All of the AEA "R" series share the same tonal characteristics so you can't expect to hear a lot of differences between models. Same with the Royer, Cloudlifter, Samar, etc. Frequency response graphs can't listen for you either. For those concerned that have never heard, ribbons have tons of detail. However, almost all ribbons, new and old, have a steep HF shelf that makes them seem "dark". This can be extremely useful depending upon the effect you want from your tone. I'm not trying to push Samar but they are the only ribbon I know that doesn't have a HF drop off. They are flat past 25K Hz. I say "past" because their measurement device stopped at 25K and the mics signal just kept going so they really don't know how high they record. FWIW, I would audition an RE20 on the source before I put any money down.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Double Bass Ribbon Mic for Recording?
- Thread starter BassiklyAC
- Start date
Here are the response plots for a couple of Samar's ribbon mic offerings:
VL37
MF65
Here is the response plot for Samar's condenser mic:
A bit of emphasis in the high mids.
I have some doubt that there is much information provided by a double bass in the octave above 10khz... of course, I have old male ears, so I could be wrong!
But frequency response does not tell the whole tale. If we all wanted accurate mics with ruler-flat response, we would use omnis designed for scientific measurement.
Again, I don't wish to discount the value of good condenser mics (bad ones are a different story), and I have, use, and appreciate really-good moving-coil dynamic mics as well. But I stand by my earlier statement that a good long-ribbon mic will exhibit unexcelled transient response, and the native figure-of-eight polar pattern provides a spatial context that is, well, really cool (technical term).
But frequency response does not tell the whole tale. If we all wanted accurate mics with ruler-flat response, we would use omnis designed for scientific measurement.
Again, I don't wish to discount the value of good condenser mics (bad ones are a different story), and I have, use, and appreciate really-good moving-coil dynamic mics as well. But I stand by my earlier statement that a good long-ribbon mic will exhibit unexcelled transient response, and the native figure-of-eight polar pattern provides a spatial context that is, well, really cool (technical term).
I think you may be missing my point. I totally agree that the upright is not going to provide much energy in the octave above 10khz, especially when pizz is played. In fact this is one of the reasons why I don't think a ribbon will make that much difference for pizz. I am not saying that you can't get a nice sound with a ribbon. I am saying I don't think a ribbon is necessary to get a nice sound. In other words, recording pizz upright bass may not be very good justification to add a ribbon to your mic locker.
In contrast I think a ribbon is more likely to make a difference for arco, because many (if not most) mics have a bit of emphasis in the upper mids that tends to make the bow sound a bit scratchy and unpleasant. The response charts of the ribbons I have posted show either a flat response to 10kHz, or the response is declining as the frequency rises. In other words the mic will either de-emphasize the high end of the bass, or at worse capture it accurately instead of artificially accentuating the raspiness of the bow. The idea is to use a mic that captures the sound you want with as little EQ as possible, and to my understanding, ribbons are great when you want to take the edge off.
In the perhaps more "alchymist" realm, two different mics with the same frequenzy curve can sound different from one another. Just like two tonally flat amps can sound different, or loudspeakers. Because there are other factors at play. Dampening, distortion, response to transients.
From reading, I think a ribbon mic sounds a bit fragile for live use. But I wouldn't mind trying a cardioid large diagphram condenser on a stick, to compare with my SM58 Beta
From reading, I think a ribbon mic sounds a bit fragile for live use. But I wouldn't mind trying a cardioid large diagphram condenser on a stick, to compare with my SM58 Beta
Last edited:
Fragile? Not so much as many think. The main precautions are to keep anyone from blowing into it, and avoid mechanical shocks.
Better reasons not to use one live are a) they require a lot of gain, b) because of that need for gain you will likely need to use a phantom-powered preamp like the Cloudlifter, c) you need to be careful about phantom power, and d) they, like condensers, are sensitive and therefore may be more prone to feedback. This last point (d) is related to the fact that a figure-of-eight pattern exhibits a lot of proximity effect, so you don't put that mic up close to the source.
