Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

[Jonny R]

Instead of a good condenser mic as used for vocals, acoustic instruments etc?

Is it a fact that guitar amps don't produce sound outside of the range of a dynamic microphone, or do we simply assume that and ignore any potential loss of range?

The times I've recorded in studio I've normally had a good condenser mic in front of the amp, not through my own choice but that of the engineer.

Or is it, for most people, simply a matter of cost?

Just curious

 

[daemon barbeque]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

It's marketing ,The power of magazines and internet ,and the lack of adventurous Sound engineers/musicians...

Sennheiser MD 421 is as well known as the SM57...Alltough there are better once ,and other Condenser microphones as well ,people tend to use the "proven" ones...

I think ,nothing ,but nothing comes close to a real acousticly well balanced room and a well placed Condenser...

 

[Jonny R]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Sorry, I should have removed Shure from the title...I mean a dynamic mic instead of a condenser...why? I've only used condensers for an amp, not dynamic...and I'm wondering why so many mic up in the studio with a dynamic.

I understand live (robustness, bleed etc), but not why it's done in studios.

 

[Imp]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

the SM57 is a fairly good dynamic - about $100.

a fairly good condenser? try at least 3x/4x that! that's the main reason for low/mid level stuff, i guess..

dynamics handle higher SPLs, and they tend to cut a little more before processing.. very good question though! i just wish i could afford a decent condenser

 

[Jonny R]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Yeah...thought it must be mainly cost. I think there have been some decent low level condensers coming out in recent years though, thought there was one from China that was rated ok, and one from...hmm...maybe the Czech Republic or somewhere.

Think they were talking maybe $400 for a low level one, can't remember.

 

[Imp]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

yeah, i'm thinking of just chucking down £100 on the golden age pack.. i think it's a large and a small condenser? for roughly the same money as a sm57 runs new here.. just how bad can they sound?

oktava's are reportedly quite good for the price, there's guys who mod the 319 and it supposedly rocks.. made in russia or czech, i forget

 

[wahwah]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I don't think it has anything to do with expense. I've worked in a lot of very nice studios, and I've found that most engineers like to use dynamic mics right in the face of an amp, and a condenser further back to capture the room sound. The two are then either tracked seperately or mixed to deliver the final signal. The dynamic in the face has to be able to handle high SPL, but it is also about having potent instant midrange, as opposed to high fidelity. The room condenser can introduce the air, but the close mic is for punch in the mids. Dynamic mics do this job better, because they don't have the large diaphragm which will say goodnight forever after a few moments of being blasted. There aren't too many large diaphragm condensers that can handle the SPL up close from a guitar speaker being driven by a 50 or 100w amp.

Close micing gives its own particular sound, and it just so happens that the inefficiencies of dynamic mics like the SM57 and MD421 suit this job very well. In some cases the slightly higher fidelity of a dynamic mic like the e509 or e609 or 906 will do the trick, but they are often too bright, especially with amps like Marshalls. Room mics are great as long as the room is good, but they will often lack some of the immediacy that a close mic can deliver. Ultimately, the answer to why so many recording engineers use the up close dynamic is because it works really well.




Cheers.................................wahwah

 

[Artie]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I think that a big part of is the reputation something gains from "pro" use. The 57 and 58 are proven old workhorses on the stage. They can take the abuse of heavy rock 'n roll hitters and keep on working. So, it carries over to the studio.

Same thing happens with audio equipment. I remember when I used to sell it, Stanton was a phono cartridge that everyone wanted because the "pros" used it. We had a hard time convincing them that it was a terrible cartridge for home use. It was specifically built for the rigors of DJ use, back-tracking, and the limited dynamic range and frequency response of radio.

Rugged as a bull . . . and sounded like one too. Same with the Shures.

 

[sosomething]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

The SM57 has been an industry standard for years. It likes guitar amps... and especially amps running through cabs with Celestion Vintage 30s, which are also their respective industry standard.

There is a certain mid-heavy frequency signature to the 57, and a certain mid-heavy frequency response to the V-30, but for some reason when you combine one with the other they totally compensate for each others faults and what you get is a big, thick, punchy sound.

