited to distant-miking applications in which the mic is a foot or more from the source, and yet a full sound is desired. Many condenser mics exhibit a very flat frequency response; however, they often provide a low frequency roll-off switch to compensate for the proximity effect when used in a close-miking application.

6. What’s the difference between miking a vocalist in a live performance and miking a vocalist in the studio?

The difference is really much less than it used to be before the KSM9.

In a live setting, we use vocal microphones designed for close-miking. They have historically been moving-coil mics because of their dependability, ruggedness, and simplicity; however, moving-coil mics don’t capture the fine transient detail as accurately as condenser mics.

In the studio we have historically used large–diaphragm condenser mics for vocals. Since the acoustics are controlled in a studio and leakage isn’t a consideration, most studio vocals are recorded from a distance of 6 to 12 inches. Sometimes, the singer moves closer, but the mic might be set to an omnidirectional configuration so the sound isn’t too thick and muddy or the low-frequency roll-off might be applied to compensate.

The vocal sound is adjusted by moving the mic across a much greater distance range than in a live setting. In addition, many professional studios have excellent acoustics—the sound of the room blends very well with the vocal to provide a desirable character and personality.

The KSM9 utilizes a studio-quality condenser capsule that provides the type detail that’s expected in a studio sound. It is housed in a body that feels good in the hand and the capsule sits in a well-designed shock mount system—it sounds great and rejects handling noises and vibrations very efficiently.

New for 2012: Bill’s “The Ultimate Live Sound Operator’s Handbook: 2nd Edition,” a 428-page book, including a DVD full of excellent audio and video examples.

In addition, Bill recently released “Q on Producing,” the first of three books he’s writing with the legendary Quincy Jones.

Interview with Mark Jensen.

You’re an IT guy and a voice-over talent, in addition to being the force behind NewMediaGear.com and Studio1A Productions. Can you explain how these inter-relate?

I am fascinated with technology. This drive rages stronger now than ever before. From on-air radio guy to Senior Global IT Engineer and finally media entrepreneur, being at the forefront of technology has relentlessly guided my careers.

Analog, digital (HD), satellite and even streaming radio all have common bonds. Computer technology slowly, then rather quickly, swept its way into audio. Information Technology is embedded in almost every facet of our lives, technically and artistically – from electronic books, smartphones to broadcast and recording – technology rules.

In this issue, we’re talking about audio for online video, thinking specifically, about creating better web/YouTube videos than the kind that might be created using a mobile phone, webcam or camcorder’s built-in microphone. So, let’s start with – what’s wrong with using one of those built-in mics?

In the short term, these low-quality, integrated microphones seem fine. But, when we think long term, cutting corners with technology deals us a terrible blow. Think about being able to go back in time and actually hear the voices of people and experiences that can never be re-created– decades or even centuries old. Wouldn’t we want to capture those moments with as much sonic clarity as technology allows? True, it’s not practical to carry around a sound studio.

However, with kits like the Shure SM57/X2u and the USB port on your laptop, it’s becoming much more practical to capture professional audio on the go.

There are as many mic options, probably, as there are broad categories of online videos. What mic recommendations and tips do you have for specific applications?

First, remember that the most expensive microphone is rarely the best choice. In a world of picky sound engineers and thousands of choices, few would disagree that the affordable SM58® is the most popular, versatile microphone in the world.

Let’s say we want to capture the voice of a strong vocalist, singing lead. Right away, I think of condenser microphones. Most large diaphragm condenser mics are very sensitive, able to capture subtle nuances and wide dynamics. With that heightened audio acuity, and without a sound studio, you run the risk of recording your neighbor’s dog barking or the subtle sound of a door closing on the other side of the house.

How about recording narration for a video? Here, a good dynamic microphone works great because it’s a passive device and won’t generally be as sensitive to ambient sounds. Yet, a good dynamic microphone will brilliantly capture the mood of speech.

Social journalism intrigues me. Here, a reporter style, tough as nails (an SM57 with wind screen comes to mind) dynamic works great. They may have better lighting and cameras, but with some experience, an individual can match the audio quality of your local television station.

I grew up around radio broadcast microphones. If you have a dedicated room, and want that radio look to your video, try an SM7B on a boom. If you want a retro look, blow them away with the timeless Super 55.

If you’re recording several people, using a single microphone, I would huddle them around an SM58. This mic is known for being able to take on a completely different character by close or medium talking the mic. Have you ever watched a comedian on stage wrap their hands around the microphone head, achieving a bassy, or even muffled sound for dramatic effect? This is proximity effect and the SM58 made this stage technique famous.

What are the most common mistakes beginners make producing their first short videos?

Always watch the audio levels. When it’s live, and there is only one take, set your audio record levels low on the camera. Audio levels can be boosted later, but over-driven, distorted audio can make a great shoot unusable.

If levels vary wildly, check your video camera for an audio compressor or limiter. If you’re confident the levels won’t distort (record at or above 100% or 0db), then run without the compressor. Record a few dry runs to get an idea of just how much room there is from silence to the loudest sound or voice you are recording with your camera in the scene/environment.

Don’t use video camera (or webcam) built-in audio. Take the time to assess your project. Storyboard it and plan the flow, even if you scribble something at the last minute. Effective video requires planning and coordination.

A visible microphone in your video can actually lend credibility. Microphones are frequently used on television talk shows as props. If you can dedicate room to a studio and large table, go for the classic Shure SM7B on a boom. Save finicky lavaliers for shots when a visible microphone just won’t work.

As mentioned above, don’t rely on your video camera microphones. If you are constantly on the move with your camera, consider mounting a shotgun type microphone on it. This will give you maximum clarity right where you want it.

What limitations does the Internet (or YouTube-type platforms) have on audio production?

I am blown away with the inexpensive tools and the creativity found in today’s “Tube” type videos. Professional audio/video hardware and software has never been more affordable.

While the file size, and stream time, of Internet video has made incredible progress, there are still limitations. Too many times, I see Internet video shot in 1080p and high bit depths, just because it can be done. In reality, most Internet video will be transcoded (converted) to a much lower quality that still looks incredible. For me, 720p, at a reasonable bit depth is the sweet spot.

There are other video issues beyond the scope of this article, such as rolling shutters and resolution vs. bit depth and optics. Experiment and try to get the best quality shots without maxing your cameras video settings.

In audio, bigger and pricier will not always give you better results. Some of my most inexpensive microphones get the most use. The important part is that they are all professional. To me, a professional microphone means it has a balanced (XLR connector instead of the small consumer 3.5mm unbalanced). With a product like the Shure X2u, you can instantly plug in a pro microphone while the other end goes to your computers USB connector. That type of flexibility simply wasn’t available 10 years ago.

You’re also a podcast producer. What are the similarities (or the differences) between recording for podcasts and recording for video?

I like to punch the final audio levels a little harder when creating audio-only. Ideally, I would compress my audio more because people may be listening in noisy areas or in the car with the windows down.

Video can be a little more gentle and refined because the visual helps articulate your message. Also, your viewers are typically consuming your media in a quieter environment.

Try this experiment. Listen to a few minutes of random television shows. Listen only to the audio. Then, turn on a few random radio stations. Notice the difference in overall sound? Much of that difference is due to video stage production and the stations final processor. Sometimes television sound is captured live, but high budget film and television use a technique called automated dialogue replacement (or ADR). After a video shoot, the actors will lip sync their lines in a sound studio, achieving the highest quality audio experience and advanced mixdowns. I’m getting off track here, but the underlying concepts and foundations of audio are universal.

