Discussion:
Flute mic
(too old to reply)
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-06 02:27:00 UTC
Permalink
I need a flute microphone for live applications. I do not want a
clip-on or headset mic and prefer a conventional mic. I used an AKG
C1000S a few times. It sounds okay but is very prone to feedback (I
tried both polar patterns). I also tried a Shure SM58. The sound
wasn't as good as the AKG but it was more usable (no feedback).

Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.

Stephan Patterson
Pooh Bear
2004-09-06 02:44:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
I need a flute microphone for live applications. I do not want a
clip-on or headset mic and prefer a conventional mic. I used an AKG
C1000S a few times. It sounds okay but is very prone to feedback (I
tried both polar patterns). I also tried a Shure SM58. The sound
wasn't as good as the AKG but it was more usable (no feedback).
Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
A friend of mine used an AKG D190E very successfully in this exact
application. Sounded very sweet, very clear etc etc...

Despite its age, the 190E is still available ( because it's a decent mic
perhaps and doesn't need the hype that Shures get ? ). Ignore the silly
descriptions that refer to it as a a paging mic ( or whatever ) that you
may find occasionally. It has a lovely flat ( uncoloured ) response
entirely unlike anything that Shure can offer.


Graham
Hubert Barth
2004-09-06 17:03:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
A friend of mine used an AKG D190E very successfully in this exact
application. Sounded very sweet, very clear etc etc...
Despite its age, the 190E is still available ( because it's a decent mic
perhaps and doesn't need the hype that Shures get ? ). Ignore the silly
descriptions that refer to it as a a paging mic ( or whatever ) that you
may find occasionally. It has a lovely flat ( uncoloured ) response
entirely unlike anything that Shure can offer.
If you can get a Beyer M201 at a good price that should also work very
well.

regards
--
Hubert Barth
Cologne/Germany
http://www.bigbands.de
Michael W. Ellis
2004-09-07 18:33:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hubert Barth
Post by Pooh Bear
A friend of mine used an AKG D190E very successfully in this exact
application. Sounded very sweet, very clear etc etc...
Despite its age, the 190E is still available ( because it's a decent mic
perhaps and doesn't need the hype that Shures get ? ). Ignore the silly
descriptions that refer to it as a a paging mic ( or whatever ) that you
may find occasionally. It has a lovely flat ( uncoloured ) response
entirely unlike anything that Shure can offer.
If you can get a Beyer M201 at a good price that should also work very
well.
I've used the M201 for this on several occasions and it worked well.
--
Michael Ellis
first initial last name at pesa commercial account
Tim Perry
2004-09-06 03:05:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
I need a flute microphone for live applications. I do not want a
clip-on or headset mic and prefer a conventional mic. I used an AKG
C1000S a few times. It sounds okay but is very prone to feedback (I
tried both polar patterns). I also tried a Shure SM58. The sound
wasn't as good as the AKG but it was more usable (no feedback).
Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
Stephan Patterson
consider how much you spent on the flute
consider how much time you spent in practice
consider that Elwood Blues traded a Caddy for a microphone ... and Jake
agreed with it.

from my mic kit i would pick the rode NT-5 or the shure SM-81. if you are
real tight for $ the oktava MC 012 might satisfy you.
Pooh Bear
2004-09-06 03:58:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tim Perry
consider how much you spent on the flute
consider how much time you spent in practice
consider that Elwood Blues traded a Caddy for a microphone ... and Jake
agreed with it.
Cute !

I like that. Bet it was a trashed Caddy though !
Post by Tim Perry
from my mic kit i would pick the rode NT-5 or the shure SM-81. if you are
real tight for $ the oktava MC 012 might satisfy you.
Sadly I have no experience of those. They're more upmarket mics than the OP
mentioned IIRC.

I would still * strongly* recommend he try AKG's D190. Funnily enough , it was
once considered a relatively inexpensive mic. I got a surprise when I saw the
current price. It's still not outrageous though.

Back when I was regularly gigging with my rig ( 70s / 80s ) an SM58 was
*expensive* but I could get D190s for a song. The situation is reversed now.


Graham
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-06 13:05:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 23:05:18 -0400, "Tim Perry"
Post by Tim Perry
consider how much you spent on the flute
I play flute every day. I'm going to use the mic maybe five times a
year for amateur performances and I'm not going to be paid a penny.