Don't ask me why - I'm no sound engineer so any further explanation will have to come from the myriad other people on this forum who know more on the subject than I.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

No mic records exactly what you hear. Every mic kinda acts like a new EQ curve being placed on the thing it's recording. A lot of people seem to like the sm57 with guitar amps.

Generally speaking, an electric guitar is sitting in certain mid-range frequencies once it's recorded. There's no real need to record the very high frequencies produced by the electric guitar if a hi-hat is going to wash them away anyway, and there's no real need to record the very low frequencies if a bass drum and bass guitar are going to boom over top of them. I'm guessing that that (in combination with the loud spls) is the main reason that dynamics are chosen for work with guitar amps.

 

[Rich_S]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I think a lot of it is historical. Historically, only dynamic mics could handle the high SPL from a guitar cab, adn so they were used for close-miking. 20 years ago, condensers were two delicate for this duty.

Also, over time, the SM57 proved itself as a good-sounding mic for this application and/or we came to associate the sound the '57 made with what "good sound" was, so we continued to shoot for that vibe.

These days, there ARE condensers that can handle high SPLs, but we continue to associate close-miking with a plain ol' SM-57 with what a "good guitar sound" should be. On the other hand, if you're adventurous and have the time to experiment, there are literally hundreds of high-quality mics of all descriptions out there these days (many at quiet reasonable prices)just waiting to be tried.

 

[ParameterMan]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

The Shure SM57 and Sennheiser MD401 have a distinct character- a bit lo-fi, but they color/shape the guitar sound in a way that makes it 'sit' really well in the mix. I've done my own experimentation as well as listening to comparative sound samples and come to the conclusion that the 57 just works well. A lot of other mics, especially condensers pick up too much of the brittle sizzle off the cone and also pronounce the boxy, dense lower mids you get with close micing. The older german style dark/crunchy large diaphragm condensers seem to work well, too. It all depends on the sound you're trying to create.

 

[Jonny R]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Interesting and informative answers, thanks!

Generally speaking, an electric guitar is sitting in certain mid-range frequencies once it's recorded. There's no real need to record the very high frequencies produced by the electric guitar if a hi-hat is going to wash them away anyway, and there's no real need to record the very low frequencies if a bass drum and bass guitar are going to boom over top of them. I'm guessing that that (in combination with the loud spls) is the main reason that dynamics are chosen for work with guitar amps.

I'd disagree with that because the sounds that you hear in a live setting include the interaction of sounds from the different instruments, even if they are in similar frequency ranges.

In a recording, I'd expect some value to be placed on the interaction of sounds, not just presentation of each separately. Sound waves interact, and that influences how we hear the final music.

 

[Virtual Kevorkian]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

While I dig condensers, on higher-gained sounds, they tend have more of a hi-fi style sound than a dynamic. Some guys like this... some guys don't.

The 57 is just the tried and true. If you can't get a solid tone out of one, it's probably not an issue with the mic.

 

[J Moose]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

The 57 is just the tried and true. If you can't get a solid tone out of one, it's probably not an issue with the mic.

Indeed.

But ya know... I can't really stand the sound of an SM57 on an amp.

Pretty harsh... never ever sounds nothing like the amp does in the room. Well, nothing really ever does... but I find a LOT of other mics much more pleasing for close miking. It's like a midrange focus hat goes right through my skull.

Dynamics can take lots of abuse... but so can some condensers like the BLue mics and the Royer/AEA ribbons.

It's also possible, especially with low-end heavy "metal" tones... to absolutely flatten the diaphgram of a 57 which is a whole other kind of distortion. Not a crackly... "breaking up" thing... but it gets smaller, really quickly.

My rule is I don't have rules.

In a tracking session about a week back I placed a 421 and an AKG C460 small diaphragm condensor on a '68 Dlx reverb. Both about 1" from the grille. Rest of the band in the same room. No cans. Overdubs done a few days later had a 421 close and a 414 in figure 8 several feet back as we wanted to introduce more "room" tone and blend the dubs into the rest of the tones.

Why the 421? It's the players favorite mic. We went through a shootout over a year ago and he said the 421 was "it" for him. Tried several other things... he was right. The 421 into a '70s Neve preamp just rocked for "his" tone.

On my rig I love the old Sennheiser 409's and new 609's.

