looking for mic suggestions for 4x12

dstroud

dstroud

Well-known member
So I have Heil PR-20 and an sm-57. They sound really different but I’m thinking about trying something else to mic my 4x12 for recording. What are you guy liking these days? Using boosted plexi/jcm800 style amps into Greenback loaded 1960BX cab.
 
I picked up a sE Electronics Voodoo VR1 passive ribbon mic and have been blown away by it. An SM57 and a Royer R-121 is the classic combination used in studios for years. Ribbon mics in general add a warmth and body to the cut of a 57. What I like about the VR1 is the high end. Most ribbon mics are dark, but this one seems really neutral. It sounds natural, like an honest capture of whatever I put in front of it.
 
Other than a 57? A 57….. :D

Honestly if I were you I’d hunt down and get a few vintage unidsynr sm57s. They sound very different, and are all slightly different as well. Much much preferred for the most part.


If you are only using one mic, I’d personally be very weary of using anything else other than a 57 for a number of reasons, because you’ll end up chasing your tail in the mix wondering why something isn’t work etc. the 57 just works, period. So if it’s single micing only, I’d say go with a vintage unidyne 57 or two, you’ll be glad you did regardless, trust me.


2 mics? Eh… I hate this topic haha. But, the 201 is a great option to pair with a 57. I like it dead center on the cone about -16 to -20 dbs under the sm57, just to give it alittle extra girth in the low mids and the low end. It’s very small, but it makes a huge difference when you start stacking tracks. The 421 is a favorite as well. As far as obscure mics, the the ehrlund EHR -D is quickly becoming a favorite as a second mic for me too, again about -20dbs under the 57. I’d start here.
 
VESmedic said:
Other than a 57? A 57….. :D

Honestly if I were you I’d hunt down and get a few vintage unidsynr sm57s. They sound very different, and are all slightly different as well. Much much preferred for the most part.


If you are only using one mic, I’d personally be very weary of using anything else other than a 57 for a number of reasons, because you’ll end up chasing your tail in the mix wondering why something isn’t work etc. the 57 just works, period. So if it’s single micing only, I’d say go with a vintage unidyne 57 or two, you’ll be glad you did regardless, trust me.


2 mics? Eh… I hate this topic haha. But, the 201 is a great option to pair with a 57. I like it dead center on the cone about -16 to -20 dbs under the sm57, just to give it alittle extra girth in the low mids and the low end. It’s very small, but it makes a huge difference when you start stacking tracks. The 421 is a favorite as well. As far as obscure mics, the the ehrlund EHR -D is quickly becoming a favorite as a second mic for me too, again about -20dbs under the 57. I’d start here.
Click to expand...
I actually like what I get with my 57, just was thinking about experimenting, should prolly just stick with what works and save some $$$ lol
 
dstroud said:
I actually like what I get with my 57, just was thinking about experimenting, should prolly just stick with what works and save some $$$ lol
Click to expand...


Good answer :D Haha… everyone hates my answer on this, but it’s the truth. People use nothing but 57s often on guitars for a reason, and it’s not because they don’t want to experiment or can’t afford other mics etc. it’s because it’s just never nearly as focused or clear, or tight, or the same transient response you get with a single mic. I challenge anyone to send me a clip of a well placed 57 only, and then another with say, a 57 a ribbon or even a 421, with both clips perfectly volume matched and tell me why the two mic version is better. Sure, it might sound better on its OWN( still doubtful), but not often in a mix. On that note, sometimes two or 3 mics is needed, but I think this generally applies to experienced engineers who know exactly what they are looking for and have a clear mindful reason for why they are doing it. Often times at our level, guys just “wanna do it because”. And I mean there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, no doubt. I’m just saying, the two mic combo will never be as punchy, as FOCUSED( for sure) or have the same transient response as a single well placed 57. That’s why when I do it personally, I keep the second mic much much lower In a mix. I have a great monitoring setup as well, and the things I couldn’t hear before and didn’t quite understand are much more apparent to me now, and is now clear to me. The mics will never be perfectly In phase, which is why you get the results you do ( less transient response and clarity, focus etc). And sometimes, that can be cool! It’s just not usually for me in the music I like to play and mix.
 
The 57 is going to be the go-to for the majority of guitar recordings. However I think a while back, Ola A/B'd a bunch of dynamic mics and he found that he actually preferred an SM58 over the 57. I don't know if he used it in mixes though, or if he's gone back to a 57 now.

The standard in Nashville for a while has been to blend an SM57 and Royer R-121, but there's not a ton of super high gain metal being produced there, and I find that combo typically works better with smaller or lower gain amps.

My favorite mic pairing with a 57 is the Beyerdynamic M160. It has the low end of a ribbon mic but it is tighter than other ribbon mics, and it has interesting mids and doesn't interfere with the presence of the 57 in my experience, so I don't think of it as "blending with" the 57 so much as "supporting" it. 57 for presence and clarity, M160 for more depth and body.
 
VESmedic said:
Good answer :D Haha… everyone hates my answer on this, but it’s the truth. People use nothing but 57s often on guitars for a reason, and it’s not because they don’t want to experiment or can’t afford other mics etc. it’s because it’s just never nearly as focused or clear, or tight, or the same transient response you get with a single mic. I challenge anyone to send me a clip of a well placed 57 only, and then another with say, a 57 a ribbon or even a 421, with both clips perfectly volume matched and tell me why the two mic version is better. Sure, it might sound better on its OWN( still doubtful), but not often in a mix. On that note, sometimes two or 3 mics is needed, but I think this generally applies to experienced engineers who know exactly what they are looking for and have a clear mindful reason for why they are doing it. Often times at our level, guys just “wanna do it because”. And I mean there is absolutely nothing wrong with that, no doubt. I’m just saying, the two mic combo will never be as punchy, as FOCUSED( for sure) or have the same transient response as a single well placed 57. That’s why when I do it personally, I keep the second mic much much lower In a mix. I have a great monitoring setup as well, and the things I couldn’t hear before and didn’t quite understand are much more apparent to me now, and is now clear to me. The mics will never be perfectly In phase, which is why you get the results you do ( less transient response and clarity, focus etc). And sometimes, that can be cool! It’s just not usually for me in the music I like to play and mix.
Click to expand...