Don’t let all of this impede your message. In the end, that famous saying is still paramount: content is king. Use the best tools available, but never lose sight of your message and your audience.

Got a favorite Shure mic? What do you like about it?

I do! It’s a PG27. There is just something about the way that microphone articulates my voice. It’s ultra crisp and clean. It always gets the job done. Being a studio condenser, it is larger than most hand held microphones, but the sound is amazing for speech.

ABOUT MARK JENSEN

Mark lives and works in Orlando, Florida with his awesome wife Laura. He is a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, FCC licensed radio operator, national media producer and agency voiceover talent, while running his flagship syndication NewMediaGear.com.

You can reach Mark at: mark@newmediagear.com

A History

Whether you believe that Todd Rundgren, Stevie Wonder, or the Steve Miller Band was the first to pioneer the use of in-ear monitoring systems, one fact is indisputable: this represented a breakthrough in live sound.

With the earliest systems carrying a price tag — $65,000 by one report — placing them far outside the reach of anything but a globe-trotting touring act or a national sound company serving those artists, their adoption by houses of worship didn’t begin until the late 1990s when Shure and other pro audio manufacturers introduced affordably priced systems.

Fast-forward almost fifteen years and you’ll find personal monitors in wide acceptance, with a wide spectrum of features (full-rack form factor, diversity receivers, auto-scan, with stereo being the standard) at a fraction of the price of their vintage ancestors. There are personal monitors (bodypack receiver, transmitter, and earbuds, but in mono) on the market today for less than $400.

Let’s look at the benefits of personal monitor systems:

• When the entire band or praise team is on “ears,” there is no monitor feedback.
• The absence of clunky stage monitors makes for a cleaner stage.
• Performers can customize their own mixes and hear their own performances much more clearly.
• Stage volume is lower (no more turning up the stage monitors), helping to preserve the performers’ hearing.

Not Just for Vocalists

Personal monitoring offers a degree of control that just isn’t possible with traditional floor wedges: the power to pan, adjust volume, and, in some cases, to choose between multiple mixes on the fly. Wireless systems are more costly than wired systems, but have the added advantage of allowing performers to move freely around the stage.

Along with being able to hear better and control volume, the advantages of in-ear personal monitoring include the ability to individualize what each musician hears on stage. With personal monitors, each musician can have the mix that makes them most comfortable onstage, which makes for a better performance. Best of all, each player can hear his own mix, as loud as he wants, without blasting the other musicians onstage.

“The accuracy in monitoring helps vocalists improve pitch, drummers improve time, guitar players improve tone, etc. You can hear everything — the good, bad and the ugly — and that provides the best platform for improvement.” – Jeff Urke

Drummers with personal monitors tend to play quieter. When the loudest instrument onstage gets quieter, everything else can follow suit. Some churches take this a step further by using electronic drums that create little, if any, acoustic noise. Another option for drummers is the throne- mounted ButtKicker; it allows drummers to feel low frequencies without boosting sound pressure levels.

Bass, keyboard, and, electric guitar can also be taken directly into the mixer if the praise band is using personal monitors, eliminating the need for onstage amplifiers. The end result is a cleaner, more controlled congregation mix.

Many other uses are possible for personal monitors. Choir directors use them for cues and also to hear the pastor more clearly.

“Personal monitoring can provide the band flexibility to incorporate extra elements such as loop/click tracks, and even talk-back mics for band communication.” – Jeff Urke

The isolation provided by personal monitors can be of great benefit to organists, especially when they are located at the opposite end of the sanctuary from the choir. Timing can be an issue due to the often- lengthy delay times caused by this separation. If the choir microphones are fed into a personal monitor system worn by the organist, the time delay is eliminated, and the organist is able to remain in sync with the choir.

For pastors who want a monitor, in-ears are also a viable option. Lavalier microphones, as well as gooseneck microphones found on pulpits, are especially prone to feedback issues with a floor monitor due to their increased sensitivity and greater distance from the sound source. A personal monitor will eliminate those concerns.

What Happened to the Audience?

Let’s talk about psychoacoustics since it’s a factor here.

Here’s a simple definition: it’s the way our brains process and perceive sound, based on spatial information.

“The average in-ear personal monitor can offer anywhere from 7 to 45 DB of noise isolation, which can make you feel just that: a little isolated.” – Jeff Urke

One hurdle that personal monitor systems need to clear is the loss of psychoacoustics – producing an uncomfortable sense of isolation. That’s a problem on the club stage or in the sanctuary where communicating with the audience demands interaction with the audience. Many performers need to recover some natural ambience.

Here’s how to do it:

Ambient microphones are typically placed in a fixed location. They are distant from the listener’s ear and the levels are controlled by the sound engineer instead of the performer. The directional cues provided by ambient microphones (assuming a left/right stereo pair) are dependent on the performer facing the audience. If the performer turns around, the ambient cues will be reversed.

Ambient earphones More natural results can be obtained by using a newer technology known as ambient earphones. An ambient earphone allows the performer, either by acoustic or electronic means, to add acoustic ambience to the personal monitor mix. There are two types:

Passive ambient earphones have a port, essentially a hole in the ear mold that allows ambient sound to enter the ear canal. While simple to implement, this method offers little in the way of control and could potentially expose the user to dangerous sound pressure levels.

Active ambient earphones use tiny condenser microphones mounted directly to the earphones. The microphones connect to a secondary device that provides the user with a control to blend the desired amount of ambience into the personal monitor mix. Since these microphones are located right at the ear, directional cues remain constant and natural. Ambient earphones not only provide a more realistic listening experience, but also ease between-song communication amongst performers.

Happily Ever After: Five Ways to Get There from Worship Director and Educator Jeff Urke

So how do we get the most value out of this versatile tool? Here are five tips that may help you in the transition:

1. Give it some time. The most important thing in making the transition to in-ears is getting adjusted. This could take weeks or months of consistently using them for both performances and rehearsals. It sounds simple but the more you use a tool, the more accustomed you are to it and the more valuable it becomes to you.

2. Use both ears. One of the worst things you can do with in-ear monitors is to use just one ear. This is the common misconception: if I only have one earbud in, I can still hear the congregation. In this case, your other ear compensates for the loss and you end up perceiving the monitoring ear as being too quiet causing you to turn it up to dangerous levels.

3. Don’t skimp. “You get what you pay for.” Generally true with in-ear monitors. One way to avoid dealing with an unnatural, overly contained sound is to purchase some higher quality earbuds (ideally with a dual or triple driver) that produce a fuller, more accurate and open sound.

4. Dig those good vibrations. One of the biggest losses that drummers and bass players experience with in-ears is the loss of the low end “punch” or “rumble” they feel from their kit or amp. There are actually products available now to simulate this vibration and can be mounted to a drum throne or placed on the floor so that they can feel the vibration of their instrument (formerly created by an amp or stage monitor).

5. Use house microphones. Aiming microphones at the congregation is the best (and only) way to keep from feeling disconnected and isolated from the audience.

Depending on the room, this may be a shotgun mic, a large diaphragm condenser, or a small omni mic. I’ve used everything from a Shure KSM 32 (large diaphragm condenser) to a small homemade omni condenser. There are many options and many preferences. This is ideal: two microphones (on either side of the stage) facing the congregation.

Mixing Dos and Don’ts from Pro Engineer John Mills

DO use a separate monitor board and operator if you plan to have more than one person on ears. If the cost is prohibitive, consider one of the new personal monitor mixers such as the AVIOM®, MyMix, or EliteCoreAudio systems.

