Another dumb question. Might as well ask.

A condenser normally has more definition and better detail and high end than
a dynamic ..I guess?

Take a Beyerdynamic M 88 TG or a Audix OM7 or [insert 200+ hand held dynamic
of your choice]. For that money, wouldn't a condenser like a Nueman KM or
shure beta 87 or AKG whatever be better since a condenser would have better detail
and high end?

Course the dynamic would take more abuse I would imagine.. But I was just curious
why dymamics like these are this expensive...if a condenser would be "better".

thanks
Jay

I don't know about hand-held high end dynamics, but my SM7 is nothing like a condensor, but it's still really, really good. It may not have more high-end definition than a 57 or something comparable, but it's really, really smooth and blows away most of the condensors I've used on hard-edged vocals. It also sounds just amazing on amp.

So, higher-priced dynamics don't have to try to emulate condensors to be worth every penny.

That M88 is a nice mic! I really enjoy the E/V ND468 for a great sounding all around good dynamic mic as well.

A condensor's diaphragm is much more sensitive and reacts much swifter than a dynamic mic by design so yes, it will typically deliver more detail, particularly in the high end. Sometimes that detail is desirable, sometimes not.

Mic selection and placement is a wonderful part of the recording process, and one of the most important steps if not the most important, to a good recording of a good performance. I would dare say that a $99 condensor will sound better on some sources than a $400 dynamic...and of course vice versa.

It's nice to have some selection, and yes anything that needs more high end detail I'm going to reach for a condensor. Do you have any decent small diaphragm condensors? If you're looking to capture high end detail I would look there first.

War

Any other thoughts on top of the line dynamics, especially those which excel in less than perfect rooms/noise conditions?

Everyone seems to mention the sennheiser MD 441-U? Any thoughts on that or other such mics?

Part of it is a point of philosophy. Stage condensors, while sometimes practical and useful mics, are not really the best condensor mics out there. Rather than spend money on an item that will be replaced with a better example of its type when I have more money, I'd rather buy something that's best in breed and will last a lifetime, assuming I don't have compelling needs that demand a stop gap comprimise.. I use good dynamics for vocals and many instruments, and a couple of pretty good but very cheap small diaphragm condensors for stuff like overheads and acoustic guitar. To my ears, the SDC's are often at less of a defecit to their higher priced brethren then cheap LDC's. When you can get some of the best dynamics for vocals for $300 and less, it doesn't make sense to me to pass them up for mics that are "like" Neumanns.

Bear

When I got into owning some very nice mic preamps I started seeing that even many of the better lower cost condensers sort of paled next to a good dynamic. There are exceptions to the rule and I still own my Oktava MK012 pair and just got a pair of Groove Tubes GT33. I keep an Oktava MK219 as I like it on hand percussion only. Otherwise, it'd be on eBay. I've got a Studio Projects B1 which I keep but haven't used in a long time.

One of my favorite mics which even compares favorably to more expensive large condensers it the Audio-Technica AT4040. If you were a newbie and came up to me today and said you wanted to get a first large condenser, then I'd say AT4040.

I think Bear gave an interesting insight into things. And, I'll expand on it a bit. On certain of the more popular cheap large condensers you hear people saying things like XYZ large condenser is like a Neumann U87. Well, I can't remember the last time I heard someone say that XYZ dynamic sounds like a Shure SM57. With the dynamics you can afford to get the real thing versus getting the imitation.

I wrote this entry in my blog on putting together a mic collection. You'll note that I don't list a mic that sounds like a Neumann or is just as good as something else. I only put in mics that stand on their own for what they are.

Steven,

Is the oktava 219 really so bad that you only use it on hand percussion?

I picked up my 3D audio mic cd. The cd compares different mics. I listened to the SM7, sennheiser md 441-u, sm57, Lawson 47mp and the ELam 251.

I was stunned by how good the guy sounds on the sm57. It is a very usable take and just as usable as the lawson and ELam. Of course the sm57 did not have that big tube condensor sound which might be required in certain types of music but it worked on that guy and i'd use that sound in a rock or pop setting. The sm57 did not work on the female voice so well.

The 441 and sm7 were definitely smoother than the sm57 especially in the high frequencies. They did not have the same amount of high end as the sm57 making them perhaps less useful for cutting through a mix withou EQ. The 441 and the sm 7 also lacked the brillance and openess of the Lawson and ELam (telefunken) but they were still quite nice and very smooth. I really like the 441 on the male singer, especially with a bit of EQ.

I have to say that i favor putting money into mic preamps and decent converters over buying a $1000 or $2000 mic.

Many singers have relied on dynamic mics on major releases. Some of the one's i've heard of are below. Can you guys name any others?


