Shure SM57 vs. ? - Recording Guru's Opinions

[DRM]

Thanks for the input guys. I'm good now.

[mjtripper]

My two favorites are the e906 and the mxl 2003a, I've had good luck using both of these both individually and combined.

[catzodellamarina]

I had a 906 and it was much easier to place and get a good thick sound than the 57. Now I'm going to mess around with home recording and I'm going to use the 906 again. I think another reason I had a good sound is that I use Weber beam blockers on my speakers. With the 906 in front of a speaker w/beam blocker I don't get the harshness. I'm also thinking about placing an area mic out in the open. Any suggestions for an inexpensive mic placed about 5-10 feet away from the cab?

[Endrik]

Try Oktava mics. Probably the best condenser mics you can get with such a low price. Anything cheaper is pure crap.
Go with large diaphragm. MK-101 is 195 euros in their online store right now.

If you got more bucks then with twice the price you can get Rode NT-2. A budget U87 and a very good one. If you get a stereo-pair then you can record some huge, warm and badass sounding drums.... yes with only two of them.

[Spivonious]

Any advise goes, then. Cool. Because it very much depends on what sound you are after. What sound you heard on an album and want to have. We all have references. I bet you have some too. Without these references, any help could possibly push you in the wrong direction.

Let me think up a scenario. Just to explain the above. Let's focus on rythm guitar sound. You want fat, saturated, hard rock or metal guitar sound. You want it to be massive. Dry. Have percussion-like punch. In a final mix, the guitar should have a lot to say and fill every void, so to speak. Every bass players nightmare, but that's how it is

Enter DRM. Yeah, what mic will get me there? Well, a lot of mics will get you there. The mic in this case is a relatively small factor, due to the recording techniques needed.

So we have to prioritize to reach the goal. There are a lot of factors involved and focusing on the wrong factors (mics) in the job at hand, will make you ineffective or you may never reach your goal.

In this scenario, I would prioritize like this:

1. Recording technique using two mics (mics placement, eliminating phase problems).
2. Overdubs. Every rythm guitar should be quad tracked. We want massive, remember? L-R x 2 = 4.
3. Your ability to play tight. I said tight.
4. Mixing (eq, panning, level, etc.). Done afterwards, of course. Avoid doing stuff on the way in.
5. Holding back on the amount of distortion on each take. Hard part.
6. Choice of mics. Matched correctly, a lot of mic pairs will do the job.

So, mics came last, eh? If you can play and team up with a competent studio engineer, the two of you could make this sound happen using almost whatever mics are available. In other scenarios, mics might be prioritized 2nd or even first. That's my point.

I'm suggesting using two mics simultaneously for each take, because different characteristics is a good thing. They just need to be matched correctly. And don't underestimate phasing problems. Other parameters are part of the above, but not necessary to make a point (amps, speakers, guitar setup).

Excellent post, Henrik. In recording there is no magic piece of gear that will give you great results. I will add one thing I've learned: get it right during tracking. Don't fix things during mixing.

[jackson1]

Thanks Scott. Yes, I totally agree. Get it right during tracking. My mixing comment was addressing the level (amplitude) of the many guitars, the panning and possibly also some EQ. It is hard not to want that afterwards, when you layer many guitars.

To be able to fully understand - to REALLY appreciate your advice about don't-fix-it-in-the-mix, one would have to go down the wrong path at least a couple of times. Go the full length of a project. With the bag full of turds. You will have to experience the countless of hours spent afterwards on making those turds something else, to end up with... just another bunch of turds.