DON’T use just one earbud. When you have one ear monitor in, you actually have to turn it up about twice as loud to overcome the ambient sound coming in your other ear. One of the key benefits of personal ear monitors is hearing conservation. By wearing just one, you could be causing damage to your plugged ear.

DO mix in stereo , and pan. When you listen to personal monitors in mono, it’s sometimes tough to distinguish between similar-sounding instruments. In stereo, you have the option to pan them a little left or right. The pros know that when you pan something, you make room for something else. Plus, on stage in a live setting, it can give you a very nice “feel” for where that person is standing.

DON’T be afraid to pan something all the way to the left or crank up the audience. The best way to learn something is to grab that knob and twist it. The great thing about a knob is that you can always twist it back. Remember: less is more. Start with an ample amount of your voice and instrument, then fill in the other instruments under those. That way, your stuff stays on top.

DO put the audience in the mix. Add just enough, but remember, like reverb, too much sounds bad. Make sure you can always hear the drums well over the clapping because the audience is almost always off tempo.

A Final Thought

While personal monitoring is no longer new technology, the pain of change is still a factor. Your praise team may have some difficulty adapting to “ears” after years of performing in front of stage monitors.

Then there’s cost. Even though they’ve decreased dramatically, a pro quality wireless system — including a transmitter, receiver and earphones — can cost anywhere from several hundred to several thousand dollars. And if you already have stage monitors, there may be a sense that personal monitors fall more in the “nice-to-have” than the “need-to-have” category.

It doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing proposition, and while less than ideal, one way to get started is to introduce personal monitoring gradually — one member of your praise team at a time. You’ll eliminate at least one floor monitor, contributing to a quieter stage, and give others performers (at rehearsal) a chance to try them out and experience the difference.

The bottom line: The advantages of personal monitoring extend well beyond the benefits to the performer. They can have a tremendous impact on the overall quality of the service and the worship experience.

About Our Contributors

JOHN MILLS is a veteran of the road and a graduate of the school of hard knocks, providing front of house mixing, road manager, system tuning, and audio training services to the Christian music community for over 20 years. He is currently out on the Kenny Chesney country music tour as systems engineer. To read about his adventures out there, visit www.JohnDMills.com. If you are looking for down-to-earth training for your volunteers, check out his other website www.TechTraining101.com

JEFF URKE is a faculty member at Biola University in southern California, where he oversees worship ministry bands, produces conferences, and teaches sound production courses. He is also the worship director for Pathways Church, a young church plant in Irvine, CA. Jeff has a passion for excellence in worship ministry and technology in the church and hopes to help the church become better prepared to produce authentic, God-centered worship services without distraction.

There was a time when understanding pro audio and having a good pair of ears was enough to handle most church audio challenges. Then, wireless systems came into their own and changed the landscape. Touring acts may have the luxury of a dedicated RF coordinator, but few, if any, churches do. We asked Shure’s Monitor Man Michael Johns for his advice on the essentials, and here’s what he had to say.

Usually the person responsible for getting the microphones or the in-ear personal monitoring systems on air isn’t an RF coordinator. Churches might have a monitor engineer, musical director, or technical director of some sort who is responsible for the audio, but that person might also be a video or lighting person who is responsible for the whole production. More often than not, he or she is a volunteer.

Understanding the basics of RF coordination is a really simple way to become much more comfortable as a user. If you know how the products operate and how they’re supposed to work, then it’s a lot easier to get them to work right. Teams know how to operate mixing boards, they know how to operate most of the audio equipment that they’re using, but wireless systems can mystify even the most experienced audio engineers. They understand the audio side of it, but don’t always know a lot about radio frequencies (RF).

Here are four steps that will help most church audio techs get the most from their wireless mic and personal monitor systems:

1) Understand the Basics

Make sure that you learn how wireless systems work.

First of all, the components:

Earphones – compact, high-fidelity sound-isolating stereo in-ear monitors
Bodypack Receivers – sleek, wearable units that receive sound and give you the ability to adjust your volume and move freely on the stage
Transmitters – usually (but not always) a rack-mounted device which sends audio wirelessly to the receiver

Then, the nature of radio waves:

• Most wireless audio equipment accomplishes its task by converting the audio signal into a radio wave, then back to an audio signal.
• Radio waves travel at the speed of light and are able to travel a significant distance from the source. These characteristics make radio the ideal form of transmission for audio applications, from broadcast radio and television to cordless phones.
• Like sound, a radio wave can be described by its frequency and its amplitude. Frequency is measured in hertz (cycles per second). Frequencies in the radio spectrum range from a few hertz to beyond the gigahertz (GHz) range.
• Most professional wireless audio systems operate in the megahertz (MHz) range.
• Since June 2010, the FCC has ruled that only the 470 MHz to 698 MHz spectrum, shared with television broadcast stations, is available for wireless audio users in the U.S.

2) Select the Right Wireless Products and Accessories

Determine your system needs based on your unique situation. It will inform your purchasing decisions.

• Are your performers stationary or mobile? (Do you need a wired or wireless system?)
• Can monitor mixes be shared? (Will you need a personal mixer, and does your system offer multi-channel capabilities?)
• Do you require a stereo mix, or is mono acceptable? (Mono-only systems are less expensive.)
• What’s your budget? (The less you require, the less you’ll pay.)

More advanced wireless personal monitoring systems offer the ability to combine multiple transmitter antennas (for example, connecting up to four wireless transmitters to one antenna). In these systems, reducing the number of transmitter antennas in close proximity reduces the chance of sound dropouts and is crucial to obtaining the best possible performance. A variety of accessories are available, including different antennas and combiners. Directional antennas can also be used to increase range and reduce the chances of dropouts due to multi-path interference.

3) Properly Select and Coordinate Frequencies

When using Shure PSM® systems, there are three methods for choosing and coordinating frequencies. Which method is best for you will depend on the system features, the number of wireless systems in use, and your access to a computer. No method is foolproof.

Method 1: Use the Frequency Finder on shure.com
If you have internet access, go to the Frequency Finder on the Support page of the Shure website. Enter your city or ZIP code, select the PSM system you are using, and the finder will give you the best options for frequency selection. This is useful if you are using only one wireless model in one frequency band. It cannot accommodate for other wireless microphone or guitar systems in use.

Method 2: Use the Scan function of the PSM receiver (PSM®900 and PSM®1000)
Utilize the scan functions of the receiver to scan for an available frequency or group of frequencies. This gives you a real-time analysis of your operating environment. This method cannot account for all of the potential interactions between your wireless monitor systems in different frequency bands and your wireless microphone or guitar systems.

Method 3: Use a frequency coordination program such as Shure’s Wireless Workbench® Software
This is by far the best method, especially when using multiple wireless systems. Software such as Wireless Workbench will give you the most reliable frequency coordination when using multiple wireless systems regardless of the model, frequency range, or even manufacturer. Wireless Workbench is a free download from shure.com.

Advanced: Use software such as Shure’s recently updated Wireless Workbench 5.0, which you can download for free. This is recommended when a user has a number of wireless systems to get on air, has the means to scan for RF either as a product feature (for example, PSM 1000 or UHF-R®) or through an RF scanner, and needs to coordinate multiple systems.

4) Lastly, There’s No Such Thing As “Set and Forget”

Remember, even if your audio system doesn’t move from place to place, the environment changes constantly. It’s largely true that television stations remain constant, but if there are other wireless systems in the frequency band — whether it’s multiple systems in your own location or interference from the coffeehouse down the street — your wireless frequencies may need to be adjusted. What worked last Sunday (or even last night) may not be failsafe when the service begins. And that’s why frequency coordination is so important.

