What Mic? (Yes, sorry, another one.....!)

[SPHDS]

Sorry if this has been done to death, but........

I have started to do backing vocals for a band, and the microphone I am using (a Shure Unidyne PE515) which belonged to my father

[url="http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/$(KGrHqR,!pwE9eGeBW0ZBPZWjYi-Z!~~60_57.JPG"]http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/$(KGrHqR,!pwE9eGeBW0ZBPZWjYi-Z!~~60_57.JPG[/url]

is, whilst looking pretty good, just not cutting it in the mix (apparently it is turned up twice as high as any of the other mic's on stage and is barely audible (plus I am not the loudest of singers anyway.....!)

So I was wondering what to get, I know Shure SM58's are the go-to/industry standard/creme de la creme of mics, but they ain't cheap.......so was wondering if there were any others out there to consider that may not cost as much, but do the job...!

Cheers for any help......!

[paul_5]

AKG D770s seem pretty robust, slightly cheaper than the SM58s too.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AKG-D770-Pro-Dynamic-Instrument-Vocal-Cardioid-Microphone-with-Stand-Adaptor-/290731812261?pt=UK_Music_Instruments_Microphones_MJ&hash=item43b0f765a5#ht_1141wt_1215

[charic]

I'd suggest giving the guys at your nearest digital village a shout. They're very helpful and will let you trial microphones in the store usually.

To me it sounds like you're looking for something that is a bit more sensitive than normal but still good at fending off feedback, sennheisers tend to pretty good for this. I've never been particularly fond of the sound of them but as it's backing vocals that is (slightly) less important.

The other thing I could suggest is just go with the same as the rest of the band. That way it's common ground throughout and any problems you have are things that you can work on rather than questioning the quality of the gear

[Monckyman]

Sennheiser E840.
Great for vox,main or BVs. App £60 new

[SPHDS]

Cheers, will keep an eye out for them.
What are Shure PG58's like? (they seem quite reasonable......) Are they any good, or are they the Microphone equivalent of a the New Beetle or Mini (trading on a name that is brilliant, but quite frankly not worthy to lick their boots.....!?!)
I used the drummer's mic for a practice once and that seemed ok (think it was an SM58.....!) level wise at practice, just meant that because I won't be bellowing down the mic, something fairly quiet ain't going to be much help.....!
(also does impedance have much to do with it - read that the PE515 is high imp. and the SM58 is low imp. is that where the problem lies?)

Sorry if I am being a tad blond......!

[Monckyman]

Please don`t buy a PG mic.
The PG stands for Pure Garbage.
They are Shures cheapest and nastiestest sounding range.
The PE is almost as bad and yes the impedance dictates it`s output.
Buy cheap, buy twice...

[joegarcia]

Just get a secondhand SM58. Keep an eye out on the newly listed Buy it Nows in the eBay mics section, they often come up for under £50. That's how I got all mine. Make sure it's from a respectable UK seller though.

If you really need to get a new one then yea, look at the Sennheisers or Beyerdynamics.

Edited June 22, 2012 by joegarcia

[SPHDS]

Ah, thought that might be the case, just trading on a name, but made of tin cans and elastic bands......!?! Just thought I'd check though......!
So basically I need a low impedance microphone I take it?

[SlapbassSteve]

I don't know a massive amount about the impedance side of things, but I'll hazard a guess it dictates what you use it for- if you're screaming your head off into a high output mic, you'd need to have it turned right down to avoid feedback..?

From my experience it's a total mystery to me as to how the SM58 is -or ever was- the industry standard. Horrible muddy things with an rather 'vague' sounding midrange. Beyerdynamic, Audio Technica, AKG and Sennheiser make some great alternatives in the same price bracket, and if you don't mind paying a little more the difference is astonishing. You can often get a better deal on them second hand too as everyone else seems to be busy chasing 58's. Might just be personal taste but I generally like things as clear as physically possible in the mix, and PG58, 58 and 58 Beta don't really do it for me.

[joegarcia]

Mostly down to SM58's being totally bulletproof I think really. Plus most PA systems up and down the land are set up and voiced to them. I kinda agree with charic's earlier post too though, might be worth just matching whatever your lead/other singer(s) are using. Easier to set up/voice out a PA if you're all using the same vocal mics usually.

[bremen]

[quote name='SlapbassSteve' timestamp='1340366889' post='1703392']


From my experience it's a total mystery to me as to how the SM58 is -or ever was- the industry standard. Horrible muddy things with an rather 'vague' sounding midrange.
[/quote]

Here's why:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vToepYWmOq4

see also Beyer DT100 headphones - horrible sound, but they cannot be killed by conventional means.

