Production Expert

View Original

Audio Professionals Talk About Their Mic Choices

Julian Rodgers

When I record, I usually do so using a mobile rig. Taking the studio to the band rather than the other way around. Because of this I’ll always plan which mics go where, bringing a few key alternatives, and of course a modelling mic for those cases where I want to defer the decision til later. Because of this, ‘first call’ mics are something I’m very used to thinking about - Those mics you’ll put up and only swap out if you feel it’s not working.

More often than not those swaps happen less than you might think. I know what mine are, but unless I’m borrowing gear then I’m only choosing from my mic collection. What about other people’s first choices? When I read about this kind of thing online I sometimes wonder how often people are just repeating opinions they have heard, and even whether they actually have access to the mics they are talking about. I decided to gather opinions more widely from people I actually know.

My research for this has been unstructured to put it mildly, actually all I've done is ask the same questions to anyone whose opinion might be useful in the phone conversations I've had over the last few days, so if you feel a particular genre or characteristic is under represented, that's just a reflection of the conversations I've had. However I thought the responses were interesting and did reveal underlying principles. With at least one ‘takeaway’ point from each example.

Thanks to William Wittman, Mike Exeter, Gareth Young, John Cornfield, Ashea, James Richmond and Steve DeMott for sharing their thoughts. The question they were all responding to was, what is your default first choice for each of the following instruments? You might change it but not knowing anything about the particular instrument or singer in advance, if you had to choose, what would you choose? In order to keep this article’s length reasonable I've omitted some of the instruments and responses but if for no other reason than it's usually on the first channel, let's start with the kick drum.

Kick Drum

The principle I see looking at these responses is that real kick drums aren’t as ‘attacky’ as most people would like. When I asked James Richmond about drums he said “triggers, they are all getting replaced anyway!” He was only half joking but this just illustrates the fact that different genres have different aesthetics. The prevalence of transient shapers and the language surrounding kick drums illustrates this preoccupation with attack. The popular choice of using two mics to capture the attack and the body of the drum respectively illustrate this perfectly, and the popularity of a Shure beta 91A inside the drum, a microphone which is very ‘attacky’ indeed does rather prove the point. A single well-placed mic is still a very valid option and neatly avoids the alignment issues using multiple mics can cause, but this approach of using two mics does mirror the approach frequently taken when EQing kick drums. Look at any EQ preset and you're likely to see a prominent upper midrange boost, a cut in the lower midrange (most of these mics have a distinct EQ profile), and a low end bump.

John Cornfield added details of an innovative use of a compressed ribbon mic at 90 degrees to the kick which probably credits exploring in another article. It sounded really interesting.

Takeaway - Kick Drums often need extra transient attack to fulfil our expectations of what a kick drum on a record should sound like. Most of these mic choices reflect this.

Snare Drum

When it comes to snare drums, in these entries we are restricting ourselves just to top snare. You might think that this discussion begins and ends with the ubiquitous SM57. In truth in our not-at-all scientific sample we saw more variety than online discussions of snare drums might suggest. There is a fairly straight split between people who favour a dynamic mic and those who favour a small diaphragm condenser. The differences between these two choices are twofold: Firstly a condenser microphone has an extended top end response while a dynamic microphone will favour the midrange, the second difference is one of speed. The relatively heavy moving coil attached to the diaphragm of a dynamic microphone adds weight and inertia and limits the speed with which the diaphragm can change direction this not only affects the high end but also the transient response.

The SM57 is as popular as it is in this role because of the pronounced upper mid range peak it displays which is excellent for adding a perceived clarity to the recording, though it’s detractors might hear that as harshness. The most revealing of these suggestions is Mike Exeter in which he uses a combination of a side address Shure beta 181 small diaphragm condenser with a 57 or M201 dynamic. The condenser is there “for tone”, an acknowledgement that a close 57 on a snare drum sounds cool, but doesn’t sound all that much like the drum it’s pointed at!

Takeaway - snare drums differ a great deal from each other but capturing the attack and the upper  midrange to add focus is the principal role of a close mic on a snare drum. Small diaphragm condensers are ideal in this role but are often overlooked in favour of dynamics.

Drum Overheads

Looking at the responses when the panel were asked about drum overhead preferences there is a clear pattern here between large diaphragm condensers (principally U67s) and ribbon mics. John Cornfield replied with his preference to set both ribbons and condensers, something I find I do frequently. In my case I like to set a pair of condensers out wide with a single 4038 straight above the snare, John’s technique is similar but he uses a Blumlein pair of ribbons where I favour a mono Coles. Mike Exeter is something of an outlier here in his choice of alternative pairs of small diaphragm condensers. When I asked why this was he replied simply “detail". A good point. Some of us are looking for more acuity from our overheads. Mike’s choice of SDCs, which are set either coincident or on a stereo bar with plenty of adjustment available, offers this detail.

Takeaway - Capturing a pleasing tone for overheads is about the nature of the top end. ‘Sweet’ HF is what most are looking for and the popularity of valve condensers like U67s evidence this. Softening potential harshness is what ribbons do best and because of this they are the other popular choice. Gareth’s comment of 67s or 4038s “for heavy players” makes this point perfectly.

