Unfortunatelly there’s nothing similar here in Brazil. Hope one day I can do something inspired on your work.

Keep podcasting!

Thanks. Email me when you have a chance and I’ll see about getting at least an mp3 so you can hear some stuff.

slau

I’m glad you’ve gotten as much out of the episode as you have. Believe me, while putting it together, it felt like a labor of love so, to hear of your appreciation makes it worth having spent the effort. As you probably know, I did another orchestral project this past spring. Unfortunately, I just didn’t have the time to put anything together regarding that trip. I do hope to cover some of the things that occurred in an upcoming episode. Believe me, it tortures me to not have the time to put out new episodes as often as I would like. Comments like this, however, do inspire me and I’ll get one out whenever possible.

Cheers,

Slau

But regardless of my comprehension, this production is breathtaking. It’s so captivating/informative that it hurts. That’s not to say that it gave me brain cramps, it just makes me ache to go record something.

Thanks to price tags and lack of availability, it won’t be hard to fight the (extraordinary) temptation to carbon-copy your mic selection/set-up. I guess I’ll have to blaze my own trail… as it should be.

Hats off to you, sir.

-James

Glad you enjoyed the interview.

To sum outside the box (OTB), you’ll need to use some type of mixer or summing box to combine the outputs of your interface. You’d normally organize your tracks to come out of various outputs on your interface. Typically, people use 16, 24, 32 channels or more. I suppose you’d get some benefit even through an 8-channel system.

You’d route kick to an output, snare to another output, overheads to a stereo pair of outputs, bass to an output, lead vocal, etc. Ultimately, you route all of the outputs to a mixer or summing box and then route the stereo output to either another dAW, recorder or even back into your original dAW and simply mute the input track. That’s pretty much the basics.

HTH,

Slau

thanks! keep ‘em coming!

Yeah, the QC is spotty on many of the budget products. I know someone who had a CAD Trion 8000 that he absolutely loved. It took a spill and was toast. He bought another one and it didn’t sound nearly as good as the first. He returned the second one and bought a third and it didn’t sound as good as the first either. He went through several such mics but never seemed to find a match for the original. He ultimately got into modifying his own mics and found that much more satisfying. Fun stuff…

Slau

I had the older 460s with the older shock mounts. One of the mounts broke so I bought a pair of nicer shock mounts from Advanced audio a couple of months after having had the mod done. In retrospect, I must say, it would’ve been cheaper to just buy the Advanced Audio CM-12s. I mean, I don’t regret the process. I was able to assess the stock 460s and evaluate the modifications side by side. It’s just that, in the end, when you add up the costs, including shipping, etc., the CM-12 is a great value. Also, Avant makes essentially the same mic, the CV-12, for an extremely reasonable price—somewhere around $700 or so.

Anyway, all that said, the original 460 sounded quite good, regardless of the price. I know the QC isn’t the best and you have to be aware that you might get a lemon but, still, they’re pretty nice, especially at that price.

Slau

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/543995/Apex%20460%20Back.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/543995/Apex%20460%20Front.jpg

The headbasket, tube and C8 capacitor mods aside, the stock electronics are slightly different. Anyways, I was curious about the ones you had.

The reason why I picked up on Mixerman’s non-use of “audio engineer” is because I personally feel as he does. It seems the only qualifier for being an “audio engineer” is to own gear. The barrier to entry for audio engineering has become quite low over the last 15 years or so. Everyone with a Pro Tools system is now an “audio engineer.”

I think the use of the term “audio engineer” is a personal preference. Some people would never call themselves “artists” and might say, “I just move some paint around a canvas with a brush—I wouldn’t call myself an artist.” Well, there are some people who really just move paint around (same thing) and call themselves artists but the public might not agree. Without getting into a debate about self-perception and public perception, it all boils down to what one’s comfortable with. I’ve met people who call themselves audio engineers and, if they found themselves in a room with people whom I consider true audio engineers (in my opinion), let’s just say it would be easy to tell the two apart after just a few minutes.

I called myself an “audio engineer” before I went to college to study audio recording technology. I realized how much I had to learn. Having graduated and having learned a craft, I began to appreciate what the pioneers of audio engineering accomplished and contributed before me. Out of respect for them, I rarely use the term to describe myself. I don’t feel I deserve it. I deserve to use it no more than I can use the term “scientist” to describe my approach to testing gear and shooting out mics, etc.

I know you’re a photographer. Just because an average Joe can afford a large-format Mamiya or Hasselblad, does that make them a photographer? Wait a second, how about a “photographic engineer? Personally, I think most people who can afford an expensive camera don’t necessarily fall into the category of “photographer.” Maybe they take photos and maybe take plenty of them but I think a certain responsibility comes along with what a person calls themselves. That’s just my take.

Language is a funny thing and names or labels can be particularly problematic. I suppose whatever label one can live with at the end of the day is cool.

One dictionary defines an engineer as “A person who uses scientific knowledge to solve a practical problem.” Using scientific knowledge to solve a problem is what audio engineers do countless times per day. “The vocals aren’t even enough; I’ll throw on a leveling compressor with just the right threshold/release to tame it a little.” “The snare sounds a little too present; it needs a reverb with proper ratios, RT60 values, frequency responses etc.”