MICHAEL JOHNS is an associate product manager working in the monitoring category in the Shure Global Marketing and Sales (GMS) Division. Michael worked as the main marketing representative on the development team for PSM 900 and PSM 1000 in-ear monitor systems. His duties also include working on and managing the development of Shure’s pro headphone line. Michael holds a BA in Sound Engineering from Columbia College Chicago and is also a sound engineer and DJ.

Learn More

Here are two downloadable publications with more comprehensive information on personal monitor systems. Both are FREE.

Basic:
Introduction to Personal Monitor Systems (PDF)

Advanced:
Selection and Operation Personal Monitor Systems, Third Edition (PDF)

Also, make sure to check the FAQ section on the Shure site, where you can find 416 questions and answers on the subject just by searching “Personal Monitors.”

The following article is an excerpt from Shure Notes for Houses of Worship, Issue #47 (October 3, 2011).

Running live sound in a church setting can be a very challenging and a very rewarding experience. Every week, the sound crew is faced with a mix of professional, semi-professional, and amateur musicians who all unite together for a common cause. Some understand what they need to hear in their monitor mix, and some have no idea.

My job is to be as helpful as possible, designing individual mixes so that the musicians can be at their best leading the church in worship, not worrying about their mixes. The better the musicians can hear, the tighter the band will sound, and the more inspiring and moving worship will be.

Three Methods for Providing Monitor Mixes for Musicians

1. Letting the FOH sound person dial up multiple monitor mixes utilizing the AUXES.

Advantages: Less costly than the other methods.

Disadvantages: Communication has to be very good between the mixer and musicians. This puts a heavier load on the FOH mixer.

2. Letting each musician dial up his or her own mix using a feed before it hits the FOH mixer into individualized mixer units for each musician.

Advantages: Each musician gets a very personalized mix. The FOH mixer can totally focus on the main house mix.

Disadvantages: Very costly, could be too complicated for amateur musicians who might be fiddling with their mix instead of leading worship.

3. Having a dedicated stage monitor mixing board with a dedicated monitor sound operator.

Advantages: The monitor mixer has total focus on providing stage mixes.

Disadvantages: Very expensive because more equipment is needed, as well as talented and knowledgeable operators.

Lakeside Christian Church’s Method

We have chosen to use method #1 for the time being. It’s simple, clean, and very straightforward. It makes it much simpler for the non-tech oriented.

We use a combination of Shure PSM®400s as well as smaller wedge speaker monitors. We accomplish this by using a FOH mixing board with 10 AUX sends:

We break out the mixes by sending AUX 1 and 2 into one of our five Shure wireless transmitters for our two principle worship leaders, Craig Crynes and Eric Ginder. By sliding the dial to mix 1 or 2 on the Shure P4R wireless IEM (in-ear monitor), they can custom-design their individual mixes even further by adding the other’s mix. I think it’s brilliant that Shure designed this feature into their wireless receivers. It enhances the mixing options in a very useful way.
AUX 3 goes to our five-person vocal team. Everyone on the team slides his or her dial to the same side as mix 3 and receives mainly vocals, piano, and light click track. I can solo any of these individual mixes on the FOH board to check vocal balances. I also make sure to get input from the vocalists as well, to ensure that they can hear themselves.

• AUX 4 is the mix for the electric guitarist, consisting of piano, click track, worship leader, and drums.
• AUXES 5, 6, and 7 feed amplified wedges that we use for various changing band scenarios (choir, extra musicians etc.).
• AUX 8 goes to another Shure wireless unit for the drummer. This mix has lots of click track, bass, some piano, and the worship leader.
• AUX 9 is another spare amplified speaker mix.
• Aux 10 is used for my reverb send.

The key to successful monitor mixing using this method is to keep each mix simple and clean. One of the most important aspects of monitor mixing is to thin the mix out. Each musician needs to hear a specific thing. Identify those important elements, and customize each mix for them. Only the important necessary components are in each person’s ear, while the ambient FOH sound fills out the mix.

One more thing: Using the personal monitoring system really cuts the stage volume down, making for a much clearer FOH mix, and a service full of inspiration and impact.

DAN MURPHY is the Sound Tech Director at Lakeside Christian Church and also owns Group Effort Sound Studio (www.groupeffort.com), which he started in 1976. He is constantly using the natural laws of science, technology, and physics to illustrate how amazing God’s creation really is.

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.

How well we remember the days gone by when the airwaves were filled with news of a digital tsunami and the end, as we knew it, of analog television. For consumers, it meant the addition of a set-top box and a never-ending stream of public service and cable provider TV spots. And instead of portending a bright new digital future, there was something about the transition that seemed a little bleak.

In the fall of 2008, this was especially true for users of wireless audio systems. The Federal Communications Commission unanimously passed its long debated “white spaces” rules, paving the way for the deployment of new unlicensed wireless devices (like smartphones, for instance) between the newly assigned digital television channels.

There were serious concerns about interference, licensing, and equipment obsolescence. Led by Shure, the pro audio community went to Washington, debated with a powerful coalition of consumer product manufacturers, retooled product lines, and worked tirelessly to represent the rights of wireless audio users. Those users included everyone from Broadway producers to the National Football League … and you.

Fast forward to June 12, 2009. That’s the date when the analog TV signals officially signed off. Then, approximately one year later, wireless mic systems were no longer permitted to operate in the 700 MHz band.

And here we are. With all the sound and fury, the hand wringing, the lobbying efforts, the white papers and the worry … what really happened? Did churches large and small return to the days of wired sound? Were mobile apps jamming the airwaves? Was interference a fact of wireless life? Did entire systems hit the scrap heap and call for emergency budget meetings to fund new systems? Was the praise band sent home?

For the answers, we talked to experts at two distinctly different churches – Ron Gibson at Eagle Mountain International Church, in Fort Worth, Texas and the Bob Abraham, Shure Associate and volunteer at Vineyard Church (planted in Shure’s former Hartrey Avenue headquarters) in Evanston, Illinois.

First up, Eagle Mountain international Church

Meet Ron Gibson. Along with Robert Price and Paul Hayden, he is responsible for live sound reinforcement in the big room at the biggest church in the Kenneth Copeland Ministries. Across the sprawling Fort Worth campus are eight venues and eleven rooms – all needing audio assistance from a full time staff of three and a battalion of fifteen volunteers.

“Back in 2008, we heard the announcement that there might be some changes – and we really paid close attention to it because here in the northwest Dallas/Fort Worth area, there’s a lot of stuff going on. We realized by looking at the anticipated changes in the frequency band that we were going to get hit pretty hard.

At that time, we were running 27 channels of wireless mics and six channels of IEMs – and that was across our facility. We had 12 channels of wireless in our main sanctuary, and we had three channels of wireless IEMs. We started experimenting with different manufacturer’s wireless systems and even before the transition, were getting hit with interference, not in a major way, but enough to convince us to jump on the bandwagon in December 2008. We didn’t want to have problems.

We changed out our main sanctuary with 14 new channels of wireless mics from Shure (UHF-R®, which we thought were the best we could get for our building) and we also got 14 handheld mics and bodypack transmitters, so we actually bought 28 new wireless microphone systems. This gave us the flexibility to do what we needed to do in terms of performance, too – drama, singing or any combination.

We thought about sharing the outdated 700MHz equipment with some of our smaller churches rather than turning the equipment in for the Shure rebate, but of course, we’d only be putting them in jeopardy with the FCC’s rulings, so we didn’t end up doing that.

Shure had a good rebate program and that helped us to make the change as early as we did. Even so, we ended up spending about $30,000 in the main sanctuary.