Rivers Cuomo (Weezer): Sm58
Anthody Kiedis (Red hot chili peppers): Sm57
Bono (U2): Sm58
Michael Jackson (thriller?): sm7
Elton John (early albums): sennheiser 441
Stevie Nicks (fleetwood mac) sennheiser 441

I am sure there are plenty of others. Can you think of any?

Well, it's really good on hand percussion. And, I'll add it's been good on the sort of hand percussion I record. It gives a certain sound I can't get elsewhere.

But, I've had times I've used it for other things. Then, later, I'll get in a mix and I can't quite get it to fit the way I want it to.

For a more general use sort of mic from Oktava I'd say look to the MK319. It's the same insides but a different body from the MK219.

WELL PUT!

Hey, just some wisdom I've heard from you and jslator over the years. It took getting a Great River mic pre and an A Designs mic pre to prove you right but it was worth it.

I bought the EV RE-27 specifically for use in lieu of a condensor on stage. So far, I'm really liking what I hear.

Sammy Hagar with VH- SM57.

it's not just about condensors vs higher priced dynamics, but any priced dynamic.

In general, it's the old saying of whatever sounds best for a particular use, and don't fail to experiment, you might be surprised. Listening to an SM57 or SM58 through a good preamp might really surprise you. Sometimes my EV757 can sound awsome.

In general, the dynamics don't have quite the soundfield, they're not suposed to, or they'd never work onstage. But they also lack that hairy/fuzziness/grit that sometimes drives me nuts with condensors on some sources. The dynamic can sound more creamy..

Also, some performers just don't perform well unless they are holding a mic and singing with their mouth right on it (eating the mic).

Madguitarist...creamy...yes they can compared to condensors...

War

very interesting stuff -- didn't know all those people did "real records" with dynamics.

Also, in the 60's the Beach Boys would record their lead and backup vocals live, they would have a U87 for backups and a little ways away, a sm57 that Mike Love and Brian would alternate using. for lead.

i think the error you are making in thinking high price dynamic vs. medium low price condenser (say you have a $300 budget which will get you a GREAT dynamic-used or a decent condenser-used) is that you are imagining them along some sort of line that goes from bad mic to great mic.

the two different types of mics are just gonna sound very different. more different than almost any other signal chain factor. more than different pres, more than different recording mediums.

what i would say is you should think in terms of: what is going to work best with my gear, in my studio, in my budget, trying to get the sound i want?

tough questions, and probably the only way you can answer these questions is with some trial and error.

that said, i love my m88tg and my 441 and my ribbons (i'll include these as dynamic mics). but sometimes i just NEED a condenser. and even a cheapie condenser is going to get me the sound i want over a super fancy dynamic. and sometimes a 57 is the best choice.

so, in summary, i have no answer for you. try them both and see what happens.

ps: that $199 gt44 sale at GC rocks.

With a pop-screen, the Oktava MC-012 is nice on some vocals, and it's cheap. The M-88 tends to be better on most, though.

If you're competent w/ a soldering iron, you might check the Lab for threads on mic mods, generally on MXL's. Guys who are building quite high-end mics from better capsules and such are speaking well of some of these mics with just some replaced capacitors. (Gus, Flatpicker, tmbg, and Marik are some of the big players in fiddling with this stuff.) We're probably still talking functional tool, but probably a better, less disposable one.

As a general point of principle, I'll stick to my general line, but there's going to be a certain point of quality on a lot of types of gear where, while you may get better stuff, the first stuff you bought will still be useful. Nady and Samson condensors, IMO, are not of that grade. Many AT and Studio Projects mics probably are. If you're willing to spend decent money on a dynamic mic, it's just fundamentally harder to fall below this ceiling of utility, besides some of them being plain great in a lot of uses.

Bear

100% agree with Eeldip, different types are just going to sound different and each will have their own place.

As an example, the song I'm currently working on. The range of this song and the way the melody goes are very stressful on my voice(this old fat boy don't sing like he used to). I tried using every LDC mic I have. And though some sounded better than others, I could really hear the stress in my voice(not what I wanted). After trying every trick I could think of to alleviate this, I still wasn't happy! I started to think I would just have to accept it. After playing several games of Solitare(I think best when I'm playing Solitare, ), I decided to try my Shure SM7. Now I may not have gotten the same quality of vocals as with an LDC, but it worked wonderfully. Gone were the sounds of an overly stressed voice. Although I still had a hard time getting the take, the SM7 didn't emphasize the strain and slight crackling in my voice. Also, to my advantage, I sang right up on the mic, which gave the vocal an "in your face" sort of sound. This just happens to work well with this particular song. Because of the large dynamic range of this song, I could never do that with an LDC without overdriving the recorder.