[joegarcia]

SlapbassSteve, you're not gonna have feedback problems from a loud singer shouting into a low impedance/high output mic. You're more likely to have feedback problems from a quiet singer using a high impedance mic (as is the case here).

If you're not getting the clarity you want from a SM58 you probably either need to tweak your EQ (try taking away some low mids and bass) or it's an old knackered mic. Having said that, it depends on the singer/band and the PA of course and I do sometimes prefer Beta57/58's and Audix OM6/OM7's. These mics have quite dramatic EQ which are designed to improve intelligibility.

[charic]

[quote name='bremen' timestamp='1340370018' post='1703456']
see also Beyer DT100 headphones - horrible sound, but they cannot be killed by conventional means.
[/quote]

I like Beyers...

[SPHDS]

Another question to add to this (minor) can of worms.....I presume I want an XLR-XLR cable as opposed to an XLR-1/4" jack cable? (both seem to be advertised for sale with microphones) or does it not really matter?

Looked up the impedance thing it seems that most mics nowadays are low impedance as they give better vocal response and are now able to be produced at a reasonable price, also they are better as there is less signal loss over cable length when compared to high impedance. (although some super cheap (as well as some specialist....) mics are still high impedance......!)

Are Behringer any good, (seem cheap and got some good reviews) or are they the Encore/Stagg of the Microphone world....!?!

Will check with the band what mics they are using too.......!

[joegarcia]

XLR yes.
Behringer no.

[SPHDS]

Short and to the point! Thanks!

What is the advantage of XLR over 1/4" ? (just out of curiosity....!)

[brensabre79]

SM58 Yes.
I don't care about the naysayers, they get the job done, they are bulletproof - literally, they resist feedback well and you can get a perfectly clear sound out of them with a little EQ. They are not for the audiophiles, definitely not for the studio, but for BVs once you've dropped a beyer or sennheiser you'll see why i say get a '58.

XLR - XLR = Balanced line at MIC level, no noise just lots of nice clean signal.

XLR - Jack = unbalanced line at LINE level - you'll need to crank up the gain to get the same level as an XLR-XLR, when you crank up the gain of a mic you open up the pickup response pattern, making it more omnidirectional and prone to feedback (simple version). this is one reason those sh*tty old PA systems that have only jack inputs sound noisy, distorted and feedback before they get to useable volume.

So SM58 and XLR - XLR
you'll never need to buy another backing vocal mic.

[51m0n]

[quote name='Monckyman' timestamp='1340351356' post='1703059']
Sennheiser E840.
Great for vox,main or BVs. App £60 new
[/quote]

+1 or an E835 if it suits your voice better (effectively they each have their own sound, the 840 was supposedly more sm58-ish, the 835 more sm57-ish, well kinda)

Damn fine mics for live for the money IMO

[bremen]

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1340379744' post='1703796']
when you crank up the gain of a mic you open up the pickup response pattern, making it more omnidirectional
[/quote]

Really? First I've heard of this. Please elaborate?

[51m0n]

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1340379744' post='1703796']
XLR - Jack = unbalanced line at LINE level - you'll need to crank up the gain to get the same level as an XLR-XLR, when you crank up the gain of a mic you open up the pickup response pattern, making it more omnidirectional and prone to feedback (simple version).
[/quote]

Nah mate, dont agree. You may make the gain so high that even with the pattern of the mic its putting enough level out to 'hear' stuff from the sides, but the fact remains that the level in the hot areas is still just as much louder than the level from the sides as it ever was. And that ratio of volume on axis to volume from a different direction is all the polar pattern describes at a given frequency. Lower frequencies (being more omnidirectional) are less affected by polar patterns ( you ccan see this in action on polar response graphs that show multiple frequencies).

[Lozz196]

The SM58 is the industry standard, so is likely to be at many venues where there is FOH. So it could be a good move to get one of those, if your likely to be playing these types of venues.

Sennheisers are good mics, have a very nice sound to them - 2 guys in one of my bands use them.

But my choice - a very cheap, but definitely not nasty Behringer XM8500. Why? Well I have a fairly "middy" voice, and these seem to have a scooped eq to them, so it clears my voice up - whereas an SM58 just makes me sound blocked up and full of the `flu.

[SPHDS]

Cheers Lozz, those were the Behringer's I was alluding to.....! Don't quite know what my voice 'equates' to range wise, as have only just started doing BV's just know that the old PE515 ain't quite up to it (people say they can see my lips moving but hear nothing, even with the mic turned up top whack....!) Most of the places we are playing we provide all the kit, so no 'house' equipment to fall back on....! Shame I don't have a couple of mics to borrow to compare what they are like in 'full throws band mode' (a lot of things can sound great on their own, put them in the mix and they sound dreadful.....!)