This is absolutely using “scientific knowledge to solve practical problems.” I think what Eric was getting at is that he doesn’t considering himself to be an electrical engineer. While it’s true that perhaps he couldn’t build a tube mic pre from scratch, he is engineering sound. He, you, Big Al, Ryan & the boys at http://www.homerecordingshow.com (intentional plug), have earned the right to be called engineers. You/they engineer sounds; and that’s arguably more impressive/important than engineering a console.

I love your show.

-James

Glad you’re enjoying the interview. Dave, I’m so not a good interviewer—it’s just that, for the subjects covered in the few interviews I’ve done, I’m qualified to ask relevant questions and can relate directly to the issues. Put me in front of a politician and I’d be lost. The other thing is, what you don’t hear in the interview (which I’ve edited out) is the sound of me constantly responding, “yep, yeah, uhuh, right, mhmm…” It drives me nuts. that’s the thing about doing interviews where it’s not face-to-face—one tends to over-respond for the lack of eye contact. Anyway, glad it’s being so well received. I get tons of direct emails that never get posted here. Maybe I should read some on the podcast.

Slau

I download and listen to your Behind the Scenes in a Recording Studio, either at home or on the road to my 2 – 3 hour round trip gigs from Santa Cruz to San Francisco/Napa Ca. gigs, I must say I really enjoy listening to you. You are a breath of fresh air. thanks and I look forward to more!

you are quite good at interviewing, which we all know is not easy

Thanks so much. These days, so much communication is done online. I wanted the listeners to get a sense of Mixerman’s real voice, not just his writing voiced. Of course, there is the Mixerman Radio Show but so much of that is teasing and ribbing (which is great and entertaining and all) but I wanted to keep it focused on his career, the book and the Total Access Master class.

Cheers!

Just wanted to drop a note – almost finished the interview with Eric. Fantastic listen and kudos to you for running a great chat!

D

Thanks for the comment and I’m glad you enjoyed the interview.

Regarding the summing, there are lots of choices that are quite affordable, however, as usual, you get what you pay for. The signal path of something like the Neve 8816 or Dangerous 2-Bus is going to be considerably cleaner than a $250 mixer. That said, it’s about getting the stuff out of the box and having it summed in the analog domain rather than digital. Some summing is better than no summing—so whatever the budget allows.

The same pretty much applies to 2-bus compression. The idea is, at the very least, to get the mix out through a decent compressor. Now, again, budget plays a role in what quality is affordable. I used to mix through an Aphex Compellor and I still think it’s a great unit although it’s not a standard compressor. It happens to be a bit of an odd piece of gear. I’m inspired to give it another whirl.

On the more affordable side of compressors, DBX makes some excellent products. Their Project Studio line is great but, if you can, save up a bit and go for something like a 160a. Also, on the more esoteric side, Hand Crafted Labs makes a fantastic dual channel compressor and even a summing mixer and their prices are extremely reasonable for the quality of the product. It might be worth consideration.

Hope that helps a bit!

slau

I enjoyed the interview with Mixerman. I wonder if you could list some gear options for 2-Bus Summing Mixers/Compressors as discussed in the podcast. I know he mentioned the Dangerous gear, but what other options are out there? Apecifically, are there affordable options that may be within reach for home recordists?

Thanks!

Ah, if only Mixerman knew Ms. Information—I’m sure he wouldn’t be horrified

As for the controversy, I think it’s more about that supreme confidence. Mixerman isn’t afraid to say what he thinks and some people don’t like hearing things they might disagree with. Frankly, I don’t think anything he says is controversial. If anything, it’s mostly quite straight-forward and reasonable. There are, of course, opinions that some would challenge him on. For example, he’s not a fan of SSL consoles. In fact, he seems to pretty much dislike them quite a lot. Well, one can point to countless engineers and producers who’ve recorded and mixed innumerable hits on SSLs. Controversy? Hardly—just opinion and someone who had just spent $250,000 on a 4000G might be compelled to challenge a critic of that console.

On the other side of things, there are those who believe a soundBlaster is the epitome of A/d conversion… now, THAT’S controversy.

Please fix it, I´m very keen on listen to this interview.

Keep up the good work.

Kind regards

aLf

Thanks for the comment. Yep, in my haste, I didn’t process the episode the way I usually do. I was scrambling before heading out to AES in San Francisco and, well… sorry for the inconsistency

I enjoyed the show as usual.

HOWEVER, the levels were too dynamic for casual listening. I burn podcasts to CD and listen in the car while commuting. The drastic changes in level on your most recent episode had me twiddling the volume knob up and down throughout the episode.

Maybe next time, place a limiter or compressor on the Master bus to level things out a little more?

Thanks!

LOL Monica, you cracked me up with that comment. I say so because my wife would probably say the same thing about me in terms of her eyes glazing over when I get into some aspect of my work. I’ve said it before on the podcast—sometimes, when she can’t sleep, she’ll ask me a question like, “So, how does multi-band compression work again?” The mancave is important—let him do his thing—he’ll be happier when he comes out and he will come out… probably to go out and buy more gear but that’s a whole different subject, eh?

