Thread: \what microphone works best?

What type of microphones work best? I have recorded this tune using three different microphone setups:

Sony PCM D-50 audio recorder
Audio Technica Pro-44 boundary microphones
AKG 414 xls

All were using cardioid capsules or set to cardioid and all were at 24 bit 48htz.

I used built in limiters on the D-50 and 414’s but as I didn’t have a limiter for the pro-44 I was forced to paste 3 notes from the 414’s recording into the pro-44’s recording; where the pro-44 dropped out.

I gave all three about 4 db’s of extra headroom to avoid compression on YouTube.

All three recordings were outputted from Final Cut Express using AAC 128kbs stereo format.

I should have given the 414's a bit more gain, but in general the comparison appears to be fairly truthful. The Sony PCM D-50 was closer and you can hear this on the video (I have got into the habit of putting it close), it was about 2 foot away, the others were 5-6 foot away from the guitar.

Which microphone type do you prefer?


The AKG 414 xls's (£750 each)

The Sony PCM D50 (professional sound recorder, £500 +/-)

The Audio Technica Pro-44 Boundary microphones (under £100 each but using in-line pads £40 each).

My vote is for the Pro-44's in terms of value, also they are floor mics so no stands and no floor bounce echo. The Sony PCM wins for portability.

The difference isn't really the microphone quality at all - it's where you put them. The closer one wins in my book, because the ratio of direct to reflected sound is better and I can hear the quality of the instrument. The more distant sounding version are much too ambient for my liking. I'd have liked to have heard the 414s in closer, maybe in fig-8 mode, so you'd have room sound but clarity and detail too? Stereo field is also exaggerated by distant miking - the guitar, miked from a distance becomes more of a point source, so in terms of image information, we hear a lively room, with a guitar in the centre. As the hand positions change, with eyes closed, we can't hear it. The closer perspective of the Sony seems to have more left-right information in it. The crossed pair of 414s just out of frame at the height of his left knee, favouring the soundhole would have been nice to hear?

Hi Paul, good reply. I will record another with a Blumlien pair (crossed figure of eights), I had always thought of the technique as a setup for distance recording but it should sound good close. Nice one thanks for that. Bill

I suspect I'm a firm subscriber to the theory that all the established techniques can be given a try when obvious ones don't cut the mustard. I have a stereo multi pattern mic, and was recording in a very ambient church one day, in m/s - and the results were just not quite right - a huge space, but it didn't sound that big. Setting the mid microphone to omni rather than cardioid created a lovely impression of space, but not actually realistic of what I was hearing - but the recording sounded really good. Blumlein pairs close in sound quite different from their usual 'sound' out front - but sometimes give just that closer perspective that works.

I'm by no means someone to take advice from when it comes to audio, but you and paulears seem to know what your talking about, and I do have a quick question for either of you. I noticed you rendered your work in 128kbs, is it not better sound quality at say 320kbs?

I produce all my material now at 96K/24bit as a 'standard', but I'm quite happy to see them end up on compressed formats - as most of my work is either live or theatre based, it's very common for it to be loaded into mp3 players or MD players. Much of the theatre playout is still on MD - mainly because of the text displays - and atrac compression, works well enough. Same thing with the solid state players that are gradually becoming common in flightcase racks - and most of these work with mp3 files. In the studio, the differences are quiet clear - even with my aged ears, but live, much less so. I know many people hate the compression artefacts and other often quoted negative features, but if they are going onto the net, then 128Kbs seems a good compromise. I must say that I've never found 320 to be much better than 256 - which I do use from time to time. I suppose what I'm saying is that if I need to distribute compressed audio, I've made myself happy to live with the results, so I don't get too worried by it.

Oddly - When I've been in the studio working on older projects, it's only when I attempt to edit them with newer material and find they are different sample rates that I 'suddenly' discover that 96/24 sounds better. I've perhaps been working for days with 48/16 and never noticed! I do lots of video work, so I've been using 48K for a long time, which resamples nicely to 44.1 for CD.

I've slowly lost the annoyance at paper specs over the years, and for me - 128Kb or higher is fine for non-critical material. I don't subscribe to any of the hi-fi snake oil stuff - if I like the sound, I'm happy. With archive material, I now find the most annoying thing is background tape hiss - it seems to overshadow any audio A/D - D/A artefacts.

Hi, well there's a point. I use Final Cut Express; and when I do the export box for sound, I put it for stereo and 128kbs jumps into the box and I go for the 'Best' option.

I have tried other settings but ran into problems and found the software just locked-up so I have stuck to the above.

Have you been able to get mpeg 4 AAC files to work at 320kbs?

In these three examples the Sony is the best recording. I think as Paul has already said, this is mainly due to mic placement. Also the placement in the stereo field is correct for the Sony recording but the others to are just wide as though you have put two versions of a mono recording with one to the left and one to the right. If you're sat in the middle of the picture that is where the sound should be coming from. The AKG has a nice tone and if placed correctly could have been better. The Pro-44's seem to bright for this type of recording.

Hi, I took paulears idea and recorded tried using M+S using a front facing Omni, in close proximity. It does sound good, I also tried a Blumlien pair (figure of eight mics set a 90 degrees to each other) this had a very big sound.

But then I built a boundary mic and piezo bridge pickup into a £5 junkshop guitar and close mic'd it using the Sony and it worked a treat, big as a barn door. Though each of the feeds on their own was horrible.

Thinking about how it wants to sound and then playing like that makes a big difference.