Mic recommendations for a raspy voice.

Benjamin Strange · #1 04-05-2007, 10:05 PM

I've started to do some vocals on an acoustic EP I'm working on, and I'm finding my voice to be very reedy and raspy. I'm currently using an AKG Perfection 200, and it's apparently not a very forgiving mic. During loud passages I almost sound like I'm singing through a megaphone, and overall I seem to sound pretty midrangy.

I may need to buy a better vocal mic, or replace my vocal chords. Any suggestions?

bassturtle · #2 04-06-2007, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benjamin Strange

I may need to buy a better vocal mic, or replace my vocal chords. Any suggestions?

I've been having the same problem. I'm having my vocal chords replaced.

bassjamn · #3 04-06-2007, 02:01 PM

A few well placed "David lee Roth" howls might be the ticket

bassturtle · #4 04-11-2007, 11:42 PM

Since no one else offered any serious posts, I'll share my experience.

Finding the right vocal mic is just like finding the right bass or amp for you. Different mics sound differently with different vocalists. A lot of cheap vocal mics have a spike in the upper midrange. You might take a look at the spec sheet for you mic and see if that's the case. One of my personal favorites are Shure KSM32 mics. They have a relatively flat freq response.

What kind of pres are you using?

Basshole · #5 04-12-2007, 12:08 AM

EV RE-20

Often the best choice for male voice, oddly enough.

bbe · #6 04-14-2007, 08:25 PM

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/produ...nse?sku=270247

Dbassmon · #7 04-15-2007, 12:07 PM

AKG Perception 200? (not perfection)
That is a really nice, large diaphram condensor, especially for what it costs. If it sounds middy, eq it. That is a really natural sounding mike and I think it's a mistake to think that mike selection is your issue.
If you have a identifiable raspiness to your voice naturally, I wouldn't try and change that. Rather, I would try and be known for having that sound. I don't think you will be sucessful regardless of what mike you use and if you have something indivigual about your sound, celebrate it, don't try and change it. IMO

chrisp2u · #8 04-15-2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dbassmon

AKG Perception 200? (not perfection)
That is a really nice, large diaphram condensor, especially for what it costs. If it sounds middy, eq it. That is a really natural sounding mike and I think it's a mistake to think that mike selection is your issue.
If you have a identifiable raspiness to your voice naturally, I wouldn't try and change that. Rather, I would try and be known for having that sound. I don't think you will be sucessful regardless of what mike you use and if you have something indivigual about your sound, celebrate it, don't try and change it. IMO

Well, different mics will surely color, enhance or influence particular vocal styles and voices in different ways... in the OP's case, it sounds like he's not pleased with the sound he's getting, not necessarily his voice, so it seems it's not something to embrace or celebrate. bassturtle is right on in saying that mics are like choosing any other instrument or amp... you need to find the one that fits what you're going for... one size does not fit all. Obviously, you can't really change your voice so you need to find something that will be forgiving where you need it to be and accentuate the things you like. Looking at freq charts may help if you know where your trouble areas are.

Best advice is to, if you can, go out and audition as many as you can until you find the one that fits... either at local stores, if they allow you to; friends, if they have any mics; or area studios maybe. The previously mentioned RE-20 and SM7 are pretty good suggestions as well and work well for many, but again, may not suit you.

Not sure how much this will help in your case, as the mic just may not work for you, but another thing to try would be your mic positioning if you've only been using it straight on pointed at your mouth. Tipping the mic up toward your forehead a bit usually gives you more "head" tone. Down toward your chest a bit will generally give you fuller lows and smoother highs. Straight on at your mouth gives you maximum brightness... which may (or may not be) where some of your issues are. Might be worth messing with for a bit, and cheaper than a new mic.
---
c

hyperlitem · #9 04-15-2007, 04:22 PM

I always thought a neumann u67 did really well with evening out vocals. Look into a tube mic, itll chill out the midrange a bit.

Dbassmon · #10 04-17-2007, 07:08 PM

While mikes do color the sound to some extent, I don't think a SM57 or RE20 is going to give you what you are after. I believe that you may try several mikes and find one you like better than another, your issue could perhaps be attacked from a different angle. A tube pre is one will certainly make things warmer, some compression and EQ are things you can try with gear you already own and I think might solve the majority of your issues. Condensors are crystal clear and very present. You are right when you say unforgiving, they pick up every nuance good and bad. Some are brighter ie AKG414, some are less sparkely and warmer ie U87 Neuman, Your mike is somewhere in between those closer to the 414. You can probably rent anything you want if you live near a major metro area. That's great way to really get to find out what a mike is about. What you have sounds pretty good in my opinion. I have used for many vocalists with good result.
Perhaps try my suggestion about EQ and Compression, if you can, demo a tube preamp somewhere.
Hope this adds some things to consider.

seamonkey · #11 04-18-2007, 12:36 AM

Check this out:
http://www.audiomasterclass.com/learn.cfm?a=3098

chrisp2u · #12 04-18-2007, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seamonkey

Check this out:
http://www.audiomasterclass.com/learn.cfm?a=3098

I love these comparison tests where some guy on the internet does some *tests* and mentions nothing about setup, environment, what pre it's running through, pre settings, or mic/source positioning. All of these things will affect the outcome. Sure there may be *some* merit, but for those reasons this kind of stuff makes me skeptical of the result.

For instance, were the preamp gain settings the same? Were the levels matched? A u87 will usually have a much higher output than a 57 or 58. In their $5 preamp test the writer even attested to this when he said he had to stand further back from the u87... was it the same case in this instance? That would surely affect the response/sound.

At least he does say the following:

Quote:

In conclusion... actually there isn't a conclusion. Choice of microphones is very subjective, and you should always choose the one that sounds best to you.

and this...

Quote:

A test for one application, i.e. speech, does not necessarily predict performance in another, i.e. singing.

In short, and as said before, find out for yourself and make up your own mind.
---
c

seamonkey · #13 04-18-2007, 11:16 AM

Agreed - not too scientific. In a real blind test, the mics would have been made equal through test measurement, - i.e. impedance matched, EQ matched, pop screens, etc. to sound the same first.

People do seem to think the mic, or other gear, should sound just great right out of the box. A/B tests in stores can be just as misleading.

In any case if the mic you have doesn't quite sound right - try tweaking the EQ, adding compression, .... Mic emulation is cool, it's interesting how convolution works.

I can bet also, that if some even cheaper mics were in the test they would also fair well. Durability, handling noise, ... not evaluated.