New Music Gear Monday: The EV RE320 Mic

If you were to look into any large studio's mic cabinet, chances are that you'd see at least one Electro-Voice RE20 mic inside. The RE20 has been a workhorse in the industry for a long time, and up until recently, was one of the few large diaphragm dynamic mics.

While EV continues to manufacture the RE20, it recently introduced the RE320, which isn't the same even though it shares the same package. Here's a great video that explains the differences.

Suffice it to say that EV designed the 320 partially as a kick drum mic, but it works in other applications, such as broadcast (where the RE20 has always excelled), as well. The RE320 has a street price of around $300 while the RE20 is around $450.

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

Bruce Swedien's Mic Closet

Bruce Swedien at his Harrison console

Bruce Swedien is truly the Godfather of recording engineers, having recorded and mixed hits from everyone from Count Basie, Duke Ellington and Dizzy Gillespie to Barbra Streisand, Donna Summer and Michael Jackson. He's a mentor of mentors, as so many of his teachings are now handed down to a generation now just learning (his interview in The Mixing Engineer's Handbook is a standout).

Bruce is also a collector of microphones and will not use one he doesn't personally own, so he knows the exact condition of each. Recently he posted a bit about the mics he uses on his Facebook page, and I thought it worth a reprint.

A couple of things stick out to me.
1. His use of an Sennheiser 421 on kick. I know it's a studio standard for some reason (especially on toms), but I never could get it work on anything in a way that I liked.

2. His use of the relatively new Neumann M149, because it's eh...........new.

3. His synthesizer advice (under the M49) is a real gem.

Here's Bruce.
--------------------------------------------

Constantly being asked about my mics, so here goes:

My microphone collection, spanning many of the best-known models in studio history, are my pride and joy. My microphones are prized possessions. To me, they are irreplaceable. Having my own mics that no-one else handles or uses assures a consistency in the sonics of my work that would otherwise be impossible.” 

AKG C414 EB
“My first application would be for first and second violins. It’s really great mic for the classical approach for a string section.”
Hear it on... the first and second violins in Michael Jackson’s ‘Billie Jean’.

Altec 21B
“This is a fantastic mic, and I have four of them. It’s an omni condenser, and [for jazz recording] what you do is wrap the base of the mic connector in foam and put it in the bridge of the bass so that it sticks up and sits right under the fingerboard. It wouldn’t be my choice for orchestral sessions, though.”
Hear it on... Numerous recordings for Oscar Peterson between 1959 and 1965.

RCA 44BX & 77BX; AEA R44C
“[The 44BX] is a large, heavy mellow-sounding old mic with a great deal of proximity effect. This is very useful in reinforcing the low register of a vocalist’s range if that is desired. If I am asked to do a big band recording of mainly soft, lush songs, I almost always opt for ribbon mics for the brass. I suggest AEA R44C or RCA44BX on trumpets, and RCA 77DX on trombones. Ribbon mics are great for percussion too.”
Hear it on... trumpets and flugelhorns in Michael Jackson’s ‘Rock With You’ (at 0:54); percussion in Michael Jackson’s ‘Don’t Stop Till You Get Enough’.

Sennheiser MD421
“The kick is about the only place I use that mic, and I mike very closely. I frequently remove the bass drum’s front head, and the microphone is placed inside along with some padding to minimise resonances, vibrations, and rattles.”
Hear it on... the kick drum in Michael Jackson’s ‘Billie Jean’.

Shure SM57
“For the snare I love the Shure SM57. In the old days it wasn’t as consistent in manufacture as it is now. I must have eight of those mics, and they’re all just a teeny bit different, so I have one marked ‘snare drum’. But the ones I’ve bought recently are all almost identical. On the snare drum, I usually go for a single microphone. I’ve tried miking both top and bottom of the snare, but this can cause phasing problems.”
Hear it on... snare drum in Michael Jackson’s ‘Billie Jean’.

Telefunken 251
“These mics have a beautiful mellow quality, but possess an amazing degree of clarity in vocal recording. The 251 is not overly sibilant and is often my number one choice for solo vocals.”
Hear it on... Patti Austin in ‘Baby, Come To Me’, her duet with James Ingram.