[Phil Starr]

OK there's lots of stuff here.

First the factual bit. Mic's are either low impedance and balanced line needing a three pin connector, almost always an XLR (but I remember stereo jacks in the 70's) or they are single ended high impedance. The high impedance mics like yours actually have more output than the low impedance ones but we don't use them nowadays because they pick up electrical noise. The reason yours is so quiet is because it doesn't match your mixer inputs so the output is being lost. If you buy a matching transformer it will turn the output into a low impedance balanced output which will match your mixer and make all the mic's output available. Maplin sell them, the last one I bought was £6.99 but that was some time ago.

Almost factual. The SM58 is as tough and reliable as people say but was designed in 1962 and things have moved on. I've run some tests including blind tests on the SM58, here's the results.

Lot's of people make copies of SM58's including Behringer's XM8500 and the Samson Q7, we have these and three SM58's in the band so I did a blind testing. The bodies are all similarly robust but the wiring/soldering in the Behringer was poor and broke, resoldering has fixed it. There is very little difference in the sound, the Q7 has a slight edge and the SM58 was the weakest but most people couldn't tell in a blind testing. The Behringer had more handling noise and the Q7 least. The XM8500 had the best feedback rejection and the Q7 the worst. None of the differences were very large though and I would not be surprised if I had ten of these mics to find overlaps because of manufacturing spread. We've had the Q7 for 5 years and it is as good as new so reliability is good for at least this sample.

Less scientifically I've swapped mics during gigs. Two gigs ago we did a headline spot at an open mic and I swapped our SM58 for a beta58, they are chalk and cheese, the beta is so much better. All the subtlety and phrasing in our male vocalists voice just came out, I confess I didn't know he could sing that well. (don't tell him)

I also had to swap my AKG D5 for a dying SM58 whilst mixing for another band. This time there was a female singer. Again the improvement was out of this world, just so much cleaner and more detailed. To be fair it turned out not to be the mic but the lead, SM58's are tough.

One of the reasons the SM58 is so tough is, I think, why they sound so ordinary. Materials technology has moved on and modern mics have thinner tougher diaphragms. The diaphragm in the SM58 just won't track subtle movements as accurately as a lighter modern equivalent, add in the restrictions of 1960's magnet design and materials and 40 years of development and it isn't surprising that modern mic's have moved on. An over engineered diaphragm in a well made mic will be reliable.

If you are on a budget the two clones I have tried are both good matches for the Shure (they are super cardioids though and the Shure is a cardioid) or try the mic transformer for a really cheap 'fix'.

If not I would highly recommend the AKG D5 but also look at the Sennheisers and the Electrovoice ND767a. If you want an equivalent Shure then look at the beta58 but give the SM58 a miss.

Oh, there is some merit in using matching mic's as someone suggested, you can set the system up to get the best out of them all at the same time and the feedback characteristics will be the same for all of them making it easier to deal with.

[SPHDS]

Cheers Phil, very helpful and informative post! Does add more candidates and throws up a few questions though......!
I get the impression Cardioid is preferable to Super-Cardioid. Is this basically because the former has no pick up from the rear. and if so, how much of an issue would that be?
Also this Matching transformer idea sounds interesting, would it really make the mic work well or would it just magnify the shortcomings as well as boost the output.....!?! (also how does one go about it......!?!)
Beta's seem quite a bit dearer than the standard 58's too.....!
How do SM57's compare to 58's?

[Phil Starr]

The 57 and the 58 have the same working parts mounted in a different case. The 57 works better at a bigger distance to the 58 which really needs you to be within a cm(ish) of the mic. Traditionally the 57 is used as an instrument mic but it makes a perfectly good vocal mic which suits some female voices.

Cardiod mics have the flat spot directly behind the mic and super cardioids behind at about a 45degree angle. Feedback depends upon where the sound is coming from so you put monitors directly behind the cardioid and at an angle behind the super cardioid. Neither is strictly 'better' but you need to know what you've got. Shure have a great website [url="http://www.shure.co.uk/support_download/educational_content/microphones-basics/microphone_polar_patterns"]http://www.shure.co.uk/support_download/educational_content/microphones-basics/microphone_polar_patterns[/url]

The matching transformer won't make a poor mic into a great one, all it does is match the mic to the input, They are getting hard to get hold of though, I've just checked maplin and they only do one designed to go the other way XLR->jack. you'd have to use adaptors to connect it up the way you want. You could also use a DI box designed for guitar though which would have the advantage of doubling as a .....DI for guitar! Actually you may be able to borrow one to try. To be honest I wouldn't spend too much on this as the money would be better spent on a new mic. Blue Aran are selling the XM8500 for £15 at the moment. It'll do till you can afford an AKG/Electrovoice/Senny