Thanks for the comments, as usual. Regarding my personal vocal sound, it really has more to do with vocal technique more than anything. Some people think the vocal chain starts with the mic. No, it starts with the vocal. That may sound obvious but some people overlook that very important fact. K.D. Lang will sound great whether she’s singing live, through an AKG C 585 or a U 47 in a studio. When I choose a mic for the podcast, it’s almost always a question of convenience—what’s available, what’s plugged in, etc. For a singer, obviously, there’s a lot more thought involved.

Some people liken the C 12-type mic to a Strat with pronounced low and high end and the U 47-type mic with a Les Paul with a focused mid range. I guess it really does depend on the specific vocalist, though. There are rules of thumb that many follow but, honestly, there’s almost no telling which mic will sound the best out of any given choices. At a certain point, it’s not better or worse—just different.

I haven’t tried any SE mics so I’m not sure how to compare. I’ve heard great things about the Avant CV-12. Again, the best one is the one you have handy and, like I said, what voice is being recorded—chain starts with the voice.

My only gripe (the show itself is quite nice) is that after listening to an episode he drags to something he calls a DAW and tries to show me input levels and monitors??? Can we do anything about this? I love that he loves this stuff so much, but my eyes glaze over…

-Mom in Mpls

Why a C12-style mic? Is there something inherently “vocal” about it; or is it simply a matter of “I like it best”? And what’s the closest, most-affordable version (ie CAD, Nady, SE electronics)?

I have to say that your vocal, out of dozens of podcasts that I listen, is simply tops. Good clarity, not fatiguing, not thin or poppy. You’ve really got your technique dialed in (no surprise).

Cheers!

Hendrik, I’ve used 3 different mics for the podcast. Mostly, I’ve used either the Advanced Audio CM-12 or the Mojave MA-200. Perhaps once or twice (and certainly on this most recent episode) I used the Neumann TLM 103. I do like Rode mics and have a pair of NT5s in the mic closet. I’ve tried the K2 Tube and it’s quite nice—very sweet sounding, along the lines of a Sony C800G. It’s an extraordinary value for the price.

Slau

hope you feel better since

Best, Hendrik from Amsterdam

Fan-TAS-tic show: satisfying like a Lindt Lindor truffle of the pistachio/almond variety. (insert inhale) Ahhh….

-James

thx you so much for sharing this

i’ll never get the chance to record stuff like this, but now i just feel like i did

thx again

Huge Thank you for all the time and passion you put into every show.

Great(!) show; so far beyond enjoyable.

How wonderful to hear from you! Much like for yourself, Christmas now commences for me with a listening of the tune and I’m reminded of how things came together. It never fails to give me a warm and fuzzy. We’ll commemorate the 5th somehow this year. Stay tuned.

Cheers!

Slau

I always enjoy Sessions With Slau, but really wanted to say thanks for this episode – it was as much fun to listen to as it was taking part in the original project!

Christmas never feels like it’s begun until I hear this song each year. I’d be very happy to help promote a cart “bum-rush” on this for 2010.

All the best,
Bryan / Jesta

I don’t know the exact figure but the first year it was about 1,200 downloads and it has dropped off each year but still sells each season. I would imagine we’re over 2,000 at this point? Great thing is that it’ll renew itself every year—an evergreen, as they say.

I’m still in the process of listening to this episode (I listen in the car while commuting). Maybe you answer this in the podcast, maybe not. But I’m wondering how many downloads or CD’s (or both) were sold of the Christmas song?

Thanks.

Michael, I know there are a bunch of such tunes that aren’t on any album and, while it would be nice to have them in one collection, the idea of making it a charity isn’t necessarily always a good idea. I think songwriters also need to get paid for their work and while I, personally, would probably do a charity in the future, as a songwriter, I don’t necessarily feel the need to make such collections charity projects. It’s all about balance. I’d like to see a bunch of podsafe artists actually make some money to help subsidize their art—now THAT would be cool. Being remunerated for one’s contributions makes it all the more easy to be charitable with future endeavors.

Happy holidays!

Slau

And putting this episode together can’t have been that simple either. Thanks for doing it!

That short clip where Les Paul phones was really cool.

Keep it up and I hope to hear new episodes next year…

By the way, there are some Christmas tunes of podsafe artists which are not part of any regular album and which are in some cases quite hard or even extremly hard to find as a purchased legal download. How about making it easier to get those great Christmas songs by trying to put them on an Podsafe for Peace charity compilation album together with “If Every Day Were Christmas”. Just an idea.

Have a wonderful holiday!

Slau

There seems to be a easy way for selling music on iTunes:
http://www.tunecore.com
I hope it helps…

Mary christmas and happy new year!

Best wishes from Brazil.
Julian Ludwig

I haven’t listened to it yet but I’m listening to the song. Nice job all around.

but why only 128kbps? us nitpik types prefer 320 and certainly no less than 192.

anyway, all for a good cause.

happy holidays!

I suppose that you’d have to hear him speak to truly appreciate the attitude which is what drives me nuts about this guy. Yeah, we all know that it’s about the performance rather than the gear. Whatever gear he might use, though, he’d still come across as an ass. Hey, he’s got plenty of money and fame so I guess he can afford to be the way he is and use the equipment he chooses to use.

I think I’ve gotten over it and gotten used to his cocky attitude. One could probably get used to just about anything—like a huge vice on one’s head a la Uncle Fester. LOL

If this guy can make it on an out of date system then charge the big bucks for what he does… Who can really say he is doing anything bad?