Obviously, if you have one of those new-fangled ribbon mics with a preamp built in, the gain and phantom-power issues go away.
Moreover, there are ribbon mics with cardioid, supercardioid, and omni patterns, but IMO those mics forfeit some of the ribbon magic. Here is a photo of the slide switch on one of my RCA MI-6203 "Varacoustic"; it goes from "P" for "Pressure" (omni) to "V" for "Velocity" (figure-of-eight) with three intermediate settings. I've not found a good use for anything but Velocity.
AND we haven't discussed Beyerdynamic's ribbon-mic lineup. The M130 (figure-of-eight) and M160 (supercardioid) are excellent short-ribbon mics. They are quite small and sturdy, and the M160 is very-well-suited to all manner of instruments (as well as being famous as overheads for John Bonham's drums in Led Zeppelin). And the M500 is a great vocal microphone.
I like the RODE NTR for upright, but like with any mic, I prefer to blend it a bit with the full circle pickup when tracking.
I'm not one to blend mic's and pickups. I think if you're happy with your live sound through an amplifier using a pickup, then that's all you need. The same applies to
recording microphones and pickups but in reverse. If there's a microphone that sounds great on your bass, then adding a pickup isn't really necessary. I understand that
lots of players benefit from blending the two. It just not a sound that I enjoy. Just my take however. When I first got my Grace Felix I thought " wow now I've got
the perfect setup to use both and I hardly ever do that.
recording microphones and pickups but in reverse. If there's a microphone that sounds great on your bass, then adding a pickup isn't really necessary. I understand that
lots of players benefit from blending the two. It just not a sound that I enjoy. Just my take however. When I first got my Grace Felix I thought " wow now I've got
the perfect setup to use both and I hardly ever do that.
Choosing a mic or pickup is often compared to the idea of choosing a brush when one is painting. IMHO blending a mic and pickup just expands the range of tones and textures you can create. Totally understandable if you don't find this extra range usable, but many do.
For upright I see "pickup VS mic" more as what works in a given situation. For live work I have experimented with mics a bit and always found them completely useless as I feel the bleed from other instruments is too much of a cost to pay. This is somewhat situational on the types of music and ensembles I play in. The ensembles tend to be big and loud. Also sending a mic through an amp at the volume level I typically require does not work. There is simply not enough gain before feedback to get the necessary SPL.
My impression is the Chuck Israel (CI) signature mic is probably about as good as it gets, as this mic is custom tuned specifically for close mic'ing an upright. The DPA4099 also sounds pretty darn good, but I don't think it would do as well in a live environment as the the CI. In pinch, I own several ATM350As that I believe perform fairly close to the DPA4099. The only bass specific mic I have experience with is the AMT S25B. It sounded fabulous when the bass was playing solo, but was useless with an amp or playing in a big band.
About the only place where I would consider mic'ing upright basses live would probably be an outdoor pop's concert. I have heard a few of these and they always sounded awful. The system was poorly chosen and I had the impression the audio techs were in over their heads. I am pretty confident that I could do better, but the right type of equipment is essential or it's a lost cause. Also it would be nice if the basses were not too close to the tympani. I have a great deal of experience mic'ing full concert bands, which are way louder than string ensembles. I started out mic'ing the tympani, but quickly found out that it is almost never necessary to give a dedicated mic to this instrument.
For studio work, I think I would most likely prefer 100% mic if I were playing upright through cans in an acoustic isolation module. I think a mic would also work with a jazz combo, if the bass was strategically located and surrounded by acoustic panels (gobos), to minimize bleed from the drums. Also it helps if the drummer plays with some restraint
.Regarding blending, sometimes it's nice to capture the drier, tighter, and deeper lows from a pickup and use the mic to capture a bit of that "authentic" upright tone. What would be best depends on a lot of factors such as the bass, pickup, style of music, etc. Never recorded on upright so my opinion is academic on this point.