Big difference.

I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.

Stephan Patterson
Tim Perry
2004-09-06 13:18:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 23:05:18 -0400, "Tim Perry"
Post by Tim Perry
consider how much you spent on the flute
I play flute every day. I'm going to use the mic maybe five times a
year for amateur performances and I'm not going to be paid a penny.
Big difference.
I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.
Stephan Patterson
they (mc 012) sell new for about $100 on e-bay
hank alrich
2004-09-10 00:19:03 UTC
Permalink
"Stephan Patterson" wrote...
Post by Stephan Patterson
Post by Tim Perry
consider how much you spent on the flute
I play flute every day. I'm going to use the mic maybe five times a
year for amateur performances and I'm not going to be paid a penny.
Big difference.
I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.
they (mc 012) sell new for about $100 on e-bay
But they're not all that consistent unless one spends more to get better
QC'd Oktavas via the Sound Room. If the budget is pretty restricted then
the Beyer M201, bought used, is a really good suggestion, IMO.

--
ha
Saxology
2004-09-06 16:16:53 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Stephan Patterson
I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.
Stephan Patterson
The SM57 is around $90 while the SM81 is around $350. I agree the price is
substantial for the '81. Given your low price situation maybe the 57 is
your best bet. It is a rugged performer. Don't for get that a good mic
cable will run you another $20 - $30. That fact alone makes the '81 worth
considering, after all, you are only going to buy 1, for yourself.

Good luck.... try before you buy. The '57 is in just about every store that
sells a mic.
-Sax
David Meed
2004-09-07 01:57:25 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 09:05:15 -0400, Stephan Patterson
Post by Stephan Patterson
I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.
You might also take a look at the Superlux microphones. I haven't
heard them, but have heard of many happy users over on
churchsoundcheck.com.

http://www.Superlux.US is one guy that sells them.

Did you have some specific reason not to use some kind of clip on like
the Countryman emw? (try ebay...)


-----
David Meed <***@nbnet.nb.ca>
http://www3.nbnet.nb.ca/dmeed (Sony LANC, DMX-512, Panasonic Control M)
http://www.nbbi.ca
Richard Edmondson
2004-09-08 10:01:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 23:05:18 -0400, "Tim Perry"
Post by Tim Perry
consider how much you spent on the flute
I play flute every day. I'm going to use the mic maybe five times a
year for amateur performances and I'm not going to be paid a penny.
Big difference.
I see that the Oktava sells online for approx. $240. That's $100 more
than I'm willing to spend. The mics I listed are all in the $100-$150
price range and they're the ones I'm considering.
Stephan Patterson
You might try an AT3031. Small diaphragm condenser. I got a couple off of
ebay a while back for $126 ea.

http://www.audio-technica.com/prodpro/profiles/AT3031.html
Saxology
2004-09-06 03:39:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
Stephan Patterson
I would consider the 57 as an inexpensive solution. The SM81 you might like
better. Without knowing a price range there is no way to down select this.
What I would offer is that you need to play with the mic placement on
woodwind instruments to get the desired sound. The axis of the mic and the
placement to the tone holes will make a huge difference. Maybe start 1 to 3
feet away and start to vary the position until you find what you are looking
for. You might like the off axis sound near your right hand or the throaty
air driven sound near you mouth. I find woodwinds hard to mic and get the
sound the artist desires. For a sax, I place the mic pointing at the right
hand about 1 foot away. I often see the mic shoved into the bell but I
think it sounds too harsh.

Your opinion is what counts the most.

-Sax
Phil Allison
2004-09-06 05:35:55 UTC
Permalink
"Saxology" = he is stuffed.
Post by Saxology
Post by Stephan Patterson
Stephan Patterson
I would consider the 57 as an inexpensive solution.
** Shoved right up Sax's arse - then followed by a RE20 for good luck.
Post by Saxology
Your opinion is what counts the most.
** Said like a truly narcissistic, pig ignorant imbecile.





......... Phil
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-06 13:08:50 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 15:35:55 +1000, "Phil Allison"
Post by Phil Allison
"Saxology" = he is stuffed.
** Shoved right up Sax's arse - then followed by a RE20 for good luck.
** Said like a truly narcissistic, pig ignorant imbecile.
......... Phil
You may think he's full of it but at least he tried to help. What's
your contribution to this thread, Phil? Or don't you have anything
intelligent and mature to say?