 

[Ocifer]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Dynamics have worked well for me. I just got a Shure SM57 and I'm really enjoying messing around with positioning... I understand there are many ways to record, and often it comes to down to personal preference. I'd definitely be interested in a condenser mic, but right now I can't afford it, nor can I justify having such a sensitive mic in my current recording environments.

Surprisingly, some of my favourite tones that I've managed to record have come with cheap condenser mics. One in particular was a little quieter than I liked even when close-miced, forcing me to really push the amp to get the recording to a decent volume.

The wide usage of dynamic mics comes from the fact that they have recorded some good rock n' roll. If a song inspires you, it's only natural to craft some of your work after that song. It's only natural that musicians would imitate the recording techniques of a record that moved them.

 

[MetalMike_II]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

It's marketing ,The power of magazines and internet ,and the lack of adventurous Sound engineers/musicians...

Sennheiser MD 421 is as well known as the SM57...Alltough there are better once ,and other Condenser microphones as well ,people tend to use the "proven" ones...

I think ,nothing ,but nothing comes close to a real acousticly well balanced room and a well placed Condenser...

Like whatsizname, Jimmy Page, I use both the 421 and 57 at once to record guitar, drums, anything. I'll use 4 mics to record the rhythm guitar and the lead guitar, usually the 421, the 57, an Octava and a Blue. Five mics on and around the drumset (25 foot "A"-shaped ceiling helps a lot). More tracks to work with representing different freqs. I'll sing into a Blue a foot away and a 57 up close at the same time. 421 always in the kick.

The great thing about the 57 is of course its capacity for handling all the dirty work. I've got it a millimeter from the bottom of my Supraphonic Ludwig snare, and as close to that Vintage 30 or whatever as I can (an inch or so).

A dynamic (I always get em backwards cuz it seems the one humming with 48 volts of phantom power should be the one called "dynamic") like a 57 is useful for having that extra bang to use at mixdown.

I've read that Michael Jackson was recorded singing into a 57.
The 421, I believe, is considered one of the best kick drum mics there is. It's certainly my fave.

Of course a quiet condenser like a Blue is as widely useful, and I use condensers for a drumset stereo pair

Fender USA P bass usually goes straight into the board of my workstation, but I often split it out to an Ampeg at the same time and capture that using at least a 57 for that, too

I require a 57 and a 421 barring any epiphanies as to otherhow

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

Interesting and informative answers, thanks!


I'd disagree with that because the sounds that you hear in a live setting include the interaction of sounds from the different instruments, even if they are in similar frequency ranges.

In a recording, I'd expect some value to be placed on the interaction of sounds, not just presentation of each separately. Sound waves interact, and that influences how we hear the final music.

I guess that it's a different approach to recording things . . . I'm of the opinion that the live sound is usually not perfect (maybe close, but not perfect) so my approach is to try and make each instrument in a recording fit in its own sonic space (through EQ, mic selection, and arrangement). To me it sounds tighter when each instrument has it's own defined spot and they're not stepping on each other's frequencies. Other people want the frequencies overlapping and like that sound better.

 

[sosomething]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I guess that it's a different approach to recording things . . . I'm of the opinion that the live sound is usually not perfect (maybe close, but not perfect) so my approach is to try and make each instrument in a recording fit in its own sonic space (through EQ, mic selection, and arrangement). To me it sounds tighter when each instrument has it's own defined spot and they're not stepping on each other's frequencies. Other people want the frequencies overlapping and like that sound better.

Well, in a sense, no.

In a recording - ideally and in most cases - you want each instrument to sound like itself. That is, you want to create the best sounds you can during performance and get them down to track as accurately as possible.

EQ in terms of creating sonic space should be approached from the angle of doing JUST ENOUGH to get each instrument out of each other's way to the point where you've achieved the amount of clarity you want.

I've heard recordings where everything was so heavily shelved and EQ'd that each instrument sounded totally disconnected and separate from each other, and the whole thing in those cases always sounds extremely empty and artificial.

A certain amount of incidental, natural frequency overlap is a good thing. It makes a recording sound like a band, among other things.

 

[Jonny R]

Re: Is there a reason why people use a Shure dyanmic to record amps?

I do recall some excellent CDs I have in terms of sound-stage. Guess both things have their merits.