As a result, I'm now very happy with the way the lead vocals turned out.

I put an LDC back up, stepped back a foot and recorded the harmony parts in one take.

Very, very happy!

Later,

Joel

that's actually one of the main reasons to whip out the dynamic mic as lead vocal... they manage to tame the screamers, tame the spitters, clean up the messy stuff.

one thing to remember, when you hear someone sing in the real world, you are NEVER within a foot of them. so what your mic is hearing is something really WEIRD. very detailed mics can pick up some stuff that just shouldnt be heard.

i bet the reason michael jackson used the sm7 is that he fills his more rockin songs with so many screams and yelps that a condenser would have just sounded weird.

oh and one more totally unrelated thing: the reason i like the m88 is that you can stick it on a stand, have the singer back off a foot and that mic will STILL sound nice and thick (its a VERY bass heavy mic). great mic for dudes who shout and spit their way thru vocal takes- back them off the mic, smooth that stuff out- and they still sound thick and MANLY like the wanna.

You guys KNOW a topic like this one will attract me!

For many singers with a bright voice (like me), there's already more than enough
"detail" to begin with so a dynamic can work great.

In fact, IMHO my vocals have similar coloration as the Beach Boys harmony style. A Shure Unidyne III with a killer pre would give ANY other
microphone a run for its money on that dense/layered type of pop material.

Lacking AE ala Chuck Britz, however, probably the EV RE15 or RE20 (also 666)
would be easier for most mortal engineers to use on me.

BTW been gone off the boards for a while to "clear my head" and develop new positive activities since the passing of Kathy last year (wife).

Steve was kind to offer me the opportunity of a blog here, and will put some thought into it, so it's useful for others.

Chris,

I didn't know. I'm so sorry. I just can't imagine life without my loving and supportive wife. My prayers are with you and yours.

Joel

yea, wow.

man... that must be rough.. heart goes out to you.

Thanks guys for your empathy...

BTW will try to stop by once or twice a week (or so).

That'd be great. I always enjoy reading your posts.

Joel

I often choose dynamic mics, because they are generally less sensitive to subtle noise
but pick up the loud sounds really good. Here's a few examples, on saxaphones
condenser mics seem to pick up a lot of the valve noise when used up close, a good
dynamic such as an RE-20 tends to get more of the horn sound, but doesn't pick up
much valve noise at all. The same goes with guitar amps, condensers tend to make
an hum or noise from the amp very prominent, while dynamic mics tend to get less
of this. In conference recording, condensers will pick up every damn little noise in the
room, while an omni dynamic captures mostly the voices. I don't like hearing people
shuffling their papers, or noise from the ac vents. A lot of dynamics have foam inside
of their windscreen, which also cuts down on the sensitivity of the mic element, but
makes them work better for close vocals.

In other situations, condenser mics can just be too crisp. I often like using my
Stedman N90 on the body of my acoustic guitar, because it gets more of the
woody tone of the instrument, and then use a condenser up on the neck to get
more of the string details.

Besides being less sensitive and crisp, my favorite thing about dynamic mics, is
that they sound dense and meaty in the midrange. Sometimes things just have
more balls when mic'ed with a dynamic.

THIS is exactly learned in all my time researching this. SIMPLE...but so easy to
overlook. Part of the issue is best mic in class for a pro studio with soundproofing that
will be recording all kinds of things for clients that pay or someone doing CD releases
in a specially prepared room where there is lots of high end outboard equipment and
mastering and per channel extensive EQ vs.. song (not artist) demo's.

I learned this from you guys...not all the other forums. I thank you for that.

I need a mic with punch and more high end because the tc-helicon tends to take some
off...so I plan on a EV ND767. Its a crapshoot sure, but its got a bigger high end peak than the shure beta...or even the sm86. Sure i would love a at4040, but I don't think its right for the way i record -- and with no soundproofing.

And...all that aside...its fun learning.

Jay

If I had the budget, I'd like to have all RE27 up front for live performers.

I picked up one on a lark, and really enjoy the lack of proximity effect for live performance work. One a side by side comparision with my Beyer M400, there is a huge difference with the Beyer having a big, fat bottom with a lips-touching technique.

The RE27 sounds thin by comparison, but the intelligibilithy factor is way up when used with live sound reinforcement.

FWIW, my MXL V67 shockmount works somewhat OK with the RE27. It is very heavy beast, for sure.

Update: I still don't have the budget, but I tripped over a 2nd RE27 on eBay that was selling far below value, so I jumped on it.

My new band has our debut gig on 4/9/05, and we are going to have two RE27 up front for vocals. The gig is a benefit, and there will be numerous speakers with no microphone sense, so perhaps the RE27 will make them more intelligible.