Electric Guitar

  • William Wittman - U67, U87, U47fet or Gefell UM70

  • Steve DeMott - U67

  • James Richmond - SM57 and Royer 121

  • John Cornfield - SM57/E906 + sE VR1

  • Gareth Young - Guitar - SM57 + Royer 121

  • Mike Exeter - SM57 and AT 4033 and R121

If we’re looking for a pattern, look no further than the responses for electric guitar. Balancing the harsh with the ‘not harsh’ is what is happening here. The very well-known combination of a ribbon mic and a dynamic offers exactly that balance of midrange forward dynamic and smooth full range of a ribbon. The classic combination of 57 and Royer is well represented here, other variations are evident with John Cornfield picking and choosing between alternative dynamics with the excellent SE voodoo Ribbon, I echo that in my use of an M201 and the active version of John’s voodoo VR1, the VR2. Valve condensers are again seen in their role as first choice for smoothness with Mike Exeter, someone who specialises in the heavier end of rock, choosing as a default a three-way combination of a 57 dynamic, an Audio Technica small diaphragm condenser and a ribbon covering all bases.

Takeaway - Recording electric guitars is about capturing the sound without the presence and edge straying into territory best described as harsh.

Acoustic Guitar

  • William Wittman - KM86 or U47

  • Steve DeMott -U67 into 1176

  • John Cornfield - Mid/Side Aston Starlight and Bumblebee Pro

  • Gareth Young - DPA 4011A

  • Mike Exeter - 2 LDCs, coincident but arranged vertically

Acoustic guitars when not done right can sound scratchy, or boomy, or many other things in between. Conventional wisdom suggests that small diaphragm condensers are the first call mics for acoustic stringed instruments. This makes good sense. An important difference between large and small diaphragm condenser mics is found in their off-axis response and unlike vocals or perhaps electric guitars, the source of the sound from a stringed instrument is more complex. Having a benign off-axis response can be helpful. Mics for acoustic sources of course also have to have adequate top end response making dynamic mics an unusual choice and the potential for harshness is ever present.

We see more variety in this category than in any other so far. This isn't altogether surprising as acoustic guitars vary so much. Gareth’s choice of a DPA is classy, William’s duo of vintage Neumanns is equally impressive but, without concentrating too much on the specifics in the list, the main pattern here is the lack of a pattern. John’s ingenious combination of inexpensive Aston and self-built Bumblebee Pro ribbon used in an MS pair is interesting, as John’s main preoccupation here is with keeping good mono compatibility, the reason he also uses MS on pianos when he can. I’ve also used a ribbon and a cardioid condenser in an MS pair many times before. Mike’s mic choice was non-specific but his placement was very specific - a vertical XY array with the strings spreading low to high across the stereo field. Steve’s use of a U67 is a nice choice if you have access to one and he sees plenty of 1176 compression to be as important as the mic in getting the sound he’s after.

Takeaway - The internet might tell you to put an SDC at the 12th fret but there are clearly more default options than that when it comes to acoustic guitar. None of our respondents do the faux stereo SCD on the neck, LDC on the body thing which is so often recommended either. After all, if you want wide stereo acoustic guitar you should just double-track it!

Vocals

For vocals, unlike other entries I’ve included compression choices when they were offered.

  • William Wittman - U47/48 + Fairchild 660/670

  • Steve DeMott - U47 + LA2A

  • James Richmond - SM7B + 1073 +1176 or DIstressor.

  • John Cornfield - JZ 67, Rode Classic 1 + LA610

  • Ashea - U87 or Blue Kiwi, Avalon 737

  • Gareth Young - U47

  • Mike Exeter - Large Diaphragm Condenser. Specifically listening for sibilance and resonance, and  what does it does under compression. Not an SM7B.

The runaway winner here is the U47. If you’re not familiar with the U48 William refers to, its a U47 with Fig 8 instead of omni as the second polar pattern. I didn’t ask whether Steve’s was a clone, I suspect William is referring to vintage originals but I know Gareth’s is the Wunder Audio CM7 GS. Regardless of the specifics what they are all saying with this choice is that a valve large diaphragm condenser is a safe bet and the U47 has both a desirable midrange timbre and the star quality to impress clients. Although a more modest choice, John’s Rode Classic, which he tells me he’s had for about 30 years, is probably there for exactly the same sonic qualities. His other first call, of a JZ Vintage 67, is another vintage-inspired design, as is the Ashea’s second choice mic of a Blue Kiwi. Ashea records lots of vocals and her default choice of a U87 is both client-friendly and one of the safest of bets. It has after all been described as “everyone’s second favourite mic”. On the subject of favourites, the SM7B is held as a go-to mic for rock vocals but while James Richmond’s choice was the SM7B, Mike Exeter specifically said he never uses them! Mike’s choice was possibly the most revealing, he didn’t name a specific mic, just an LDC but when auditioning mics he’s listening specifically for sibilance and resonance with a view to what it will do under compression, after all, if there are negatives without compression, they are only going to get worse when a compressor starts to do its work.

On the subject of compression, the compressor choices are all there for tone as much as their compression action. William’s Fairchild, Steve’s LA2A, James’ more aggressive choices and the flattering Avalon all reflect the user’s approaches, the 87/Avalon is perfect for the pop production Ashea specialises in. James’ SM7 and 1176 or Distressor shouts rock, and William and Steve’s U47’s with Fairchild or LA2A are old school classics.

Takeaway - For vocals, the specifics differ with genre but a large diaphragm condenser mic which flatters a vocal without accentuating the negatives, particularly sibilance, is the way most people go. Adding some colour courtesy of a valve or transformer, either in the mic or in outboard can help and while you don’t need a big name mic to get great results, it never does any harm if you are trying to reassure a client! All voices are different but if you’re going to start somewhere, a U47 isn’t a bad place to begin…

What About You?

It’s been interesting to talk mic choices with even this small group of working professionals. There’s a lot of ways the choices differ but beneath this there is still interesting common ground between the first calls. The really interesting thing would be to find out what you think? While all choices differ, we all start somewhere, what are your first choices when it comes to selecting microphones?

See this gallery in the original post