Telefunken U47
“I still have one of the two U47s that I bought new in 1953, and will still frequently be first choice on lead vocal. This is a mic that can be used on a ballad or on a very aggressive rock track. It has a slight peak in its frequency response at around 7kHz, which gives it a feeling of natural presence. It also has a slight peak in the low end around 100Hz. This gives it a warm, rich sound. For Joe Williams, another mic would never have worked as well. I figured out that it was the mic for him when I heard him speak. After you’ve been doing this for as long as I have, you begin to have instinctive sonic reactions, and it saves a lot of time!”
Hear it on... Joe Williams in the Count Basie Band’s Just The Blues

Neumann M149
“I have a pair of these that Neumann made just for me, with consecutive serial numbers, and they sound so great. That’s what I use now in XY stereo on piano.”

Neumann M49
“This is very close sonically to the M149, but not quite the same. It’s a three-pattern mic and the first that Neumann came up with which had the pattern control on the power supply... you could have the mic in the air and still adjust the pattern. I use these for choir recording in a Blumlein pair, which is one of my favourite techniques because it’s very natural in a good room. When I was recording with Michael and Quincy I was given carte blanche to make the greatest soundfields I could, so what I also did was pick a really good room and record the synths through amps and speakers with a Blumlein pair to get the early reflections as part of the sonic field. The direct sound output of a synthesizer is very uninteresting, but this can make the sonic image fascinating. You have to be really careful, though, to open up the pre-delay of any reverb wide enough to not cover those early reflections. They mostly occur below 120ms, so with 120ms pre-delay those sounds remain intact and very lovely.”
Hear it on... Andre Crouch choir in Michael Jackson’s ‘Man In The Mirror’, ‘Keep The Faith’.

Neumann U67
“The predecessor to the U87, and an excellent microphone, but it’s not one of my real favourites, as a purely instinctive reaction. It’s just a little bit too technical perhaps, and it doesn’t have sufficient sonic character for me to use it on a lead vocal, for instance. It’s a good choice of microphone for violas and cellos, however, and the U87 can also work well in this application.”
Hear it on... violas and cellos in Michael Jackson’s ‘Billie Jean’.

I'll post a bit of Bruce's interview from The Mixing Engineer's Handbook in a future post.

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

6 Audio Products That Need To Be Invented

I got to thinking about the pro audio products I'd like to see invented after reading a similar story on home theater audio. When you think about it, we've all gotten pretty comfortable with technology that no one could ever consider as cutting edge. Even though core recording products exist in the following areas, there's plenty of room for growth. Let's take a look at a pie-in-the-sky wish list:

1. A new speaker technology. We've been listening to recorded and reinforced sound with the same technology for about 100 years now. Sure, the loudspeaker has improved and evolved, but it's still the weakest link in the audio chain. What we need is a new loudspeaker technology that improves the listening experience and takes sonic realism to the next level.

2. A new microphone technology. Something is seriously wrong when the best and most cherished microphones that we use today were made 50 years ago. Just like loudspeakers, the technology has improved and evolved over the years, but it's basically the same in that it's still based around moving a diaphragm or ribbon through a magnetic field or changing the electrical charge between two plates (that's a condenser mic, if you didn't know). There has to be a new technology that takes a giant leap to getting us closer to realism than what we have now.

3. Get rid of the wires. Studios have been pretty successful at reducing the amount of wiring in the last 10 years or so, but there's still too much. We need to eliminate them completely. Think how much different your studio would be with wireless speakers, microphones, connections to outboard gear, etc. Much of this is possible today, but the real trick is to make the signal transmission totally lossless with zero interference.

4. The ultimate work surface. Here's the problem. Engineers love to work with faders and knobs. The problem is that faders and knobs take up space, which changes the room acoustics, and which are expensive to implement. When the faders and knobs are reduced to banks of 8, it gets confusing switching between all the banks needed during a large mix. What we need is a work surface that takes this hybrid to the next level, giving the engineer enough faders and knobs to do the job, yet making it totally easy to look at the banks underneath or above. I realize that the bank concept has been implemented on digital consoles for years, but there's no way to actually view what those other banks are unless you call one up. There has to be a better way.