I mean… How long has 2″ tape been sort of an antique format? But somehow when you get a guy on a panel and he is asked what he uses to make his recordings and says

“Well I start with this late 70s Neve into a 16 track 2″ tape machine, mics are almost always going to be some old Shure SM57s on guitars and a U47 on the vocals right into the board, I mix everything on the box sending vocals to the EMI plate in my basement for a little space”

I mean if Mr. Didge had said that we would all be going “Holy crap that sounds amazing” but because he uses something sort of off the beaten path… We all want to scorn

My first “hit” was with a single EV 664 into a firepod running Garage Band 2.0 it won a lot of awards on sites like Garageband.com and got licensed for use in a computer games. It also is getting a fair amount of radio play on our local college radio station…

OK, now all you Pittsburgh residence: feel free to chime in…

Austin is one of the hotbeds for Country and even Rock and Hardcore music!

Harvey Gerst has run a studio in Texas for years and done work with bands signed to major labels every day. Seems you snobby pork eatin stringy headed new coolaid drinkin New York Yankee’s need to open your eyes and ears to what the other 49 states do in this country!

Heck you guys might even figure out that they make music in places like Kentucky in “Pro Studios” though from all the demo’s I hear Kentucky can’t seem to keep the huge sucking sound from leaking into the room mic

I’m delighted that you’re enjoying the show and thanks for the generous compliment. Much as women dress for other women, I truly share my audio–related experiences for other audio engineers and audio geeks in general.

Regarding the NS–10s, it’s not so much that I like them, per se, but that I’m used to them. I know some people tend to despise them but those folks tend to also be on the younger side, generally speaking. I don’t think they sound that bad. True, they don’t sound fabulous either. Thing is, I’ve been using them since 1989 and I’m really familiar with them.

In addition to the NS–10s, I also use Genelec 8040As and a pair of passive avantone Mini Cubes. The Cubes are just for an extra reference for smaller, full–bandwidth (chuckle) speakers and the Genelecs give me a little more on the bottom and top—again, just for a secondary reference. I make all critical mixing decisions on the NS–10s.

I think that just about any engineer will agree that one can acclimate to just about any monitor, given enough time. I’d argue that a factor practically as big as the monitors themselves is the room. Lots of folks working in home studios get used to their own space and that’s cool. But it’s a real ear–opening experience to suddenly find yourself in another studio with different dimensions, different acoustical treatment, etc. For some, it can be a little sonically disorienting and people often second–guess everything. Luckily, I haven’t really experienced that kind of disorientation when working in other studios. Perhaps I’m confident about how I’m perceiving what I’m hearing and I’m comfortable with that.

Heh, I just realized something about the possible reason why I might be so irked by Mr. Didge. You know how people say that when something about someone bothers you it’s because you see part of yourself in them? Hmm… I wonder if it’s the overly confident attitude that I see in him that I recognize in myself. Hmm…

If there’s one thing that my wife has taught me, it’s that, no matter how absolutely certain of myself I can be, there’s always the unthinkable chance that I might be wrong. She’s proved it on many occasions. LOL Maybe I see that cockiness in him and somehow identify with it and I do believe it’s a dangerous trait to be so self-assured. Confidence is one thing and it’s a good thing but, taken too far, one can become careless and fool-hearty. that’s not something I ever want to be.

Anyway, thanks for the comment and for perhaps inadvertently giving me some food for thought!

Slau

So, I had a question – you talked about a polarizing figure in engineering, and then later mentioned without comment another polarizing item – the Yamaha NS10. I’ve heard differing opinions on both sides of the argument, but…

Why do you like them?

Thanks, Rob (eagerly awaiting the next episode)

Thanks for the kind words. I suppose I ranted perhaps a bit too strongly. True, he must be doing something right and I guess that when one has a formula that works, well… Still, I do shake my head in amazement.

Cheers!

I was blown away to when I found out that the engineer that makes you cringe was still using the older DASH machine. But he somehow manages to be the most commercially successful engineer in the world, perhaps of all time. I wonder if people were paying me up $20,000/day (plus points) to do what I do, the way I do it, if I would be resistant to change as well.

Fun show as always!!!
Ronan

Good stuff!

Equally as predictable: thanks for the comment! Ah, I didn’t mean I’d stop the podcast—I’d simply consider augmenting it with a separate blog, which I might actually do. we’ll see. Oh, I couldn’t possibly give up giving my inflections in audible form—it’s gotta be a podcast, for sure.

Regarding you and the podcast, I’m sure you know what I’m going to say. I am terribly consistent in this matter.

1. Do what you feel is best for you and your situation, even if that means switching to blog form, but…

2. I would prefer to see the podcast continue. I agree wholeheartedly with the vast heaps of praise other commenters have hurled upon you. Just putting in my “vote,” to continue the podcast, FWIW.

Glad your opinions are still rock-solid. Keep up the great show!

Thanks for the words of encouragement. It certainly is such a pleasure and every time I manage to set aside some time to put an episode together, I’m always so glad when it’s completed. More to come soon!

- D

thx for the show

High praise, indeed, coming from someone like yourself. I do try to “produce” the episodes to some extent to balance the general interest and totally audio geeky stuff.