Today, we are using 35 wireless microphone channels and about 10 channels for wireless IEMs across our entire facility. These are all Shure systems and we haven’t had one problem. Not one.

We stay on top of it. Every time we turn something on, we’re monitoring it. We actively coordinate frequencies. We scan our microphones every couple of weeks to make sure that nothing else has changed. And even though I’m running 45 channels of wireless, this holds true for the guy that had two channels of wireless in his building. You never know in this technological world we’re living in who has what. The days of just installing something and leaving it alone are over.”
Vineyard Church—Evanston, Illinois

“I started on the team just about the time of the 700MHz transition. Vineyard’s story is pretty typical in that there was no one on the full-time staff aware of the White Spaces issue. These were people who weren’t necessarily hooked in to the audio industry and unless they were subscribed to publications and chat rooms, they had no way of knowing. Still, before I arrived, a couple of volunteers sounded the alarm. At the time, Vineyard had two Shure UHF systems.

On a typical Sunday, we only use about two channels of wireless. The original A/V designers probably wanted to make the system very volunteer-friendly. But now that I’m here, I’m planning to integrate more wireless into our services.

We were in kind of a panic mode in January 2009, because the 12th of February was the original deadline. We had two wireless systems to replace and really had to scramble. I was able to use my Shure employee discount to get two ULX® systems for the church. We still have that old 700 MHz system in a rack somewhere, but, of course, it’s not being used.”
And?

“We’ve been really happy with the ULX system. One of the concerns we had is with battery usage because the system uses standard alkaline batteries. We go through batteries very quickly, so one of the things we did is to switch to rechargeable batteries. That’s saved us a lot of money.

With all the advantages that wireless systems have, there’s also a lot more responsibility on the tech crew because there are more things that can go wrong – from dealing with batteries and interference to sound sources going out of range, even things that you wouldn’t expect to be a problem like two transmitters being too close together. The crew has to know about wireless and not just about audio.

Especially now, spectrum management has to be part of the team’s learning curve, but fortunately, companies like Shure offer all kinds of online resources: how to set up a system, how to do frequency coordination, geographic frequency finders … just a lot of helpful information. In some ways, things really haven’t changed that much. Wireless microphones still operate on many of the same frequencies – it’s just a matter of the other devices in the spectrum.

The wireless transition is in reality a lot less frightening than people may think. It still remains to be seen how many of the White Spaces devices are going to appear and how much real havoc will be created because of them. In the short term, all of the wireless systems are going to work just fine.”

Let’s Compare:

Today there are nine pastors ministering to the needs of a multi-cultural, multi-generational population. In addition to weekly church services and Sunday school, Vineyard runs a teen drop-in center (complete with a drum kit and an XBOX console), as well as The Harvest, a food and clothing pantry that serves 150 local families every week.

There’s plenty of unused space in Vineyard’s present location, but this church likes to know every member of the congregation. That’s why the congregation has successfully planted six new churches in the general area. Here is one of Vineyard’s stated goals:

“We value ministry (giving, relating, and loving) as the primary activity of the church and want everyone to participate in some way.”

We think that Mr. Shure would have liked that.
Church Correspondents

Bob Abraham is manager of Digital Audio Processing at Shure Incorporated, developing DSP and Networked Audio products. He has a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Houston and a M.S. in Music Engineering from the University of Miami. He has designed and operated church sound systems for many years and currently leads the audio tech team at Vineyard Christian Church of Evanston.

Learn more about Evanston’s Vineyard Church here.

Ron Gibson is a full time engineer for Eagle Mountain International Church and Kenneth Copeland Ministries. In addition to his duties as monitor engineer for the main sanctuary, he has consulted on the design and specification of the church’s state-of-the art Conference Center. Prior to EMIC, Ron operated Word of Faith Tape and Sound and applied his considerable audio talents to a wide spectrum of national and international events, including the World Cup, Super Bowl half-time performances and the dedication ceremonies surrounding the Richard M. Nixon Presidential Library. And as exciting as those gigs may seem to the rest of us, Ron says he’s right where he always wanted to be.

About Eagle Mountain International Church

Let’s say you’re not quite ready to invest in a professional rig and you’re planning to get started by using a basic consumer model. While you may have to make trade-offs in optical features like zoom choices and video standard (is HDE important?), we asked expert Mark Shapiro, editor in chief at Internet Video Magazine, to lend a clear, intelligible voice.

Creating good audio is the most difficult challenge when creating Internet videos – especially if you’re using consumer-type camcorders. It’s easy to fool the eye, but it’s a lot harder to fool the ear.

If you make a mistake with audio, the ear will catch it while the eye is a lot more forgiving of video problems and inconsistencies. And if you spend a lot of time on YouTube and other user-generated video sites, you’ll notice that the sound on many of the videos is garbled, muddy and often unintelligible.

Take heart. There are many ways you can make your videos sound a lot better without having to spend lots of money, go to film school or hire a sound engineer to help you shoot your video short. Here are seven.

1. Use an External Microphone

If possible, use an external mic. Unfortunately, the microphones built into most camcorders are not very good. Even worse, they’re omni-directional and will pick up sound from everywhere.

Even though most of these mics have a somewhat ellipsoidal pickup pattern (aimed more toward what is in front), most camcorder mics will pick up mumbling, heavy breathing and other extraneous noises. A few camcorder mics will allow you to slightly focus their mics from wide angle to narrow.

And here’s another issue: on many camcorders, the mic is not well located and can easily get in the way of fingers adjusting focus, activating effects and zooming in.

The good news is that digital camcorders record digital sound. This means you should be able to record high fidelity, stereo, and CD-quality sound assuming you can get the audio into the camcorder in the first place. This is why you need an external mic that plugs into the MIC IN jack on your camcorder. Most good camcorders will have a MIC IN connector as well as a shoe to mount the mic on.

Unfortunately, many of the more affordable camcorders – especially those tiny “pocket size” camcorders, do not offer an external mike  connection at all and you need to rely on other tricks to improve the audio.

Many camcorders also offer active “hot shoes”. This allows you to plug an external mic onto the “shoe” and transmit the audio directly from the mic to the camcorder’s electronics.

If you’re on a limited budget, the best choice for an external mic is a basic telephoto or shotgun that can be adjusted to zoom out when you want to capture the sound from a crowd or zoomed in when you want to capture sound from a source a good distance away. And if you can afford to upgrade, go wireless and get a wireless lavaliere system. Even better, get a wireless kit with a receiver that mounts on the camcorder and includes both handheld and lav wireless mics.

2. Use Lavalier Microphones

A wireless microphone system is usually a bit more expensive than a basic shotgun mic, but allows you to get much better sound.

I prefer using these for shooting interviews. Instead of using a handheld mic or a shotgun mic, simply pin the wireless lavalier and its transmitter to the interviewee’s lapel or jacket and then the sound of their voice will be transmitted back to the receiver unit that is mounted on your camcorder.

In most interview situations, you don’t really need to hear the questions except for in the editing process. Of course, if the interviewer’s voice is important, then use another lav mic or have them hold a mike. Feed both mics through an audio mixer and then into the camcorder.

FYI – In many video interview situations, one camera is used to capture video and sound of the interviewer and a second camera is used to capture video and sound of the person being interviewed.

3. Close Mic

If you don’t have a shotgun mic or good wireless microphone system, or if your camcorder doesn’t have an audio input jack, then the next best thing is to get close.

If you need a long shot for artistic reasons, you might want to shoot the scene again – just for audio. Have your actors do their lines a second time so that you can get good quality audio and then dub it in later to replace the bad audio. If the shot is far enough away, the audience will never notice that the actors’ mouth movements don’t exactly match the audio.