5. The ultimate audio file format. I've done experiments recording the same instrument at 48k, 96k, and 192k and I can tell you unequivocally that the 192kHz recording won hands down. It wasn't even close. Consider this - the ultimate in digital is analog! In other words, the higher the sample rate, the closer to analog it sounds. We need a universal audio format with a super high sample rate that can easily scale to a lower rate as needed. Yes, I realize it's a function of the hardware, but lets plan for the future, people.

6. The ultimate storage device. Speaking of the future, there are a lot of behind-the-scenes audio people that are quietly scared to death that the hard drives and SSD's of today won't be playable tomorrow. Just as Zip and Jazz drives had their brief day in the sun, how would you like to have your hit album backed up onto a drive that nobody can read? That's a more real possibility of that happening than you might know. We need a storage format that is not only robust and protected, but has a lifespan akin to analog tape (tapes from 60 years ago still play today; some sound as good as the day they were recorded). We just can't guarantee the same with the storage devices we use today.

What are your thoughts? Any other products that are needed?

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

David Bock On Microphones

Bock Audio 241

There are a few people on the planet that know a lot about microphones and how they're made, but not many know as much and have the dedication of David Bock, the founder and owner of Bock Audio (formerly Soundelux Microphones). After all, how many people would go to the extent of teaching themselves German just so they could read the old Neumann service manuals? David makes some truly excellent mics, and you'll see a little of just how that came to pass with this excerpt from The Recording Engineer's Handbook.
---------------------------

"After stints repairing microphones (among other things) at such prestigious facilities as the Hit Factory and Oceanway, Bock Audio (formerly Soundelux) founder and managing director David Bock went from repairing vintage microphones to manufacturing them.  David now utilizes his expertise to produce updated versions of the studio classic 251, Although he previously made versions of the U47, FET47, M49 and U67 in the previous Soundelux incarnation of the company.  David was kind enough to share some of his insights as to the inner workings and differences between classic microphones and their modern counterparts.

What actually makes a vintage microphone so special?
There are a couple of things that go into that.  The bottom line is that the 50’s were really the golden age of audio design. Those guys really did know what they were doing when they designed a lot of the key gear that people are still using. They used a lot of the correct techniques and they had the luxury of decent materials and the time to research things properly.

There is a tone to these things that is harder and harder to duplicate. Not impossible, just harder and harder. They had tubes back then that are harder to get now. The available selection of materials was a lot greater back then.  Then there’s the element of chance. Why would someone pay $20,000 for a 251?  Well, maybe that particular 251 really does sound unique because AKG’s production was so sloppy and the capsules were so poorly machined that you’re bound to get one that excels beyond everything else and the rest are just kind of average. Now we have CNC machines that can make these tiny little holes on the capsule backplate all the same, which AKG really couldn’t do.

As you were trying to build an updated version of a vintage microphone, were you trying to copy everything including the circuitry and trying to get it as close to the original as possible, or were you trying to just make it sound like the original?
The sound comes first but that’s not the whole story. The first thing I had to do was try to find what makes the microphone sound the way it does. There were at least 15 points that you have to look at, it turns out, if you’re going to emulate the sound of a microphone. The first large problem is “I want to copy the sound of a 251”. Well, which 251?  I rented about ten 251s here in town (Hollywood) and you know what? There’s no such thing as a common 251.  They’re all totally different.  I could hear it and I could measure it. 

Among some of them there is a common thread though. Frequency response is the primary guidepost because all microphones have their own signature. But frequency response curves don’t always tell you everything. You have to take frequency response measurements not only far-field but also proximity (near-field), which strangely are not published and are completely critical to what we believe a microphone sounds like in the directional world. That’s key and it’s somewhat of a disservice that most of the larger condenser microphone manufacturers have not been publishing those graphs for many years. That’s why most engineers will say “Those graphs don’t really mean anything”. That’s because you’re always looking at a 1 meter graph but you’re not always putting your microphone 1 meter away from the sound source. So of course they don’t mean anything because they’re not telling you what you’re hearing. If you saw a proximity graph and a 1 meter graph you’d have a much better idea of what the microphone sounds like. 