Stephan Patterson
Saxology
2004-09-06 16:08:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
You may think he's full of it but at least he tried to help. What's
your contribution to this thread, Phil? Or don't you have anything
intelligent and mature to say?
Stephan Patterson
He contributed his full knowledge on the subject, as usual. Don't pay him
any mind, no one else does.
-Sax
Bob Urz
2004-09-06 18:09:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Saxology
Post by Stephan Patterson
You may think he's full of it but at least he tried to help. What's
your contribution to this thread, Phil? Or don't you have anything
intelligent and mature to say?
Stephan Patterson
He contributed his full knowledge on the subject, as usual. Don't pay him
any mind, no one else does.
-Sax
A Shure KSM27 would be a nice mike also.

As far as Phil goes, he does have flute experience.
The Skin Flute variety. He uses 5 small finger like
microphones on his (5.1 sound). Gets a very Rosie sound.......
He always takes his Palm Pilot with him.
You never know when Phil might need it.......

Bob





-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Saxology
2004-09-06 21:10:57 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Bob Urz
A Shure KSM27 would be a nice mike also.
As far as Phil goes, he does have flute experience.
The Skin Flute variety. He uses 5 small finger like
microphones on his (5.1 sound). Gets a very Rosie sound.......
He always takes his Palm Pilot with him.
You never know when Phil might need it.......
Bob
I was going to suggest the KSM line and for the studio I like it. Give the
infrequent use the poster will give it I might be inclined to change my
mind...
-Sax

PS. I thought that Phil played the suck-o-phone... it gets him closer to
the mic...
Phil Allison
2004-09-06 23:36:01 UTC
Permalink
"Saxology" = fader jerk + liar
Post by Saxology
He contributed his full knowledge on the subject, as usual.
** The POS cretin called Saxology has no knowledge whatever.

He has the mentality of a vandal and IQ of a slug.






............ Phil
Phil Allison
2004-09-06 23:33:53 UTC
Permalink
"Stephan Patterson"
"Phil Allison"
Post by Stephan Patterson
Post by Phil Allison
"Saxology" = he is stuffed.
** Shoved right up Sax's arse - then followed by a RE20 for good luck.
** Said like a truly narcissistic, pig ignorant imbecile.
......... Phil
You may think he's full of it but at least he tried to help.
** Nope - he maliciously and deliberately gets in the way of folk who
know how to help.
Post by Stephan Patterson
What's your contribution to this thread, Phil? Or don't you have anything
intelligent and mature to say?
** Try reading the other threads on this NG ( eg 1.6 ohms safe-ish? ) -
see what the low life POS called Saxology gets up to.




.......... Phil
hank alrich
2004-09-10 00:19:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
What's your contribution to this thread, Phil? Or don't you have anything
intelligent and mature to say?
Filly Assischlong is a figment of his own imagination; over in RAP
there's a plan afoot to refuse to reply to _any_ post he makes. Then
he'll take his patheic dick tweezers somewhere else. AAPL-S might try
the same.

--
ha
John Halliburton
2004-09-06 04:11:18 UTC
Permalink
You only spend money on a good tool once.

I have used a Crown CM-700 for many years on flute. I currently have three
in my kit for woodwinds. It is a condensor, which I prefer over dynamics
for instruments. This mic has very good gain before feedback, and is
similar to the SM81 from Shure, another good choice.

If I had to go to a dynamic, the OM5, 6 or 7 from Audix would be my first
choices. More expensive than the SM57 or 58, but better sounding, with very
good feedback rejection. The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and
other vocal mics doesn't usually help the flute's sound in live settings.

Best regards,

John Halliburton
www.servodrive.com
www.baaltinne.com
Pooh Bear
2004-09-06 04:22:06 UTC
Permalink
The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and other vocal mics doesn't
usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
It doesn't help vocals much IMHO either !

Designed in the days before decent EQ controls rendered such nonsence obsolete.


Graham
John Halliburton
2004-09-07 02:47:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and other vocal mics doesn't
usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
It doesn't help vocals much IMHO either !
I'd have to agree there, more times than not, it doesn't improve things.
I'm thinking a "Male" and "Female" dip filter switch in the low mid/mid area
to help clear up(what probably amounts to) some rising proximity effect
combined with the general area of muddy build up in a typical sound system
might be better.