During the editing process, you can also have your actors re-record the audio, duplicating the original dialog so that it matches. You might want to use the same camcorder to record the audio so that the audio quality matches. Also, this is where room tone can be very important.

Most camcorders have an electronic circuits built into them called AGC or Automatic Gain Control. It automatically adjusts the sound recording level so that the camcorder will pick up something, no matter how faint. The further you are away from your sound source, the more the AGC has to magnify the sound. The more it amplifies the audio, the more it also amplifies the surrounding noise as well.

If the audio source is faint, the camcorder may adjust the AGC pick-up sensitivity so high that it even picks up the sound of the camcorders motors and gears.

And don’t forget – getting close will not only make your audio sound better, it will make your video look better.

4. Record Continuous Sound of Events or Performances

If there are problems or breaks in the audio, it’s almost impossible to cover them up by using creative editing. If a visual doesn’t quite match or you get a strange out of focus shot or two, it’s easy to replace it with a cut-away or new angle. But with audio, your audience will notice every small change and gap in the recording.

When you record a performance or event, make sure you record and capture the sound as a continuous event – without any breaks. While the camcorder is rolling and capturing the sound, you can be zooming in and out, getting different shots, shooting close-ups, and so on.

For example, when I was in Hawaii with my kids, I taped my kids’ hula lesson. Later on, it was easy to edit the video by just inserting shots of new video over the clean audio track. In addition the shots of the class itself, I inserted visuals of the entire Hawaii trip.

5. Monitor Your Audio

If your camcorder has an earphone or headphone jack, use it! Especially when recording tricky audio situations like concerts and live performances. Even though you don’t want to be recording where the audio levels are too low, you also don’t want audio that is too loud or distorted. In concerts, it may be helpful to turn the mic away from the stage and catch the sound coming from the ceiling.

By using headphones, you can monitor the sound. This is very important when a dead battery or a disconnected mic plug or cable may spell disaster.

6. Use a Portable Audio Mixer

Professional video makers just don’t plug their mics directly into the camcorder and record raw sound, especially when recording a concert performance.

By using a mic mixer with level controllers, you can use several mics to get the best quality sound for recording stereo. Most mic mixers also provide a headphone jack for monitoring the audio quality as well as record volume dials. On many pro camcorders, this mixer and volume control system is built into the camera. And some camcorders allow the operator to record, control and monitor up to four different audio tracks.

7. Capture Room Tone

If you plan on editing your videos, you’ll want to remember to capture a minute or two of room tone (or the ambient sound of the location when nothing is happening).

Every location has its own background buzz. It can be the sound of the surf pounding away in the distance, it can be the sound of the city outside the walls of a ballroom, and it can even be the soft buzzing of the lights and electronics in an office. By recording this background tone and using it while editing, you will be able to insert it into your video to cover any gaps in your audio recording. By cross fading from the good sound to the background tone, the loss of audio won’t be as jarring as going from voices and singing to deafening silence. If you are mixing in new sound or recording dialog, you can help make it seem like it really belongs by mixing it with the environmental sounds.

If you are able to integrate these seven tips above into your daily video shooting process, you will find that your videos suddenly seem to be much better. Your friends and family might not be able to put their finger on it they may not be able to isolate what has improved, but they will definitely better appreciate your work.

Mark Shapiro, has been producing and writing about video for over 35 years. Internet Video Magazine, launched in 1999, is the web’s best source for how to shoot, edit and post Internet videos destined for business and personal sites, as well as for public sites like YouTube and Vimeo.

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.

In spite of all the advances made in ribbon technology it’s hard to overcome the impression that these microphones are divas. We asked four sound engineers who record and tour with the likes of the Pretenders, Susan Tedeschi, Frank Sinatra and Cheap Trick’s Robin Zander about their on stage and in studio experiences. Here’s what they had to say.

In this issue, we’re talking about ribbon mics. How are you using them?

Roger Lindsay: “Lead and pedal steel guitars.”

Julian King: “I frequently use them on guitar amps, drum room mics and acoustic instruments like guitar and dobro.”

Eric Schilling: “I use ribbon mics in lots of applications, drums, horn sections, guitar amps, pianos. I often will choose a ribbon mic when I want a smoother top end and a more rounded bottom. If I am recording and find the sound too bright, I will often switch to a ribbon. I have also found that using a ribbon on an electric guitar will give me a very natural sound.”

Mike Sponarski: “Besides being in front of a high SPL guitar amp, I’ve experimented with ribbons in a kick drum and on the bass amp. There hasn’t been any clipping, distortion or damage. These ribbons have been able to handle anything I’ve thrown at them so far. I’m very happy with them.”

What can you achieve with a ribbon mic that you can’t with another type of dynamic mic?

Roger Lindsay: “In both cases, the ribbon mics offer more weight and authority to the overall instrument sounds compared with either conventional dynamic or condenser models. They offer a richer, more full-bodied sound, particularly in the lower and low-mid frequencies which often suffer with conventional mics at higher sound pressure levels.”

Julian King: “I like the ambient nature of the mics. The ‘figure-eight’ design provides a lot of nice room texture that comes to the back side of the mic and that lessens the need to set up a separate “room mic” for close mic sources like electric guitar amps, acoustic guitars, dobros, mandolins and those kinds of instruments.

I also like using ribbons on drum overhead and drum room mics. They help soften the edgy tone of the cymbals that’s frequently hard to control.”

Eric Schilling: “I will often use a stereo ribbon mic for drum overheads. Particularly on jazz sessions. I have never been able to find a condenser or dynamic that will give me such a smooth and natural sound for drum overheads.”

Any challenges?

Roger Lindsay: “Not really, despite the bi-directional characteristics of the mics, the level of ambient pick-up from the rear of both units on a fairly loud stage was inconsequential. I’m still experimenting with different mic placements to see how this may affect the overall sound, but so far exact placement seems to be less critical than with some other models.”

Julian King: “I have actually found that in a few instances, one of my normally favorite attributes was a problem. In very ambient recording environments, the returning reflectivity to the back of the mic can be overpowering. In some cases, I have placed a small pad or gobo behind the mic to help limit some of the returning sound pressure.”

Eric Schilling: “The fact that most ribbon mics are bidirectional can sometimes be a bit problematic if I have a lot a unwanted information coming in the rear of the microphone.”

Mike Sponarski: “The only real challenge I’ve found has been due to venue acoustics. I’ve used the mic on Susan Tedeschi’s sax player and usually it works well, but if the venue is extremely live, such as a classical performance hall or a reverberant or middy room, then the bi-directional pattern can be a bit problematic. In those cases, if trying a few different placements doesn’t help, I’ll go back to the SM7 or maybe a KSM32. Other than that, it’s been an easy piece of gear to use.”

Some people might say they’re too fragile for live performance. What do you think?

Roger Lindsay: “The first mic I ever used was a Reslo ribbon in the 60s and this sounded good but was notoriously fragile.

With the new materials used on the KSM353 and KSM313, Shure has two ribbon mics that combine exceptional performance with rugged construction and components. That’s a Shure trademark. These should dispel the myths that ribbon mics are unreliable and too delicate for live applications.”

Julian King: “I don’t do much live stuff, but the modern ribbons that I have used seem quite sturdy. I am guilty of treating them with my usual ‘blacksmith-like’ touch. So far they have held up great. I don’t hesitate to put them close to a high level source like guitar amps.”

Eric Schilling: “This would be true if you where trying to use many of the vintage ribbons of the 30′s and 40′s but I find modern ribbons to much more rugged in terms of the level they will take.”

