[Rwp] type of microphone

[Patrick Perdue]

Yep, there is that.

Out of all the dynamic mics I have, my Sennheiser E835 and Shure SM7B 
are the best at rejecting such things. I have some that are just bad, 
and there is plenty of noise around here, far more than I'd like, most 
of which is not actually generated by my gear or associated transformers.
If I had the money, I'd built an acoustically treated space inside a 
Faraday cage, but we can't have it all.

On 3/5/2016 5:06 PM, Snowman wrote:
> One achiles heal of dynamics is the sensitivity to magnetic
> interference. Some do a better job of shielding than others.  But, if
> you have a dynamic withint about 2 feet of a power transformer, expect
> to pick up some hum.
> Condensers pretty much ignore magnetic fields, being based on electric
> fiels instead.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Perdue" <patrick at pdaudio.net>
> To: "Reapers Without Peepers" <rwp at bluegrasspals.com>
> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2016 4:02 AM
> Subject: Re: [Rwp] type of microphone
>
>
>> Generally speaking, dynamic mics are more forgiving than condensers in
>> less than ideal recording environments, as it takes more energy to
>> move a coil of wire and a diaphragm. This, of course, also means
>> dynamic microphones are magnitudes less sensitive than the typical
>> condenser, which can be good or bad depending on what you’re doing.
>> In any case, do what you can to minimize room problems, even if it’s
>> just sticking some drapes on the walls.
>>
>> Regarding dynamic mics, one of my favorite mics over-all is the Shure
>> SM7B. It just seems to work with anything I throw at it. It’s on the
>> high side of price for dynamic mics, and it does have a very low
>> output, so expect to have a gutsy preamp behind it.
>> I use mine with a Mackie Onyx preamp, which, according to Shure, is
>> sort of the minimum acceptable without augmentation from something
>> like a Cloudlifter CL1 or a Triton Audio FetHead, both of which I
>> have. I consider those preamps to be pretty nice.
>> Of course, there are the old industry standards, the Shure SM58 and
>> beta58, which I’ve never really been a fan of. I actually think a 57
>> sounds better on vocals sometimes than a beta58, and that’s supposed
>> to be a general purpose/instrument mic.
>> I even have a modified Shure SM57, which has had it’s transformer
>> removed for a more neutral sound at the expense of reduced output. I
>> haven’t actually found a use for it yet, as I think it sounds better
>> with the transformer, even if it does have some coloring that the
>> modded one doesn’t have.
>>
>> Shure makes a set of locking windscreens for the SM57 which locks down
>> with a set screw. They have two, one for general purpose use, and
>> another larger one for out-door use.
>>
>> There are plenty of decent dynamic options around from Sennheiser,
>> Audio Technica, Heil (if you like that sort of thing,) Shure, etc.
>> Even the Blue Encore dynamic mics are pretty nice, though I think they
>> work better on females.
>>
>> I’ll let someone else present the argument for condensers if desired.
>>
>>> On Mar 5, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Tayeb Meftah <tayeb.meftah at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys
>>> i dont know if this out of toppic, but
>>> i need a vocal microphone
>>> and i want to buy one maybe today?
>>> should i get a static or dynamic one, and why?
>>> please note that i dont have a good accostic room
>>> thanks!
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RWP mailing list
>>> RWP at bluegrasspals.com
>>> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> RWP mailing list
>> RWP at bluegrasspals.com
>> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RWP mailing list
> RWP at bluegrasspals.com
> http://bluegrasspals.com/mailman/listinfo/rwp