I tell you, I feel so bad when so much time passes between episodes. I’d love to devote more time to it but the studio does take up so much of my time, as you very well can relate to and, of course, if I didn’t have all those sessions, I wouldn’t have much to talk about in the podcast — a sort of Catch-22. Anyway, no excuses, I’ll get one out there soon. Thanks for the comment!

Best,

Slau

When do we get another episode?!?!

Yeah, the 460 is a good sounding mic. That said, I’ve since sent off a pair of 460s to Dave Thomas at Advanced Audio Microphones http://www.aamicrophones.com for full modification including Peluso capsules. I’ll surely compare the full mods to the stock 460s in a future episode.

Cheers!

In this case, both are true about the choice: the PR-40 happens to sound great on acoustic bass AND it does have amazing rear rejection. I really do like it a lot.

Yeah, sometimes clients do have very strong opinions but, then again, most people do anyway, eh? It’s all good.

Cheers!

I had to laugh at something. From the John Marshall family (the let’s die and go to glory one) to the Shay trio, it seems like a lot of people have an agenda when they get to the studio. “Are you sure that’s the best place for a mic?” “So, if you died tonight, do you know where you’d go?” I’m sure glad you’re not a conformist.

Great show!

Yep, two types of dynamics are moving coil and ribbon. Most people assume that when someone says “dynamic,” they mean moving coil but, technically, that’s a more general category of moving coil or ribbon.

Cheers!

haha…learned something new

thx!

Yeah, the distortion inadvertently became part of the sound much in the same way surface noise, clicks and pops became the defining sound of a generation (actually, several generations) of music listeners. We experience virtually no mixing console “warmth” and no analog tape “warmth” in the live shows we attend and yet many people go through much trouble to impart that sound on recordings simply because we’re used to it. Things are overly compressed these days because people are mixing to the point that it sounds like it’s on the radio, with all the life sucked out of the music. Distortion I can live with, it sounds good, sounds cool but squashed mixes? Good grief.

Sorry to have veered off topic from your original point but thanks for commenting!

Slau

Some of the stuff from Motown is a perfect example of this. If you listen to some of it with a critical ear, you will hear that a lot of it is VERY distorted and over-modulated. But, I guess that helped contribute to “the sound.”

Thanks again,
Vic

The 460 mod was done for me by the guy who did it for Dae Bennett’s mics. He chose to remain nameless as he doesn’t normally do that kind of stuff for people. There are, however, a bunch of people doing mods on that mic. Unfortunately, Michael Joly isn’t doing anything with that particular mic. See his earlier comment associated with this entry. You might want to check out http://www.recordinghacks.com and search the microphone database there for some folks that do mods on various mics.

Hope that helps!

Slau

Could you tell me what mods you did to your 460′s and about how much it was? Did Mr. Joley do the mods for you?

Yeah, david P, it’s an absolute blast to go through multitracks and hear what went into some songs. Of course, newer multis aren’t nearly as interesting as the old ones where folks were actually playing live in the studio together.

Albert, I do indeed believe that, no matter what, performance trumps any technical shortcoming. So many tunes from the 50s, 60s and 70s sound like crap or have instruments or vocals that are poorly recorded and yet they’re regarded as classics — not because of their fidelity but because of the performance. Gee, that’s not even a “between the lines” kind of idea for me. I should’ve just said that in the episode because it’s so true.

Cheers!

Perhaps the point you made “between the lines” was that a squeaky bass pedal won’t stop a great song from becoming a big hit?

(And thanks to IHR for sending me over here.)

Some other artists have released multitrack files for their songs for fans to remix, notably Nine Inch Nails and Radiohead. I don’t take the time to remix them, but I do dissect them for fun. The thing that always surprises me is how a completely mixed song sounds so much better than I would expect from hearing the individual tracks.

well, he’s got the voice for this too

I gotta say, baritone voices are perfect for broadcasting, some guys even falsely try lowering their tone, but Slau has the best non-baritone voice I have ever heard in any kind of broadcast. and it’s not just the tone but the rhythm of speech too.

you have a very musical voice Slau. Haha. no really

Thanks for the comment. yeah, that kick drum squeek isn’t too easy to hear at first. It’s one of those things that you might not notice but, once you do hear it, you hear it all the time. It’s even mentioned in the Wikipedia entry on the song.

The mic I most often use when podcasting is the slightly modified Apex 460 going through a Millennia HV3D. I keep it really simple. I just sent in the two 460s I own to Dave Thomas at Advanced Audio for major modifications. It’ll be interesting to compare them to the originals. I’m sure it’ll end up being one of the future episodes.
Cheers!

Great show!

I usually listen in the car, but couldn’t hear the squeak of the kick drum pedal, so I gave it a listen on my studio monitors at home and still couldn’t hear it. Either my monitors are not up to the task or my ears are shot or it’s VERY subtle.

As I mentioned, I usually listen in the car. When hearing your podcast on my studio monitors I was really impressed with the quality of your vocal sound. I’m curious… What is the mic and signal chain you’re using?

Thank!

This is why I just need to use my iPod and a podcatcher instead of manually downloading everything.

This episode sounds fantastic and I eagerly look forward to checking it out this afternoon.

I’d have tweeted you, but, alas, work has finally blocked Twitter.