I have recorded a bit on electric and I always preferred the straight DI sound over the mic'ed cab. But that's more about the type of tone I prefer than anything else. Of course it wasn't necessarily my decision
. There are lot's of recordings where I think the bass player's tone is awful, and yet it's perfect for both the song and recording. There are also plenty of examples of great bass tones captured either by mic'ing the cab or blending a mic with the DI.
I've been following this thread with great interest, but have come up with a little different take on recording the double bass so rather than hi-jack the thread I will start a new one.
Briefly, I have always wondered why my onboard X/Y mics on my Zoom recorders seemed to sound better than any other mics - even some Really Good Ones.
My theory is this: It's simply the advantage of a stereo recording vs a mono recording. The X/Y mics produce a stereo recording (of course) and I've been comparing that to other mics recorded mono. The mono doesn't have the 'life' and 'presence' of the stereo recording. (That makes sense or why else would stereo recordings have replaced mono recordings).
Enough of a de-rail/preview. I will title the new Thread Stereo VS Mono recording for double bass and I will have sound-clips. Hope to see you there.
Briefly, I have always wondered why my onboard X/Y mics on my Zoom recorders seemed to sound better than any other mics - even some Really Good Ones.
My theory is this: It's simply the advantage of a stereo recording vs a mono recording. The X/Y mics produce a stereo recording (of course) and I've been comparing that to other mics recorded mono. The mono doesn't have the 'life' and 'presence' of the stereo recording. (That makes sense or why else would stereo recordings have replaced mono recordings).
Enough of a de-rail/preview. I will title the new Thread Stereo VS Mono recording for double bass and I will have sound-clips. Hope to see you there.
Rick,
I think that the Zoom is great portable recorder and their mic capsules are well made. As an example, I can use a single Line Audio CM4
and get a very detailed full sound. Chris Fitzgerald uses them as well. They cost a little over $150.00 each. What I will say is that if you’ve ever heard
a really great jazz album, recorded in hi fidelity mono, the Double Bass sounds magnificent. I have A mono L.P. Version of Shadow Waltz with Sonny Rollins. Oscar Pettiford’s bass sound is spectacular in mono.
I think that the Zoom is great portable recorder and their mic capsules are well made. As an example, I can use a single Line Audio CM4
and get a very detailed full sound. Chris Fitzgerald uses them as well. They cost a little over $150.00 each. What I will say is that if you’ve ever heard
a really great jazz album, recorded in hi fidelity mono, the Double Bass sounds magnificent. I have A mono L.P. Version of Shadow Waltz with Sonny Rollins. Oscar Pettiford’s bass sound is spectacular in mono.
Jared, really enjoyed that. Nice tune, wonderful vocals, and the bass was clear as a bell! Thanks for sharing.
Thanks, the mics used we're a cascade fathead II and a peluso sdc
Got a call to put some bass on this arrangement of The Chamber Brothers tune “Time Has Come Today”. My new MXL R144 ribbon mic had arrived just a few days before, so it provided the perfect opportunity to put it to use.
In addition to the mic, I also purchased this sound shield that mounts onto the mic stand. Knowing that the mic had a figure 8 pickup pattern, I thought it might be a good idea to reduce the amount of sound reflection and capture as much of the direct sound as possible. There was still some ambient room sound which I found I liked.
Mic was about a foot and a half away from the bridge just slightly to the e-string side of the bass. (I have since discovered that I achieved what I thought was an even better sound with the mic further away...about 2 - 2 & 1/2 feet).
Strings are Zyex for A/D/G and Helicore Hybrid on the E.
The arrangement - as you’ll undoubtedly hear - is sort of a mashup of the tune plus Pat Metheny’s “Phase Dance” and done in 7.
MB Gordy is the percussionist and Tony Jones is the vocalist and arranger. Guitarist is Doug Perkins.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
That sounds fantastic, especially for how cheap the mic is. It captured a really nice attack but didn't compete with the percussion. My main concern with using just a ribbon was keeping a crisp attack. Your recording definitely put that fear to rest.