That was a lovely sentence, wasn't it?
Post by Pooh Bear
Designed in the days before decent EQ controls rendered such nonsence obsolete.
I feel that a well designed filter at the mic, tuned for exact compensation
for the intended problem, would still be better. This obviously might
effect cost point of the mic, but like I said earlier, you buy good tools
once. Believe me, I'm not going to give up a good strip eq or inserting a
parametric on a channel if need be.

Best regards,

John
Pooh Bear
2004-09-07 03:22:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Halliburton
Post by Pooh Bear
The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and other vocal mics doesn't
usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
It doesn't help vocals much IMHO either !
I'd have to agree there, more times than not, it doesn't improve things.
I'm thinking a "Male" and "Female" dip filter switch in the low mid/mid area
to help clear up(what probably amounts to) some rising proximity effect
combined with the general area of muddy build up in a typical sound system
might be better.
Since you mention the male/female issue, I can't help but comment that I had
female vocalists absolutely stunned by the performance of the AKG D190 ( ok back
in the 80s ).

I guess that a female voice benefits from flat response more than a male one ?
Post by John Halliburton
That was a lovely sentence, wasn't it?
Totally.
Post by John Halliburton
Post by Pooh Bear
Designed in the days before decent EQ controls rendered such nonsence
obsolete.
I feel that a well designed filter at the mic, tuned for exact compensation
for the intended problem, would still be better. This obviously might
effect cost point of the mic, but like I said earlier, you buy good tools
once. Believe me, I'm not going to give up a good strip eq or inserting a
parametric on a channel if need be.
I also had ( still have actually ) AKG D1200s. Interesting 3 way filter on the
mic ( BMS - bass - middle - sharp ) - the M setting was pretty effective in
reducing proximity effect. Only problem was the issue of the vocalist moving the
switch setting. Classic use for gaffer tape ! ;-)


Graham
Bob Urz
2004-09-07 04:35:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pooh Bear
Post by John Halliburton
Post by Pooh Bear
The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and other vocal mics doesn't
usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
It doesn't help vocals much IMHO either !
I'd have to agree there, more times than not, it doesn't improve things.
I'm thinking a "Male" and "Female" dip filter switch in the low mid/mid area
to help clear up(what probably amounts to) some rising proximity effect
combined with the general area of muddy build up in a typical sound system
might be better.
Since you mention the male/female issue, I can't help but comment that I had
female vocalists absolutely stunned by the performance of the AKG D190 ( ok back
in the 80s ).
I guess that a female voice benefits from flat response more than a male one ?
Post by John Halliburton
That was a lovely sentence, wasn't it?
Totally.
Post by John Halliburton
Post by Pooh Bear
Designed in the days before decent EQ controls rendered such nonsence
obsolete.
I feel that a well designed filter at the mic, tuned for exact compensation
for the intended problem, would still be better. This obviously might
effect cost point of the mic, but like I said earlier, you buy good tools
once. Believe me, I'm not going to give up a good strip eq or inserting a
parametric on a channel if need be.
I also had ( still have actually ) AKG D1200s. Interesting 3 way filter on the
mic ( BMS - bass - middle - sharp ) - the M setting was pretty effective in
reducing proximity effect. Only problem was the issue of the vocalist moving the
switch setting. Classic use for gaffer tape ! ;-)
Graham
Back in the old days, SHure made a EQdyne. It was a 58 looking mike with
four dip switches to set Voicing. I got one somewhere in my museum.

Bob


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-08 01:47:52 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 04:11:18 GMT, "John Halliburton"
Post by John Halliburton
More expensive than the SM57 or 58, but better sounding, with very
good feedback rejection. The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and
other vocal mics doesn't usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
John,

Do you have any experience with the Shure Beta 57A? In your opinion,
does it sound better than the regular SM57 and do you find that it has
that "vocal presence peak" or is it more neutral?

Stephan Patterson
John Halliburton
2004-09-08 21:21:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
Do you have any experience with the Shure Beta 57A? In your opinion,
does it sound better than the regular SM57 and do you find that it has
that "vocal presence peak" or is it more neutral?
Haven't done a side by side with them, so I'm not able to give an opinion.

