Microphone for Diezel guitar amp recording

  • Thread starter Thread starter slivoid
  • Start date Start date
C-4":1yf32kh8 said:
What happened to using the "compensated out" function either alone, or in conjunction with a mic, or a couple of mics of choice? :confused:
Click to expand...
Hey buddy.

Good point.
I've tested with this very idea, but I couldn't get it working to my satisfaction. It always seemed to be too 'hard' as opposed to simple analogue micing. But, for some others it just may be their ticket.

But I definitely would use this live to the house mix.
 
Hello slivoid - as I promised.

Here’s a quick guitar clip comparing the Audix i5 to the industry standard Shure SM57 for those of you that might be interested.

There are only 3 short parts enough to suffice and expose the SM57 alone, Audix i5 + SM57 together one panned hard left, the other hard right and the Audix i5 alone.

The clip is purely utilitarian. Its only purpose is to represent the sonic differences between the two mics. The clip was recorded with Cubase off a single V30. No EQ or effects at all - pre or post. All EQ levels on my Mackie are set to unity and there is no EQ being used in Cubase. The only processing is in the export from Cubase to mp3.

Play along - guess which part is what mic...
Ill upload a screen shot of the wave footprints where you can clearly see who's who.

SM57 and Audix i5 Comparison
 
Thanks King for your comparison ! :thumbsup:

I don't know the i5, but I am impressed !
SM57 + i5, I'm not convinced ...

With the E906 senn, the test would have been perfect ! ;)

Thank you again :rock:
 
Wow - over 470 views and only 23 replies?

Well I thought there might be more interest than that.

Any who...I've attached the wave forms of the three tests. Both mics were dialed in the exact same input. The first test is the Audix i5 (my personal fave) and you can clearly see and hear that it is much more detailed than the SM57, the second test. The SM57 sounds dull and boxy with very little detail. Some may like that, I do not. The third test is the Audix i5 and SM57 together. Both mics were placed at the edge of the dust cap off-center.
 

Attachments

King Crimson":57hik1dt said:
Wow - over 470 views and only 23 replies?

Well I thought there might be more interest than that.

Any who...I've attached the wave forms of the three tests. Both mics were dialed in the exact same input. The first test is the Audix i5 (my personal fave) and you can clearly see and hear that it is much more detailed than the SM57, the second test. The SM57 sounds dull and boxy with very little detail. Some may like that, I do not. The third test is the Audix i5 and SM57 together. Both mics were placed at the edge of the dust cap off-center.
Click to expand...

With your test, my favorite is the i5 also.

I want a comparison test between the i5 and the senn E906 but I can not find ...
 
I can't open the sound file for some reason.. doesn't load or play for me. Very interested in this thread though.. 57's i am starting to find can be picky with placement. Sometimes i also get this vortex effect where it seems like sound is being sucked out and compressed. Don't dig that at all.. need it to be more open.
 
King Crimson":2nuneeh4 said:
Wow - over 470 views and only 23 replies?

Well I thought there might be more interest than that.

Any who...I've attached the wave forms of the three tests. Both mics were dialed in the exact same input. The first test is the Audix i5 (my personal fave) and you can clearly see and hear that it is much more detailed than the SM57, the second test. The SM57 sounds dull and boxy with very little detail. Some may like that, I do not. The third test is the Audix i5 and SM57 together. Both mics were placed at the edge of the dust cap off-center.
Click to expand...
I like them mixed the best. I have both mics. I don't like the i5 alone. when I place it on the part of the speaker to get the attack I want(edge of dust cap) it's too bright for my taste. Something about a 57 just feels right. It's been beat into everyone's head for forever, when it's not there I kinda feel something's missing.

2 different mics is almost always better than 1 for recording guitars IMO. you need more than 1 to catch everything.
 
vchizzle":2zbtl5s4 said:
King Crimson":2zbtl5s4 said:
Wow - over 470 views and only 23 replies?

Well I thought there might be more interest than that.

Any who...I've attached the wave forms of the three tests. Both mics were dialed in the exact same input. The first test is the Audix i5 (my personal fave) and you can clearly see and hear that it is much more detailed than the SM57, the second test. The SM57 sounds dull and boxy with very little detail. Some may like that, I do not. The third test is the Audix i5 and SM57 together. Both mics were placed at the edge of the dust cap off-center.
Click to expand...
I like them mixed the best. I have both mics. I don't like the i5 alone. when I place it on the part of the speaker to get the attack I want(edge of dust cap) it's too bright for my taste. Something about a 57 just feels right. It's been beat into everyone's head for forever, when it's not there I kinda feel something's missing.

2 different mics is almost always better than 1 for recording guitars IMO. you need more than 1 to catch everything.
Click to expand...

I think I'll take the i5.

Who do you think would be the second best microphone ?
 
Don't know, slivoid. But I'll set it straight, IMO there is no comparison to the 'clear' and abundant detail of the i5 to the SM57, none what so ever.

Again I changed nothing as far as I/O – test was truly neutral. I don't know how anyone could argue that the i5 isn't 'clearly' more detailed and transparent to the SM57.
 
Hi guys !

I will order the Audix i5 in the next days.

If you want to change my mind, it's time ! ;)
 
I've had some good results using a Shure Beta 56A. It seems very easy to position. I remember just plopping it infront of my 1960A playing my Schmidt one day and got a damn decent tone! Both my housemate and I have SM57's too, he has a Rode NT-2A which we're yet to try on guitars properly. Could be brilliant.
 
MD409, M88, both out o print...

Try heil or Audix ... A906 or even a 609. Beats a 57 to me every time on gtr
57 is good for top snare. But 4me I hate it on gtr.

Ur 906 is perhaps the best new bet
 
If you want a mic that sounds like what you are hearing the room,
get a ribbon mic. Some of them may not handle a loud guitar cab, but many will.
Cascade Fathead is a good inexpensive choice, there are others.
 
For me the SM57 is great for the top end but to get the 'full' sound its worth saving up for a condenser mic too and recording them together. Something like the AT4040 isn't particularly expensive and captures a lot more of the lower frequencies giving you a bigger overall sound when blended with the SM57. If you then white noise the mics to eliminate any phasing, you'll end up with something that sounds seriously tight as well.
 
Alexstrat82":17f6h1z7 said:
For me the SM57 is great for the top end but to get the 'full' sound its worth saving up for a condenser mic too and recording them together. Something like the AT4040 isn't particularly expensive and captures a lot more of the lower frequencies giving you a bigger overall sound when blended with the SM57. If you then white noise the mics to eliminate any phasing, you'll end up with something that sounds seriously tight as well.
Click to expand...

I have the 4040 and it's a great mic! haven't used it on amps though..... just vocals and acoustic gtrs
 
Slivoid, when you buy your mic and start recording would you share some clips with us, please? I'm yet to actually hear a VH4 with the RL tonetubby cab :D
 
No problem !
I will change my speakers in few weeks, but I will make some clips before installing my V30 :yes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top