VO-BB - 20 YEARS OLD!

cyclometh · Posted: Tue Mar 12, 2013 10:32 pm Post subject: Mic Shootout

Hey folks. I just managed to pick up a new mic and I'm curious what you think of these two. One is the new mic, one is my current one.

https://soundcloud.com/cyclometh/micshootout-mic-1

https://soundcloud.com/cyclometh/micshootout-mic-2
_________________
Corey "Vox Man" Snow
http://voxman.net

Dayo · Cinquecento Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 544 Location: UK

Hi Corey

Mic 2 seems a little more forward but I can't say I have a huge preference for one over the other. Both sound pretty nice.
_________________
Colin Day - UK Voiceover
www.thurstonday.co.uk

Bruce · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 6:12 am Post subject:

Mic 1 was a little "boomy" to me, so I would prefer 2.

By the way Comrade Snow, tovarich in English is pronounced something like tuh-VAH-rish.

B
_________________
VO-BB Member #31 Enlisted June, 2005

I'm not a Zoo, but over the years I've played one on radio/TV. .

Lance Blair · M&M Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 2281 Location: Atlanta

I liked 2. 1 was a little 'scooped'.
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too!

cyclometh · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 7:51 am Post subject:

Interesting, Bruce- I didn't know that. I love language so I have a ton of books on slang and the origin of words, and that one was sitting next to my desk when I was looking for something to read.
_________________
Corey "Vox Man" Snow
http://voxman.net

cyclometh · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:00 am Post subject:

Lance, can you clarify what "scooped" means? I'm not familiar with that term.

I'll post which was which later today. Smile

_________________
Corey "Vox Man" Snow
http://voxman.net

Lance Blair · M&M Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 2281 Location: Atlanta

Scooped like a 'U' shape on the frequency response. Lots of low end and lots of crisp high end, but kinda thin in the middle. #2 isn't crisp up high (nice and smooth) the mids are present, and the lows aren't boomy or muddy.
_________________
Skype: globalvoiceover
and now, http://lanceblairvo.com the blog is there now too!

cyclometh · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 8:14 am Post subject:

Ah, thank you for the clarification.
_________________
Corey "Vox Man" Snow
http://voxman.net

georgethetech · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:06 pm Post subject:

+1 Mic 2

Mic 1 had some low frequency plosives I can hear in my DT770 cans.
Not sure if Mic 2 has a high-pass engaged, or if it's just not as sensitive below 80hz. Either way, i think it will "cut" better than Mic 1.
_________________
If it sounds good, it is good.
George Whittam
GeorgeThe.Tech
424-226-8528
VOBS.TV Co-host
TheProAudioSuite.com Co-host
TriBooth.com Co-founder

Leslie Humble · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 1:54 pm Post subject:

+1 Mic 2 also please.

And scooped out at the mids is a bad place because so much of voice resides in the mids. A good reason to "Scoop" frequencies is if you are producing also and need an effect, voice, music sting, or other component to stand out. You choose the frequency that part of the rest of the spot resides at and lower those frequencies with EQ. Then put the stand out part over the top of it. Only so much energy in a file and this makes things pop out.

btw I like your voice.
_________________
There are rules to the Universe. Learn them and prosper. www.HumbleVoiceover.com

Jason Huggins · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 2:24 pm Post subject:

They both sound good, but on your voice, I think I prefer mic 1 (though I think it would depend on the project). You do a lot of audiobook work, so you don't really need a mic that cuts. There is nothing to cut through. Mic 2 seems a bit thinner to me. Were both mics set in exactly the same place, same distance, etc?

Mic 1 really seems to grab hold of the depth of your voice and accentuate the rumble on the low end. I think mic technique would fix the plosives. Maybe just move the mic an inch or two off axis from where it was on that sample.

cyclometh · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 3:34 pm Post subject:

Interesting results, thank you all for the responses!

Mic 1 is an Alesis/GrooveTubes AM11 that I picked up on eBay for a great price.

Mic 2 is a Chameleon TS-1 Mark 2, and the one I've used for the last year or so.

My thoughts were that the AM11 (mic 1) sounded OK, but mic 2 sounded richer and more mellow, maybe a bit more appropriate for my voice.

I think I'll do some other tests with it off-axis and such. One thing I noted is that the AM11 had less gain than the TS-1 did- I had to adjust the volume to give them similar levels.
_________________
Corey "Vox Man" Snow
http://voxman.net

Scolaidhe · Guest

I just listened, and oh yeah, definitely mic #2.

Frank F · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:52 pm Post subject:

I am late to the party, Well the GT is nice but might require some EQ to bring out a fuller body. There is not as much clarity (RE: Color, Cut, and Clarity of a microphones sound) in this mic as I would like to hear with your dulcet sounds.

The Chameleon Labs is a good match although I would like to hear you with the "L" capsule. This mic and the Revelation or Genesis II (less bucks, good sounding, very similar microphones) from MXL are a potential good fit for you.

Frank F
_________________
Be thankful for the bad things in life. They opened your eyes to the good things you weren't paying attention to before. email: thevoice@usa.com

heyguido · Posted: Wed Mar 13, 2013 4:54 pm Post subject:

Mic 2 for my ears.... Mic 1 sounds a little thin in the mids, as has been pointed out already.

Food for thought....

Bruce, I believe, had a modded Groove Tube mic he loves.... Might want to talk to him about who did the mods..... Modded, it might be a gem. Just sayin'....
_________________
Don Brookshire
"Wait.... They wanna PAY me for this?"