Regarding the samples I use, some of them have been recorded using the modified Apex 460s (among many other mics). Thing is, when I record the voice-over for the podcast, I do add a bit of high shelf and froll off the bottom a bit. Some “cheap” mp3 players don’t sound all that great when palying mp3s which, of course, are already compromised. I’ve bumped up the compression to 192 to help make the podcast sound a bit better in teh last two or so episodes. As far as car stereos, well, sometimes folks do boost the treble a bit and, yeah, that might not be the greatest thing for some content. Perhaps I should back off on the top end to compensate for overly-equalized car stereos and mp3 players.

Again, thanks for the comments!

Slau

The ironic thing about this podcast is that I thought it was too sibilant–I could’ve sworn it was recorded with a “cheap chinese” mic It failed the “car stereo” test. I listened to it initially on my drive home, on a stock 2006 Corolla car stereo. Not the greatest of systems, but adequate. Very sibilant on that system. So I listened again on the studio speakers and while it wasn’t bad, it was still way too sibilant for my taste. And it was only Slau’s speaking parts. The music clips sounded very balanced–aside from the mp3 artifacts.

The only reason I mention it is because the podcast talks a lot about cheap chinese mics, and so far, all the cheap chinese mics I’ve heard sound just like the speaking parts in this podcast.

Cheers!

I have more than a technical interest in that

thx

Thanks for the comment and for your insight. One does hear “design flaw” often when learning more about this type of microphone. I guess, in the interest of mass production, some things are deemed “good enough.” It’s great that there are options for us to modify them and, especially, that there are folks like yourself that offer services at reasonable rates for those of us who would like a little peace of mind when attempting to step up to a slightly better product.

Cheers!

The Apex 460 has been on my mind recently also. Its one of those mics that is so popular, no doubt owing to its low cost. People have asked me for years if I work on this mic but I’ve always declined because I could not address what I see as the fundamental challenge found in this mic – the mismatch of the stock K67-type capsule to a flat frequency response circuit.

The K67 capsule was designed by Neumann with a built in high frequency response peak. This was then followed in the U 67 and U 87 microphones with complimentary HF de-emphasis achieved through negative feedback. This topology created an acoustic pre-emphasis / electronic de-emphasis system that offered the benefits of increased headroom, sibilance reduction and timbre control. But the Apex 460 uses a flat frequency response circuit – the 8kHz peak created by the stock K67-type capsule flies right through the two-stage circuit, whacks the transformer hard then delivers and actually exacerbates sibilance. This mis-match is not unique to the Apex 460. Many low cost mic use K67-type capsule driving the transformerless “Schoeps-type” circuit, which incidentally also has a flat frequency response.

In my opinion, the reason why many people complain about harsh or sibilant low cost mics is not because of the Chinese capsule used. But rather the mis-match of the K67-type to a flat response circuit is the real issue. If a K67-type capsule feeds a circuit with the proper HF de-emphasis it can sound just fine.

Another approach is to keep the circuit stock and change the capsule to a different type. I’ve found the flatter, more midrange-focused K47-type capsule is a better choice for the flat response Apex 460 circuit and actually produces a more “Neumann-esque” timbre balance as a result.

Fortunately, Chinese manufacturing and parts have made a bunch of products much more affordable but, unfortunately, quality control is spotty. However, if one look around, it’s possible, with some care, to come up with something a little stock, a little modified but very cool.

Thanks again!

Slau

i’ll take one of those fetish stiletto’s

thx for the show!

Thanks for the comment but, more impoartantly, thanks for your tireless work on the Microphone Database and Search Engine at Recording Hacks. It’s such as tremendously useful tool when doing research. I definitely plan on contributing in the future.

I have absolutely no doubt that the newer M16 Mark II earns its distinction from the original with upgraded parts and circuit. Having interviewed Tony Fishman, it was obvious that the subject was fairly uncomfortable. I imagine it’s something they really want to put behind them. OK, I’ll never mention it again

The many modifications avaialble sure do make the various re-branded versions of the HST-11A a nice potential for the budget-minded recordist. Frankly, I was surprised at how good the stock Apex 460 sounded. I know that some folks have complained about inconsistency from one piece to the next and I suppose one needs to be aware of that issue. Beyond that, however, it’s nice to know there are a few options that won’t run $9,000 and still perform on par.

Thanks again!

Slau

Regarding the Telefunken USA M16 Mk II, the components are definitely different from what you’ll find in any HST-11A derivatives on the market. Telefunken USA (actually now called Telefunken Elektroakustik) worked with AMI/TAB-Funkenwerk to design a new amplifier circuit, modeled on the AKG C12. TAB-Funkenwerk supplied a great new made-in-Kansas output transformer — traditionally a weak point in Chinese mics. The tube in the Mk II is significantly nicer than what you’re likely to find in any stock budget mic, as well (but that’s admittedly an easy thing to swap on your own).

The capsule in the Mk II might be similar; Chinese copies of the Neumann K67 large-diaphragm capsule abound in imported mics. Some are better than others. And a little quality control goes a long way. I’d be more inclined to trust one from Telefunken Elektroakustik or David Royer (see his Mojave MA-200) than one from, say, Acme.

Good show!