Mike Sponarski: “I’ve been using ribbons for the past three months of constant touring in North America and throughout Europe in all types of conditions: indoors, outdoors, with different weather conditions and at various altitudes.

The ribbons travel in the regular mic case along with the other mics. The case is a proper padded road case but the ribbons receive the same treatment as the Beta 57s and ’58s that are also in the case. There have not been any performance or damage issues at all. The only incident that has occurred was once when an over-exuberant stagehand over-tightened the thumb screw on the shock mount and snapped it. I just rigged the shock mount to fit into another clip and carried on.”

Which ribbon mics are you using?

Roger Lindsay: “I’m using the ’353 on lead guitar and ’313 on pedal steel, a combination that’s produced exceptional results for both players.”

Julian King: “With regard to the modern ribbons, I have used the El Diablo (now KSM353) quite a bit. I have also used the Royer and AEA ribbons as well as the Cascade Fat Head. None of these are the “perfect” mic for everything and frankly, it is my experience that such an animal does not exist.”

Eric Schilling: “I am using KSM313 mics on brass and KSM353s on electric guitar.”

Any tips you can offer our readers?

Roger Lindsay: “These new ribbon mics are such a leap forward and offer such outstanding performance that I would advise anyone who is truly serious about their guitar sound to beg, borrow, or if it’s the last resort…steal them! They’re that good.” (Editor’s note: We appreciate Roger’s enthusiasm for the new KSM mics, but suggest you beg, borrow or buy.)

Julian King: “I like to use the ribbons in conjunction with a ’57 and blend the two to fine-tune the texture of the source. I have also found that the ribbons are very directional and a slight misalignment or movement of the source can cause problems in clarity.”

Eric Schilling: “Try using ribbons in places you might normally go for a condenser. You will be pleasantly surprised to find you will get the same detail you get from a condenser but with a overall warmers sound.”

Find out more about:

KSM313 Dual Voice Ribbon Microphone

KSM353 Premier Bi-directional Ribbon Microphone

Our Panel of Rock-Solid Engineers

Julian King

Since 1968, professional recording engineer and producer.
He’s worked with SugarLand, Tim McGraw, Faith Hill, Kellie Pickler, Toby Keith, Willie Nelson, Robin Zander and many others.

Roger Lindsay

Since 1969, professional audio consultant, live sound engineer, event audio coordinator. Currently touring with the Pretenders, he’s worked with Prince, James Taylor, Pink Floyd, Van Morrison, Deep Purple, Ringo Starr and more “great artists than I can remember.”

Eric Schilling

Eric got his start in audio at the age of 15 in 1977. He is a recording and sound engineer for television and the music industry. He has lent his mixing talents to projects for Gloria Estefan, Natalie Cole, Madonna, Frank Sinatra, David Bowie and Elton John.

Mike Sponarski

FOH engineer, production manager and tour manager since 1989. Susan Tedeschi, Derek Trucks, Norah Jones, Cowboy Junkies, Esperanza Spalding, The Chieftains, Julio Iglesias, A Fine Frenzy, Over The Rhine, and Rik Emmett are among his clients.

We talked to three drummers whose approaches to drum miking are as different as their musical odysseys. First, Rascal Flatts’ Jim Riley. Next, ex-Pat Metheny Group sideman and groundbreaking percussionist Paul Wertico. And finally, British touring band favorite Simon Phillips, currently living in the USA working on his own solo projects.

Shure enthusiasts all, here’s what they had to say.

Jim Riley
Bandleader, Rascal Flatts drummer

Jim was born in Boston, Massachusetts and from an early age, showed real interest in music. He began his formal studies of percussion at the age of twelve, the same year he began singing with the Youth Pro Musica choir. In high school, Jim studied with Boston Symphony percussionist Arthur Press.

He attended the University of North Texas, where the studied drums with Ed Soph and timpani with The Dallas Symphony’s Kal Cherry. In 1995, Jim moved to Kansas City. While recording with local guitarist Jeff Scheetz, he took a job with Kansas City Drumworks, building and selling custom drums. There, Jim began his long relationship with The VPR Creative Group as a writer and performer with the Sticks of Thunder percussion ensemble.

In 1997, Jim made the move to Nashville. Less than a year later, he was playing with country artist Mark Chesnutt and outlaw rocker Hank Williams III. The real turning point in Jim’s career came in 2000, when he took the job as drummer and bandleader for Rascal Flatts.

Jim is currently on Rascal Flatts’ ‘Unstoppable tour, which is expected to play to well over a million people.

“With Rascal Flatts, I’m playing a large drum set, so as you can imagine, we use a wide array of microphones to capture my onstage performance. I worked closely with Jon Garber, our FOH engineer and Stewart Delk, our monitor engineer to pick the right microphone for each unique application. ”

Snare
“On the snare we use two mics: an SM7B on top and SM57 on the bottom. We decided to go with the SM7 because of its ability to capture both low and high-end frequencies with clarity. The ’57 on the bottom is perfect to pick up some additional “crack.” We also use the ’57 on our auxiliary snare and it sounds great.”

Bass/Kick
“We use two mics on the bass drum: a Beta 52®A and a Beta 91. They are both great mics individually, but used as a tandem, the ’91 picks up the snap and the ’52 (placed just inside the hole in the resonant head) brings the big low end.”

Toms
“On the higher toms we use Beta 98s. They are the absolute standard in live drum microphones. And they work great in the studio as well.

We wanted to match the thunderous sound of our kick on our floor toms, so my initial thought was to go with Beta 52s. Since we were using the Beta 98s (which are condensers) on the high toms, Ryan Smith at Shure suggested the KSM27. That was a great call.”

Hi- Hat/Cymbals
“On the hi-hat and ride cymbal, we use KSM109 (editor note: this model is discontinued, it’s now the KSM137). . It does a great job of delivering the complex tones of my hi-hat and ride with stunning clarity.”

Mics for Other Apps
“We use an SM27 to mic the gong. We top off the whole drum mix with a VP88 stereo microphone placed overhead, directly above the snare in the middle of the kit. It does a great job of picking up the cymbals and gives us the entire drum set a fantastic stereo sound.”

Vocals
“I use a Beta 56A and an SM58®. We use the ’56 as my vocal mic because of its ability to reject unwanted noise. In our case, that’s the drums! The ’58 is used as my talkback mic – it can only be heard by the band, sound crew and video director. As bandleader, it’s just critical for me to be able to communicate with the band and crew in case any problems arise or quick changes need to be made to the set. It’s not a glamorous job for a SM58, but it’s an important one.”

Personal Monitoring
“The final and most crucial component to my setup is my personal monitors. The SCL5 earphones are by far my favorite. They deliver my mix with exceptional clarity and they’re able to withstand life on the road. ”

Read more about Jim, check out his gear list, and how you build your own mic locker on a budget on Jim’s Artist Page.

Paul Wertico
Session player, solo artist, innovator

One of the most versatile and musical drummers in music today, Paul Wertico became a member of the Pat Metheny Group in 1983. During that time he appeared on ten CDs and three videos with Pat and has toured the world many times. He picked up seven Grammy Awards, won numerous magazine polls, and received several gold records. Paul left the PMG in February of 2001.

When Paul is not touring, he divides his time between studio work, producing, session playing, and leading his own groups. He currently serves on the percussion faculty of Northwestern University and the jazz faculty of the Chicago College of Performing Arts at Roosevelt University.