John
hank alrich
2004-09-10 00:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Halliburton
I have used a Crown CM-700 for many years on flute. I currently have three
in my kit for woodwinds. It is a condensor, which I prefer over dynamics
for instruments. This mic has very good gain before feedback, and is
similar to the SM81 from Shure, another good choice.
Forgot about the CM700, which is a fine little mic and insufficiently
heralded. I think it sounds much smoother than the SM81.
Post by John Halliburton
If I had to go to a dynamic, the OM5, 6 or 7 from Audix would be my first
choices. More expensive than the SM57 or 58, but better sounding, with very
good feedback rejection. The "vocal presence peak" common in the 58 and
other vocal mics doesn't usually help the flute's sound in live settings.
OM series Audix is excellent. Need a pretty good preamp for the 7,
though, which has very low output.

--
ha

Gavin Ramsay
2004-09-06 21:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Hi Stephan,
Post by Stephan Patterson
I need a flute microphone for live applications.
I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
Are you performing solo or with a group? What other instruments, and how
are they miked?

What sort of PA do you have available? All the advice so far has assumed
your using gear that will allow the qualities of a good mic to make a
difference... otherwise save your money!

If you're solo I'd really want to save and get a slightly good condenser
(even if it's only for 5 unpaid gigs! At least you'll come away knowing
you sounded as good at 100' as at 10')

If you're in a group with drums, string bass, etc. then I'd lean towards
a dynamic. If you're moving around much (even turning your head to make
eye contact for changes) it rules out the tighter pickup of the Shure
Beta mics. For that money I'd look at a Sennheiser 935, which is
cardioid and seems a lot more natural than any 58 or 57. They're around
£100 here - dunno dollar prices right now...

While the C1000 rightly deserves the punishment beatings so frequently
dished by the paramilitary wing of this froup, your feedback problems
may be more to do with your PA / monitor system than the particular
mic...

Good luck

Gavin
--
Gavin Ramsay
Herringbone Productions
Scotland
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-06 23:51:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:32:52 +0100, ***@herringbone.org (Gavin Ramsay)
wrote :

Gavin,
Post by Gavin Ramsay
Are you performing solo or with a group? What other instruments, and how
are they miked?
Combo format but the specifics vary. Always with a drum, double bass,
piano, usually a sax and sometimes electric guitar and a singer. The
piano and singer go to the PA, string bass and electric guitar have
their own amp. The sax is louder than the flute so he either plays
with no amplification or connects to the PA. I have a small powered
monitor / keyboard amp (Yorkville KW50). I've used it a couple of
times but usually connect to the PA.
Post by Gavin Ramsay
What sort of PA do you have available? All the advice so far has assumed
your using gear that will allow the qualities of a good mic to make a
difference... otherwise save your money!
The PA and speakers are usually average quality.
Post by Gavin Ramsay
While the C1000 rightly deserves the punishment beatings so frequently
dished by the paramilitary wing of this froup, your feedback problems
may be more to do with your PA / monitor system than the particular
mic...
To tell you the truth, I don't really have a problem with the way my
AKG C1000S sounds. I know that some hate it with a passion (others
like it obviously, it's a best seller). I roll off the treble a little
bit and its fine. I've tried a Shure SM58 and a few other microphones
brought by singers who played with the group. The C1000S sounds a lot
better than anything else I've tried so far. It's just a whole lot
more sensitive to feedback than other mics. We've managed to keep it
under control so far but I'd rather not have to worry about that.

Since opinions are all over the place on this issue, I'll probably
keep using the C1000S until I get to use something that's clearly
better. Maybe I'll try renting a few mics next time and compare them.

Stephan Patterson
Gavin Ramsay
2004-09-07 09:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stephan Patterson
Maybe I'll try renting a few mics next time and compare them.
That's the best idea, Stephan - no-one here knows what your flute, your
group and your PA are really like so all you'll get is a bunch of
general choices. Lot's of good mics suggested though.

I'd like to know what you think of any of the mics you try out. I meet a
lot of flutes and whistles so I'm always looking for new stories.