Thanks and I’m glad it helped pass the time. This particular recording was specifically for the anniversary concerts and isn’t available for sale. I have engineered several other recordings for Shumka that have been released on CD. They include “Absolute Shumka” And “Shumka Cinderella” among others. I think the best place to look for that stuff is at Shumka’s web site at
http://www.shumka.com

Cheers!

Sla

Thanks and keep up the good work!

Thanks for the comment. I went back to refresh my memory on the sample files. I agree with you on all points, essentially. I personally don’t reach fro the moded RSM-3 for drums. I always use a pair of Fat Heads. In the drum examples I wasn’t using a stereo pair, per se. The two mics were side by side, above the kit, pointing straight down. This would eliminate the possibility of phase issues since it’s only one mic at a time, a completely monaural sample. It does sound a bit like there’s a phase issue. It deosn’t exhibit itself on the cruchy guitar track, however.

All things considered, I find it a good deal if you can find a cheap RSM-3 to mod if only to have an alternate choice for guitar miking.

Cheers!

(1) On the clean guitar amp – I did not find a noticeable difference

(2) On the crunch guitar amp – There was a level of detail present in the Royer that was not there with the modded Nady. I imagine that if one were to mix many tracks recorded with the modded Nady, a noticeable amount of difference may be observed in the final mix – perhaps perceived as a lack of clarity when compared to the same final mix recorded with the Royer mics. But that’s conjecture on my part.

(3) On the drums, the 2nd recording (the Nady) had a noticeable phase issue to my ears – the difference was pretty drastic. I’m assuming they were used as stereo overheads? You mentioned different off-axis characteristics, so perhaps that is one flaw of the Nadys?

Kudos to you for all the ridiculous amount of work that goes into making a show like this.

Woo and definitely hoo-

Geo

thx

Pretty easy to guess which category I fall into, really.

Thanks for the detailed show notes, and congrats on another successful gig!

1. Oktava MK-219
2. Audio-Technica At 4033/SE
3. Neumann TLM-103
4. Cascade C-77
5. Heil PR-40
6. Apex 460
7. Mojave Audio MA-200
8. AKG C-1000S

As I mentioned before, the preferences among people were quite varied. We’ve decided on one particular mic at this point. George Hrab will mention the choice on the next Geologic Podcast coming up this week. I’ll mention it here as well within the next few days.

Now that you know which mic is which, are your preferences influenced?

Yeah, personalities and ideologies can be so vastly different in the studio. I suppose we all concentrate on the task at hand – making music. As long as we stay focused, we can all coexist happlily

Glad you’re enjoying the podcast so far!

Slau

Seriously, I’ve been in a similar situation with my Computer Consulting business, and it’s always surprising what becomes a deal-breaker for people.

And yes, those girls can sing!

BTW, David, I believe you meant to type 4033/SE. Yeah, Audio-technica’s AT-4033 was their first hugely popular mic and it’s had a number of reincarnations over the years. For example, SE stood for “Special Edition” and CL stood for “Classic.” Thing is, I’m pretty sure they’re pretty much identical. You might find more information at an excellent resource for microphones at Recording Hacks:
http://www.recordinghacks.com
Matt McGlynn maintains an excellent microphone database there with tons of incredibly useful information. It’s the first place I go to when I want to check on some details and find the product page or pdf manual for a microphone. Check it out.

Hey Dave, regarding #7, yeah, it’s a nice mic, for sure and you’d be surprised that some people don’t like it. Well, I’m telling you, I’ve gotten love/hate comments for virtually each mic already. LOL

I’ll wait until Monday to reveal the mics. Thanks so much for the comments, emails and tweets!

#6: full/warm

#2 & #8: similar, too compressed sort of sound

#5: a little on the thin side

#1 & #3: some freq ranges seemed “covered”

#4: had kind of a small radio effect

Not surprisingly, messages (both public and private) have reflected a range of preferences but mostly along the lines of what we were thinking. Yes, CarrieP, much like NASA, we’re doing it as a sort of point of interest. I think we’re pretty much decided but thought it would be kinda cool to see what other people thought.

I’ll give it just a couple of days and will post the identities of the mics here adn our final choice revealed on the next Geologic Podcast.

Cheers!

I listened through the Mac laptop on the sessionswithslau.com site with Sony MDR-V6 headphones. So I guess my vote would go with whichever one is cheapest, or has some other aspect which you like. If the audio was routinely delivered in 24bit, then it might make sense to use a more expensive mic, but since 16/44.1 is the delivery method actually used, monitoring the signal “as delivered” makes sense.
Richard Drumm The Astronomy Bum,
President, 3D – Drumm Digital Design
(a video production company where hopefully audio doesn’t get short shrift!)

Based on that analysis, I preferred Mics 3, 6, and 8. Mic 3 seemed to pick up the consonants pretty good, and the vibratto well. Mics 6 and 8 seemed to make George sound more like George, if that makes any sense at all.

Also, based on that analsys, I really disliked Mics 4 and 7. The tone sounded flat on mic 7, and smooshed, like bread dough after it’s risen and you have punched it down. Mic 4 seemed to have a “pixelated” quality to it. Perhaps this was how I was listening to it (not a DAW, but a player that can play WAV files. But I don’t know if it does anything to the files before playing them or not).

I’m all about the food metaphors.