So the dissection process continued through a lot of substitutions. You might take a power supply and substitute a different circuit topology and see what it changes, for instance. There are also a lot of measurements that you have to do. Our ability to test things today is definitely better than back when the classics were built but it’s not completely conclusive and opens up a can of worms that says “If I can’t measure it then I can’t hear it” which I completely disagree with. If you worked only towards measurements you end up with something that actually doesn’t sound particularly good compared to things that were designed with listening in mind. 

Finally, there are listening tests. My primary listening test is to make a recording of a drum set in a large room. I’ve got a couple of key locations where I place the microphone to give me an idea about the close and distant pickup characteristics. That’s where you start hearing the differences. Microphone capsules are related to drums. If you took 10 DW [drum] kits and you tuned them all the same they’d still sound all different. There’s a parallel you could draw towards microphones. You could tune all the snare drums and toms the same and even use measurement devices to be sure that they’re the same, and yet the trained ear of an engineer can pick out the differences between them.  We can lock on to things that are different about each one.

What was the hardest thing to get right?
Always the capsule because it’s so small and if you make a tiny change it makes a huge result.  But that’s not to say that the capsule is 99% of the sound. An 87 and a 67 don’t sound that similar yet they use the same capsule.

What’s the biggest difference in the way microphones are made today from the way the classics were made?
Mass production and availability of quality materials. Also, the need for profitability on a corporate level seems to affect how things are made a lot. I’ve seen the way Neumann microphone are built and they’re very different from the way they used to be. The way they built their microphone in the 50’s and early 60’s, I’ll be able to keep those microphone running for a long time.  Not so with the newer microphone. They still make a great capsule but they don’t make the microphone the same in terms of construction. They’re built for ease of production and lowest cost. It’s true almost across the board.

So if we were to make a broad statement, microphones are not made as well today as they were 50 years ago.
No they’re not. If you had a “cost is no object” attitude, you still don’t even have the same metals available. The quality of brass is different now from what they used in the 50’s and 60’s, for instance, and an equivalent can’t be found. 

With the way the business seems to be going, with less and less emphasis on sonic quality, will there be enough people left to appreciate what you’re doing?
Anybody who is serious about the profession either evolves to a point where they say “I can use an SM57 for every track to make a record” or “I’d rather use a hi-quality microphone to make a record”.  You’re going to go one way or the other and most people, if they stay in the business long enough, will usually gravitate to the more exclusive side."

Do check out David's mics at Bock Audio.

You can read additional book excerpts at bobbyowsinski.com.

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

Making A Mic In Your Kitchen

Okay, I admit that this is a little off-the-wall, but at the same time it's very cool. If you've been around audio for awhile you've heard of piezoelectric mics and tweeters. They're cheap and not abundantly useful, but they are interesting in that they're built around crystals that have the unique characteristic of developing an electrical signal when the crystals are physically compressed, even by something as small as sound pressure.

Here's an interesting video about how you can make your own piezoelectric crystals in your kitchen, and turn them into a microphone. Below the video is a recording using the kitchen-made mic. Thanks Marsha Vdovin for turning me on to this post.




First recording using Rochelle Salt piezo crystal made from baking soda and cream of tartar by leafcutterjohn

----------------------------------

Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

DIY Microphone Isolation Mount

Good microphone isolation mounts are both expensive and very delicate. Plus, it doesn't take much for the bands that hold the mount together to come loose, and some people just can't figure out how to reconnect them. Here's a video about how you can build your own iso mount from some pretty common materials. It doesn't exactly look like one from a manufacturer, but certainly serves the purpose.


----------------------------------
Help support this blog. Any purchases made through our Amazon links help support this website with no cost to you.

You should follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating social media and the new music business.

The Best Microphone Information Sites

There are a couple of websites that I really like for information on microphones. One is the Microphone Database at recordinghacks.com from drummer and mic collector Matt McGlynn, and the other is at coutant.com, which is a site by Professor S.O. Coutant of Pasadena City College.

The Microphone Database has 860 microphone profiles and focuses more on newer mics. Each mic has a brief description, the features, as well as the specs, frequency chart, polar plots and review. It's a great place to compare the virtues between several mics before you choose to buy.