Good luck
--
Gavin Ramsay
Herringbone Productions
Scotland
Stephan Patterson
2004-09-07 01:11:40 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:32:52 +0100, ***@herringbone.org (Gavin Ramsay)
wrote :

Gavin,
Post by Gavin Ramsay
Are you performing solo or with a group? What other instruments, and how
are they miked?
Combo format but the specifics vary. Always with a drum, double bass,
piano, usually a sax and sometimes electric guitar and a singer. The
piano and singer go to the PA, string bass and electric guitar have
their own amp. The sax is louder than the flute so he either plays
with no amplification or connects to the PA. I have a small powered
monitor / keyboard amp (Yorkville KW50). I've used it a couple of
times but usually connect to the PA.
Post by Gavin Ramsay
What sort of PA do you have available? All the advice so far has assumed
your using gear that will allow the qualities of a good mic to make a
difference... otherwise save your money!
The PA and speakers are usually average quality.
Post by Gavin Ramsay
While the C1000 rightly deserves the punishment beatings so frequently
dished by the paramilitary wing of this froup, your feedback problems
may be more to do with your PA / monitor system than the particular
mic...
To tell you the truth, I don't really have a problem with the way my
AKG C1000S sounds. I know that some hate it with a passion (others
like it obviously, it's a best seller). I roll off the treble a little
bit and its fine. I've tried a Shure SM58 and a few other microphones
brought by singers who played with the group. The C1000S sounds a lot
better than anything else I've tried so far. It's just a whole lot
more sensitive to feedback than other mics. We've managed to keep it
under control so far but I'd rather not have to worry about that.

Since opinions are all over the place on this issue, I'll probably
keep using the C1000S until I get to use something that's clearly
better. Maybe I'll try renting a few mics next time and compare them.

Stephan Patterson
Mike T.
2004-09-08 00:06:06 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 22:27:00 -0400, Stephan Patterson
Post by Stephan Patterson
I need a flute microphone for live applications. I do not want a
clip-on or headset mic and prefer a conventional mic. I used an AKG
C1000S a few times. It sounds okay but is very prone to feedback (I
tried both polar patterns). I also tried a Shure SM58. The sound
wasn't as good as the AKG but it was more usable (no feedback).
Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
The AKG D770 or D880 are OK choices, if your budget is limited to
under $100.00.

The SM57, in my experience, can emphasize breath noise and screech on
a flute. The Beta57A will have a tighter pattern, and more gain before
feedback, but the same 5 - 7 KHz boost as the SM57.

Other people have suggested some very fine but expensive microphones.
They will certainly do a good job, if you want to spend that much.

Go cheap, try the D770 or D880 first.

Mike T.
Tony
2004-09-08 07:54:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike T.
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 22:27:00 -0400, Stephan Patterson
Post by Stephan Patterson
I need a flute microphone for live applications. I do not want a
clip-on or headset mic and prefer a conventional mic. I used an AKG
C1000S a few times. It sounds okay but is very prone to feedback (I
tried both polar patterns). I also tried a Shure SM58. The sound
wasn't as good as the AKG but it was more usable (no feedback).
Right now, I'm considering the Shure SM57, the Shure Beta 57A, the AKG
D880. I read that the AKG D880 is very crisp. Is it going to be too
harsh with a flute? Is the Shure SM57 a better choice than the SM58 in
this case (I've read conflicting reports). Is the Beta 57A worth the
extra money over the 58 or 57? Anything else in this price range that
I should consider? I know that there are good microphones as we get to
a higher price range (like the AKG 535) but I can't justify paying
that much. I'm an amateur jazz flutist performing maybe 5 times a
year.
The AKG D770 or D880 are OK choices, if your budget is limited to
under $100.00.
The SM57, in my experience, can emphasize breath noise and screech on
a flute. The Beta57A will have a tighter pattern, and more gain before
feedback, but the same 5 - 7 KHz boost as the SM57.
Other people have suggested some very fine but expensive microphones.
They will certainly do a good job, if you want to spend that much.
Go cheap, try the D770 or D880 first.
Mike T.
I tried a D880 quite a while back for my own vocals (tighter
directionality than the old SM58), but I sounded terrible through it -
its presence peak (around 4kHz according to the spec sheet) definitely
seemed to come in lower than the Shure. Plus, although cheaper even
than an SM57, it didn't seem anywhere near as rugged as a Shure for
stage work, so it's been sitting in a drawer ever since.

But I need to mic a flute soon, so I'll dig it out for a try.

Tony (remove the "_" to reply by email)
Loading...