It was very hard to pick out the differences between most of the mics. So, even though I’ve given my preferences, I’d say please, please don’t take my word for this, and instead choose which mic or mics you think work best for the project. Be like NASA and the space station node naming contest: Gather votes, and say that you will consider them, but then go with whatever you want to do.

Keep ‘em coming!

Petur

Podcast about what you love and keep it entertaining (as always).

William

Although I understand what you’re saying about cheap mics sounding good through great gear and great mics sounding crappy through crappy gear, I don’t agree with what you seem to be implying. mp3 is quite a popular delivery format these days and things sometimes sound pretty bad when compressed to one-tenth the original file size but does that mean we shouldn’t use great gear because it’ll sound bad anyway? I think not and I think you’d agree that we all try to get the best out of what we have.

I enjoy doing shootouts like this because, when they are truly double-blind tests, they reveal things that we normally don’t consider when we know what we’re listening to. It is really too bad that you’re not hearing the stuff in a full 24-bit environment when you hear the podcast. Bandwidth still prevents me from providing that. However, no matter what the resolution, whatever you hear from any podcast or studio will never sound like the results you might achieve in your own studio — different pres, different room, different source, not to mention different person making the mic placement choices. My goal was only to provide a bit of perspective to some folks that might otherwise have never held a U47 or a C-800G and offer at least some point of reference.

Again, thanks for the comment, I really do appreciate the feedback and I hope you find something that might interest you in the future.

Cheers!

I am not convinced that any of the 11 microphones tested sound any better than a 200 (or so) dollar Shure or even an MXL 990 (90 bucks, roughly). It seems to tell me that you can get a decent sounding recording out of a 200 mic and have close to the same results with a 10K mic. You are going to have different results using different recording equipment and that was not taken into consideration. A 50 dollar mic might sound great on a 100K recording console while a 100K mic may sound like crap on a 50 dollar MP3 recorder…

So…17 tracks.

Is that, like, a lot?

One Response to “Coming Soon”
Carriep Says:
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Expecting good things from this. As a music layperson, this stuff fascinates me, though I sometimes wonder how much I’m picking up.

At any rate, hope to see some content in the near future.

hhy Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
March 17th, 2009 at 8:06 am
Soon the New Podcast featuring behind the Scenes of B Sharp Studios.

This entry was posted on Monday, August 11th, 2008 at 2:21 pm and is filed under Podcast. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply
Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

Subscribe

Subscribe in a reader
HOME
Contact Slau

About

Slau on Twitter

And you and Geo are both so engaging, it seems to me you ought to do something like a DVD commentary track or a “making of” documentary for his next album. It would be instructive for learning musicians and drooling fanboys alike.

Thanks for the message. I’m still trying to find a balance between being too basic and getting ahead of people. There are a couple of excellent podcasts like Inside Home Recording:
http://www.insidehomerecording.com and
Sine Language:
http://www.audio2u.com
that address subjects for people setting up home studios, understanding signal flow, etc. Check ‘em out. They also take listener questions and answer them on their respective shows.

THTH

The differences are even harder to hear in an mp3 format, of course. Unfortunately, the innertube’s bandwidth for most people isn’t up to WAV files yet but… some day.

Regarding EQ on mics, of course, to a degree, it’s possible to boost and cut a little here and there to brighten up a dull mic and tame a shrill mic. I’m always a fan of changing mics or at least changing the mic position rather than reaching for the EQ knob unless, of course, we’re just talking about adding a little sparkle to a ribbon mic or something. Most of today’s condensers sound pretty good on most sources. It’s amazing what you can do with just a couple of mid-priced offerings

Since each microphone has different frequency response profiles, which makes them “brighter” or “warmer”, what is your opinion about tweaking the response with equalization? Obviously, a crappy microphone with poor response probably can’t be salvaged with equalization; but can a reasonably good quality mic be tweaked to sound similar to a more expensive mic?

Glad to know that I’ve provided food, err… audio for thought. I’ve used the RE-20 for recording upright acoustic bass where it has gotten a special reputation. I thought it sounded nice but I’ve shot it out against a Heil PR40 and I thought the Heil sounded better. BTW, that shootout was featured on PSN (I believe it was episode 58).

As far as portable recorders go, I think they’re great as long as you’re using external converters. Thing is, for most applications, even the on-board converters are at least decent. It depends on what you’re recording. If you’re doing a serious acoustic source like a classical ensemble, well, maybe it’s worth putting it through something like an Apogee AD16X, especially if it’s going to be released and distributed. You’d probably want to go with the highest quality you can get for something like that. As far as the little 2 and 4-track portable recorders go, I love ‘em. I’ve used an Edirol R-09 since they first came out. Still kicking.

Thanks so much for the comments!

I intend on including as many sessions as I can. It is truly the most time-consuming type of episode to do, of course, but it often does have the widest appeal. Stay tuned for more of these after a couple of shootouts.

Can’t wait to hear the new stuff. How about you come to New York for a few days and we can mix it when it’s ready? Now, wouldn’t that be an episode?!

Reeves

Yes, I did actually get behind the mic for “Squirrels.” It was a blast, as you might imagine. Pushing buttons and turning knobs is quite alright, of course, but when you’re invited to get up and sing, well, now you’re talkin’!

Next episode will be a little session profile that’s been in the can for a while and then it’ll be a few shootouts. Stay tuned and thanks for listening!

Slau