Newbie condenser mic experiments - could use some help...

[Donnie Frank]

SAC-heads;

This thread is a spin-off from my "Barbershop quartet" thread some of you may have seen.

At rehearsal last night I was handed all the microphones owned by the vocal group I'm now working for. There were 3 kind:

* DAK ECM-2001 (x4) (with "real working switch")
* Cascade M39' (x2) (with high-pass switch and -10dB switch)
* AKG C1000S (x2) (with cardioid/hypercardioid capabilities)

The latter 2 mic's came with a stereo bar.

Needless to say, the DAK's are out of the running. The "real working switch" comment was my brand of comedy. These seem like mic's one might purchase at Radio Shack for their Karaoke machine with a hard-wired cable down to an unbalanced 1/4" plug.

The Cascade mic is a small diaphragm cardioid mic that requires phantom power (has no battery compartment). The AKG is the same, with the exception that it DOES have it's own power (via 9v battery), and it can be adjusted to have a hypercardioid pattern. Because of their hypercardioid ability, I decided to start with the AKG's.

To get a feel for these mic's, I decided to set up a quick experiment in my living room. For the first part of my experiment I wanted to just get a simple idea of how much gain these mic's would provide from 2-4 feet away; how quickly they'd feedback, and at what frequencies, etc. So for this, I simply plugged one of the AKG's directly into my K8 mic pre. Needless to say, without E.Q., and all settings flat, the amount of gain I was able to get before feedback wasn't much. But I *did* get a nice feel for the hypercardioid pattern, which seemed more cardioid to me.

Part 2 of my experiment, I set up both microphones on the Stereo Bar, a mixing console (MixWizard WZ3), which is in a rack with 1/3 octave E.Q.'s on the Main and 3 of the 4 Aux channels.

I adjusted the AKG for a hypercardioid pattern (achieved via a passive sleeve that slides up and down the diaphragm). I put the speaker about 6' behind the mic @ a 120° angle to the mic (in the deepest part of the cardioid depression), and then walked and talked around the front of the microphone from about 4' away. The results were "okay." After some fairly deep cuts on 6 frequencies and a high-pass of 63Hz, I could definitely hear my voice out of the speaker, but just barely. 6 deep E.Q. cuts is FAR more than I like to do on any mix. So back to the drawing board.

After roughly 2 hours of experimentation I was able to achieve a decent monitor mix with decent gain and relatively even coverage across the front line. The secret was to position the wedge right at the base of the mic stand. Because of this, I was able to trade those 6 deep, 10-12dB E.Q. cuts for 5 relatively shallow 6dB cuts - much better. Ultimately, after a couple hours of futzing with mic angles, speaker angle, E.Q., etc., here's what I came up with.

* Mic angle to each other = 120°
* Mic height = 4 feet.
* Artist distance from mic's = roughly 2' for center vocals, 3-3.5' for peripheral vocals.
* Gain turned up as high as possible before feedback (no head room...blah).

The amount of gain out of the wedge is enough so one can hear one's voice, but definitely not "blaring." I guess my only real question is, "Are these results typical?"

Thoughts? Suggestions?

I haven't experimented with the Cascade mic's yet.

Regards,

[Butch Bos]

YES

[TomyN]

Hi,

the results are common for this kind of setup. Please note that, especial for the backing - vox the room plays a large role for the sound.
You might experiment with a carpet on the floor, or some backdrop to shield the wall behind the singers. In your setup the feedback is mainly due to reflections from the 'nearby' surfaces, so it will vary a lot with the amount, position and clothing of the singers standing in front of the monitor. So keep the analyzer plugin patched to the mic channel or sub-group for quick action.

Tomy

[Paul Henry]

Try it with 3 wedges.

[Donnie Frank]

Try it with 3 wedges.

One mix? Or do I need to bias one or more of the monitors? At this point I only have 2, K8's. If I'm going to use 3 wedges, I'll have to go passive with my SRX712m's. Because I have another show immediately following this show, I want to keep set up as simple (Read: quick) as possible. But that's a secondary objective. The primary objective is to make this work. So I'm thinking I should have the center wedge on one mix and the peripheral wedges on another?

Thank you for clarification.

[CurtZHP]

* DAK ECM-2001 (x4) (with "real working switch")

HA! I remember when I was a kid, my dad, for some odd reason, would get those DAK catalogs at his shop (an upholstery shop, mind you...). I remember seeing those mics, and even as a kid, I could tell they were crap!

[IraSeigel]

Try it with no monitors. A barbershop quartet should be used to blending with each other acoustically, and not rely on electronics. They need to rehearse that way - by listening to each other. I've heard quartets sound great around one mic - Ear Trumpet Labs' Louise mic on the Jason Mraz tour - and a quartet using a mic for each pair of singers (2 SM87s on a stereo bar in an X/Y config, e.g.). IEMs are another way to go.