That's totally true that there's nothing wrong with experimentation; but IMO alot of people don't really learn the 57 well enough before they start fucking around with multiple mic setups.

There's so much you can do with a 57, and most of the time it seems like people do the basic shit with a 57, and then think to themselves "well if this is good, a multiple mic setup must be better! And with a relatively experienced engineer it certainly can be.

But there's so much to learn about placement, gain staging/preamp interaction, and how it reacts to different amps and playing styles, that people just seem to skip over because they think it doesn't matter - and it totally does matter.


Edit: I'm not trying to insinuate that this is you, @dstroud I have no idea of your experience level, I'm just saying this happens alot in general
 
DanTravis62 said:
That's totally true that there's nothing wrong with experimentation; but IMO alot of people don't really learn the 57 well enough before they start fucking around with multiple mic setups.

There's so much you can do with a 57, and most of the time it seems like people do the basic shit with a 57, and then think to themselves "well if this is good, a multiple mic setup must be better! And with a relatively experienced engineer it certainly can be.

But there's so much to learn about placement, gain staging/preamp interaction, and how it reacts to different amps and playing styles, that people just seem to skip over because they think it doesn't matter - and it totally does matter.


Edit: I'm not trying to insinuate that this is you, @dstroud I have no idea of your experience level, I'm just saying this happens alot in general
Click to expand...
yeah man I hear you!! Move a mic a 1/2 inch any direction and it’s a new tone!! Here’s where I’m at currently. I do all my own mixing /mastering but I’m completely self taught and always looking for ways to improve
 
dstroud said:
yeah man I hear you!! Move a mic a 1/2 inch any direction and it’s a new tone!! Here’s where I’m at currently. I do all my own mixing /mastering but I’m completely self taught and always looking for ways to improve
Click to expand...


Good playing man! And great video editing skills too.
 
TheGreatGreen said:
The 57 is going to be the go-to for the majority of guitar recordings. However I think a while back, Ola A/B'd a bunch of dynamic mics and he found that he actually preferred an SM58 over the 57. I don't know if he used it in mixes though, or if he's gone back to a 57 now.

The standard in Nashville for a while has been to blend an SM57 and Royer R-121, but there's not a ton of super high gain metal being produced there, and I find that combo typically works better with smaller or lower gain amps.

My favorite mic pairing with a 57 is the Beyerdynamic M160. It has the low end of a ribbon mic but it is tighter than other ribbon mics, and it has interesting mids and doesn't interfere with the presence of the 57 in my experience, so I don't think of it as "blending with" the 57 so much as "supporting" it. 57 for presence and clarity, M160 for more depth and body.
Click to expand...


Very much the standard in music city for sure. Even on some of the heavier country rock tunes ( Aldean, Brantley Gilbert etc, who I was out with for a few months actually). It absolutely can work, no doubt, but for higher gain tones, it’s just better to start with one first and really learn it! I saw ola’s video, and he did like the 58. But again, Ola is a pro musician, not a pro engineer. I am by NO MEANS taking anything away from ola, he’s great no doubt, and he knows his shit. But he likes darker tones as well, and didn’t really give actual reasons why he liked the 58 better and why he thought it work in a MIX better specifically, and that’s the nuts and bolts of it for me. My buddy mixed a feared record for instance, and I think he said it was by far the darkest record he’s ever done, so take that with a grain of salt as well. There’s nothing wrong with that, as it’s all taste at the end of the day. He liked the Ehrlund a lot as well, which I’m becoming a real fan of myself for sure as well! Great mics.
 
Last edited:
VESmedic said:
Very much the standard in music city for sure. Even on some of the heavier country rock tubes ( Aldean, Brantley Gilbert etc, who I was out with for a few months actually). It absolutely can work, no doubt, but for higher gain tones, it’s just better to start with one first and really learn it! I saw ola’s video, and he did like the 58. But again, Ola is a pro musician, not a pro engineer. I am by NO MEANS taking anything away from ola, he’s great no doubt, and he knows his shit. But he likes darker tones as well, and didn’t really give actual reasons why he liked the 58 better and why he thought it work in a MIX better specifically, and that’s the nuts and bolts of it for me. My buddy mixed a feared record for instance, and I think he said it was by far the darkest record he’s ever done, so take that with a grain of salt as well. There’s nothing wrong with that, as it’s all taste at the end of the day. He liked the Ehrlund a lot as well, which I’m becoming a real fan of myself for sure as well! Great mics.
Click to expand...

Just to chime in, I agree with your buddy who mixed the feared record - Ola prefers super dark tones. Soloed on a YouTube video - that helps it sound pleasing to so many casual observers, I assume.

In a mix, however, it's a bit of a different story. In the vast majority of modern metal sounds, there is going to be a lot more high mids and high end, because that's what gets results in a full band mix.

Obviously it's all personal taste, but I've noticed it too.
 
57 if you want the sound of a 57 on a cab.

57/ 121 if you want the sound of your amp.

Tried 421 and hated it, 421/57 and hated it. Basically any sennheiser mic I hate on guitar.

My 57 is old from the 80’s and sounds great. Love the 121 with it. My buddy lets me use his.

Also want to try the m160 sometime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top