Professor Coutant's site looks more at older mics, which makes it a great resource for any microphone history, and specializes in mics used for broadcast. There are some great detailed photos, as well as some seldom seen celebrity user pictures (like the one of a very young Willie Nelson from 1966 on the left).

When I was teaching recording in the early 1990's, one of the biggest problems for my students was one of microphone identification, especially of vintage mics. It was all well and good to discuss using a U-67 or a C-12A, but most students didn't have a clue what they looked like. That's why I dedicated an entire chapter to the microphones that are considered "standards" in The Recording Engineer's Handbook. I tried to give a history of each mic, as well as it's uses. I'd like to think I did a really good job with providing facts that can't be found anywhere else in my book, but sites like Matt's Microphone Database and Professor Coutant's now make it easy for a student to easily identify a vintage microphone. Now if only they were more available to use.

-------------------------

Follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating the music business.

4 Steps To A Cleaner Smelling Microphone

There's currently a post on Pro Sound Web that was derived from a Shure article about cleaning your microphone. After reading it, I thought that I could break it down more clearly into just a few steps.

This is more for a mic used in live performance that the studio, although any mic that's used for vocals is naturally somewhat contaminated by the saliva, spittle, and in many clubs, smoke. It's a good idea to clean those mics if for no other reason that simple hygiene. Keep in mind that what we're talking about is a microphone with a removable grill, like our old friend the SM58 or Beta 58.

1) Unscrew the grill from the microphone and remove anything stuck on it with a toothbrush.

2) Now clean both the grill and foam windscreen with some plain water and mild dishwashing detergent. This should be enough to chase any unwanted smells away.

3) Let grill air-dry, but if you're in a hurry, you can use a hair dryer set on low. Don't put the grill back on the mic if it's still wet, since this can cause damage to the capsule if any moisture sifts into it.


4) For mics with grills that aren't removable like an SM57, turn the mic upside down and scrub with a toothbrush soaked in a weak solution of water and detergent. Don't turn it right-side up until it's dry.

Want a quick solution for a stinky mic? Get a very diluted solution of mouthwash and water, turn the mic upside down, and gently scrub. As in #4 above, don't turn it over until it's dry.

Be especially careful with condenser mics, since any moisture at all equals disaster. In fact, don't even think about it unless you can take the windscreen completely off and leave it over-night to dry.

Once again - be careful, be careful, be careful. Moisture and electronics do not mix. That being said, if you're careful your mics will now smell nice and clean and be good for you too.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Don't forget to check out my Music 3.0 blog for tips and tricks on navigating the music business.

Follow me on Twitter for daily news and updates on production and the music business.

Drum Recording Handbook

Another new book that I've written along with engineer Dennis Moody has just been released called "The Drum Recording Handbook". Dennis has been my engineer on projects that I produce for years, and he's the go-to guy for such monster drummers as Michael White, Ricky Lawson, Gary Novak, Bernie Dresel, Dave Weckl (who are all in the book), Vinnie Colaiuta, and Steve Ferrone among others.

The book is about the best method to get great drum sounds even with inexpensive gear, although it covers a lot of drum related issues like tuning, studio environment, phase cancellation (the drum sound destroyer), and the drummer's headphone mix.

Of all the things in this book that I wish I knew when I started out, learning what it takes to make a drum kit sound good before you even put the mics up is number 1. Let's face it, if the drums don't sound good by themselves in the room first, no amount of electronic manipulation will make them sound good later.

A 90 minute DVD also comes with the book where Dennis takes you through the steps of miking each drum, getting sounds, and getting a mix together. Michael White (drummer for Steely Dan and Earth, Wind & Fire among others) the takes you through drum tuning and even plays a song.

For more info, check out The Drum Recording Handbook here.

AES Trends

While AES 2008 was essentially the same as all recent AES's in that the audio products shown were evolutionary rather than revolutionary, there was one trend that caught my eye.

Several companies were displaying dual capsule mics where each capsule had it's own output (multi-pattern mics use two diaphragms but mix the result into a single output).  This enables you to manually change the pattern either while recording or when you're mixing.

I don't know how practical dual out mics will actually be since we've been getting along just fine all these years without this ability, but it's nice that mic manufactures are thinking outside the box.