Paul was voted “Fusion Drummer of the Year” in DRUM! Magazine’s Reader’s Poll and he’s placed in the “Top Five in the Electric Jazz Category” in Modern Drummer magazine’s Reader’s Polls. Paul also has his own “signature” drum sticks: the Paul Wertico model – TX808W, as well as new “signature” products that he invented called “Tubz” and “KidzTubz”, all made by Pro-Mark.

Paul Wertico’s mic setup and tips:
“At my home studio (Rat Howl Recording), my engineer Brian Peters and I love to constantly experiment to find not only great traditional sounds, but also new non-traditional sounds. ”

Snare
“A cool trick I learned while recording with legendary engineer/producer Reinhold Mack (ELO, Queen, Rolling Stones) is to mic the snare drum from the side of the snare shell. We’ve tried this method with multiple different microphones (including the trusty SM57, which we’ve used on the last few recordings) and have gotten great results.”

“Instead of putting a mic on the top and the bottom of the snare drum, balancing them with each other, and then sending them to a bus to add any EQ or compression, we can just use one channel to get the entire snare sound. It really brings out the sound of the drum itself, with just enough of the snap from the snares and almost none of the ringing overtones coming off of the top head. It also gets a very nice rim click sound. We usually position the mic an inch or less away from, and perpendicular to, the surface of the shell (making sure to avoid the drum’s air vent hole).”

Overheads
“We most often use a pair of KSM32 microphones with the low end rolled off.”

Bass/Kick
“Between different styles of music, bass drum sounds can vary a lot. (In fact, just describing the drum as either a “bass” drum or a “kick” drum, can tell you a lot about what type of sound you’re going for.) Of course, most of that will have to do with how you tune and muffle the drum itself, but every type of microphone will capture different characteristics of the sound.

One of the best bass drum sounds we’ve gotten has actually been with the SM7B microphone. It’s often neglected as an option for a bass drum mic because of the number of other things it does so well, but this mic gives a deep, punchy sound that might be exactly what you’ve been trying to achieve. We usually place it on the beater side of the bass drum in conjunction with another bass drum mic we normally use, like the Beta 91 or the Beta 52A. The SM7B also sounds great when placed by the front head. Again, it all really depends on the type of sound we’re looking for and the type of music we’re recording.”

Toms
“For toms, we use a set of Beta 98D/S (or sometimes a set of Beta 56A).

Hi Hat
“After recording a number of records with a hi-hat microphone (usually a SM81), we’ve rarely, if ever, ended up using it on the final mix, so sometimes we’ve stopped even putting one up. Usually we’ve found that the overheads capture a very natural hi-hat sound by themselves.”

Other Miking Apps
“We’ve also recorded the drum set with Pro-Mark “X-Mutes” still on the drums and cymbals, as well as using various muting devices and “found sounds”. We’ll sometimes also use the May Internal Drum Miking System that’s inside some of my drums and combine those sounds with the standard miking techniques.”

Read more about Paul, check out his gear list, and how you build our own mic locker on a budget on Paul’s Artist Page.

Simon Phillips
Touring pro, solo artist

Simon’s professional musical career began at the early age of twelve, performing and recording with his father’s – Sid Phillips – Dixieland band until he turned sixteen.

With an offer to play in the musical Jesus Christ Superstar, his path was marked and Simon soon became one of London’s most celebrated session drummers. In his early twenties, he was well on his way to having a musical career nothing short of brilliance. To date he has toured and recorded an “A” list of bands and performers: Mick Jagger, The Who, Jeff Beck, Joe Satriani, Tears for Fears, Judas Priest, Roxy Music, Michael Schenker, Nik Kershaw, Pete Townshend, The Pretenders, Whitesnake and many, many more.

In 1992 Simon moved to the US. He was asked to join Toto for their world tour and remained a full time member until the band dissolved in 2008.

Expanding his career from drumming to writing solo projects, Simon recorded his first album “Protocol” in 1988 and followed it up with five more critically-acclaimed albums. Another facet of his far-ranging musical career? Producing and engineering.

Snare
“I use an SM57. I prefer it to the Beta 57. Nine times out of ten, I will reverse the phase when listened with the overheads. I like to play on a wooden surface and often encourage drummers I am working with to do the same. I am sure this contributes to the phase issue but it seems to work just fine. I rarely use a mic underneath the snare drum. This really messes with the dynamics of the player – but occasionally I will use a mic pointed to the side of the shell if I really need some more snare. It depends on the player and the sound he or she wants to get.”

Bass/Kick
“I use a Beta 52A, which is mounted on a custom-built clip assembly inside the drum. I think the best position for a kick mic is off center. I place mine around 4″ from the shell facing directly towards the batter head.

The distance is the main area of experiment and that will depend upon the type of head used and the tuning and the playing. I usually use closed front heads so the mic has to be inside the drum enough not to hit the front head. However if there is a hole (which I make sure is lined up to be directly behind the mic) then I can place the mic further away from the batter head. It also depends upon the shell depth of the drum.

You will see that my 52s have been modified so that they will fit into a KSM137 clip. This helps isolate the mic from the stand or the shell.

If you use a stock Beta 52 and mount it on a stand you must isolate the stand from the floor with foam or you will hear the floor – not the just the drum.

Toms
“I use KSM137s on all the toms for live applications and KSM27 for recording.

I used to use an SM98 and then a Beta 98 for quite a few years – very popular microphones for tom toms. But, I discovered something mixing live recordings. While the 98 worked well with a PA system, I found that the recorded signal was not as good – especially on the larger drums. So I set out to find an alternative.

The main requirement with live sound is a system that can be set up and taken down quickly. Certainly the system I had with my ’98s was pretty slick. All the barrels (pre amps) were set into A53M shock mounts which were attached to an aluminum bar mounted somewhere on the kit. A loom of 98 cables all cut to specific lengths and then wrapped with tech flex made for an elegant and quick solution.

The KSM137 was the prime candidate since it could slide into the A53M shock mount and isolate the mic from the drum and/or hardware. We created a loom made up of regular mic cable wrapped in tech flex and that terminated at the rear of the kit, close to a stage box.

I don’t place these mics close to the drums – in fact, they’re at least 2″ away from each drum. If the kit is well balanced there is no leakage problem I ran a side-by-side Beta 98 and KSM137 test. The KSM137 emerged the winner. It had everything I needed for live applications and it worked well in recording applications.”

“If space is tight, I substitute the KSM137 for the KSM27 when recording. The feedback (not the howling type) I have had from engineers has been very favorable.”

Hi Hat
“I use a KSM137 or KSM141 and I prefer an “off-axis” position. My main complaint with live sound is that the hi-hat is often mixed too prominently.

The hi-hat is not as loud as the snare drum or the kick drum —that natural balance has to be considered. You may be dealing with a variety of different cymbals and that’s often the choice of the musician. I generally feel that drummers pick cymbals that are not well balanced with the drums. They’re usually much too heavy and loud.”

“You should be able to hang one microphone over the kit (1960s style) and get a balanced kit sound (apart from the kick drum). That means that the drummer must play in a balanced way, his choice of cymbals is smart and his tuning of the instrument is sound. It just has to work and be musical and fit the music that is being played.”

Overheads
“I use KSM27s, KSM32s, KSM44s, SM81s, KSM137s or KSM141s, depending on what’s available and what works best. I prefer to use just a stereo pair since I like to use the overall kit sound and not roll off too much low frequency – but that will depend, of course, on the situation.

The actual positioning depends on the set-up of the kit but I prefer to keep them wide as opposed to a co-incident pair. I am not a fan of stereo mics – but in some scenarios, they work well.”

Read more about Simon, check out his gear list, and how you build your own mic locker on a budget on Simon’s Artist Page.