Do You Need An Expensive Mic

Affiliate link options below.
Please know that by using any of the links below helps me continue with the channel as if you choose to buy from any of the links below I will get a small commission.
Purchase All Sweetwater Gear Right HERE: - sweetwater.sjv.io/3erZRk
Purchase Gear from Thomann right Here: www.thomann.de/intl/thlpg_l58...
Purchase All Proaudiostar Gear Right HERE: - proaudiostarcom.z5dw.net/GmNRB2
Purchase All Seymour Duncan Pickups Right HERE: - seymour-duncan.sjv.io/baojzM
Purchase All East West Sound Gear Right HERE: - astoundcommercecorporation.sj...

[@officialdiomer]

I've bought a bunch of mics over the years, and finally bought a U87ai after wishing I had one for years. after trying to make it work, I just sold it and have a Sony C-80 on the way. I mainly work with pop and rap music and just wanted a brighter mic. I do have an analog tracking chain (Neve 5211 > Audioscape Opto > Apollo) so I'm hoping it'll be full all around. The U87 takes EQ well but ultimately not what I was hoping for sonically. I wasted so much time researching on the best mics and outboard gear, and looking back I was a better artist and producer when I didn't care about the gear as much and just used my TLM-102 into a Clarett 2Pre (which is still a nice setup). like he said in the video, buy nice used gear from a trusted place like Reverb, and once you find a sound you like, just make music and don't turn back. stop losing sleep over the "what if's" and don't obsess over the gear other people have. if you really want music to be a career, put that money you would have spent on a crazy expensive mic or gear, and instead invest in your skills (ex/how to produce better or play more instruments), your brand and find ways to become more visible to people. after over a year of falling into the analog pit and spending $10,000 on my setup, I feel like I'm starting all over again as an artist and trying to motivate myself to create again. unless your main goal is to open up a commercial studio, do not throw away so much money towards gear! don't be like me. just make music and enjoy your journey!

[@eddwardmusic]

Now I see your comment, yes! We should care less about choosing the gear and get more focused in the process and joy of making music! Cuz at the end of the day, all the big names in music industry became BIG with a hit they wrote with a budget gear. Now they can try 10-20k mics and have fun.

[@tomrogers2790]

This is just true wisdom. It doesn't get any better than this comment

[@officialdiomer]

@@tomrogers2790 🙏🏽🙏🏽

[@JHS56247]

I really appreciate the Barry Johns school for audio recording. You give great advice! Thanks.

[@mikewolfe9458]

I’m starting to research upgrades to my Blue Bluebird. Looking into used Neumann and new Lauten audio options right now. I can’t see myself spending over $1500 at this point. It’s a fun journey, but there is just SO much out there. Thanks for your insight, Barry!

[@teashea1]

Another good and useful video. I purchased a Neumann U87ai a year ago. It is a great microphone for many situations, but I actually like my Rode NT2A and NT1 just about as well.

[@trebleboost7]

Wow.

[@DNGMaestro]

Thomas, tell me more.

[@revelationsoundstudio]

​@DNG Maestro The Neumann has the wonderful character and more pleasant top end over the Rode. I had the K2 and the Neumann provides more detail in the top end.

[@vc2tb]

Great video. I had some spare cash so I treated myself to a Townsend lab LS 22. 3 years ago I’m happy with it I won’t be changing 👍👍

[@thaexception3406]

Same here and got a free one when I bought Apollo X6!

[@jeffroberts_tunes]

6:30 -- one of the most important points for the home studio. Unless you have a vocal booth or a room that you can't afford you want a cardioid/unidirectional mic and you want to sing close to it so you're not gettting the stanky room slap that nothing will fix. I use a AKG c1000 for everything, and it's great. All of $240 new.

[@musiccreation1198]

I'm a mic snob, but JZ, Austrian Audio, Roswell Audio, Lewitt, etc are making awesome products

[@youthmanrecords965]

Don’t forget Chinese company Se

[@JustJames26]

Thanks!

[@JTAITSINGER]

Ayyyyyye!! Barryyyyy’s Baaack!!

[@msb1704]

ive used the avantone cv-12 for a couple years and love it. especially on my female clients like you mentioned. but on my male clients it's been a but flat sounding. still able to get good results but i wanted better... that new sony c-80 was the same price as i paid for the cv-12 so i figured why not. im hoping that can become my go-to for the guys👍. like you said , pre & comp mean the world too.

[@eddwardmusic]

My first mic was Blue Yeti (before starting making music I made youtube/twitch), after my big purchase was the TLM 102, he was a beast and I record a bunch of nice HQ songs, but after digging more into music producing I wanted to get deeper in quality and gear so I step to the U87 and AMS Neve 1073, which was the worst decition, cuz it didn't worked well for my voice and after a year of almost no music making, just times to times (cuz after hours and hours of EQ my vocals I got tired of it) so I sold my U87 and 1073, now I'm using UA Apollo Twin (mostly for UAD Plugins) and purchased a new mic, which is Manley Reference + API Preamp (works great for my voice, better than Avalon or Neve or Manley). Also the U87 and 1073 was a blind purchase cuz I was too much into these hyped videos (U87 AND 1073 IS THE DREAM SETUP FOR VOCALS) but I forgot that each voice has it's own mic, like a key. You can't use any key for any door, each door has it's own key. So the best decition is to try 30 days return policy and demo the mic before. For each one there who reads that comment and can't decide which mic to take into consideration, try the TLM 102/103, U87, Telefunken TF51, Manley Reference and Rode NT1 (never tried one but listening A and B tests sometimes sounds better than any U87 or even more expensive mics). So I ended up with API Preamp + Manley Reference + CL1B and that's exactly the sound I wanted! I can't be more happy and probably will never buy any new mic, at least if it will be the C800G.

[@officialdiomer]

I relate to this so much. I just posted a comment similar to yours lol. we as artists gotta keep the main thing the main thing, and just create music. that's what we do best. I'm glad you found a setup that works well for you!!

[@eddwardmusic]

I'm glad Diomer that I'm not the only one. Yeah, that's life, so we learn in our fails. After trying over 7 mics I found mine. And for sure, never trust any reviews or (DRAKE VOCALS SETUP/GREEN DAY SETUP), take in consideration, try it and move to the next one till you'll find one. As long as you can return the gear back, you should try! And yes, I made greater music with my TLM102 more than with U87. That says a lot!

[@makemusicordie]

Great points all around as usual. I’ve been loving JZ mics, and have picked up a variety of their condensers to get well acquainted with them so that I can always have one around that works for any given vocalist. The range of tones available across their lineup of mics is really pretty darn good! Not cheap but not crazy expensive and doing a good job emulating microphones of the insanely expensive variety 👌🏻 perfect for my current stage and budget at the home studio. Highly recommend.

[@makemusicordie]

And I have BAE 1073s, BURL B1, and API 512c preamps to accompany, and can certainly vouch for your statement that having a decent selection of quality preamps will take you up another notch when paired well with the right mic and source.

[@chrisbogart687]

You are right - the Roswell Mini K87 is the one tailored made to my voice. I do a lot of voiceovers for my videos and everything else pales in comparison. I got expensive loaners before I bought and this one rings the bell for me. It is either fed into an Audient ID14 interface or MixPre 6 for direct recoding. Everyone needs to experiment and test unless they have more money than time.

[@trebleboost7]

My first ‘good’ mic was an AT 4033. At that point I was hooked on building up my mic locker. At this point I only have a couple mid-tier workhorses - Sennheiser 441 and AKG 414B/ULS. At some point I will be looking to step up even more I am sure.

[@trebleboost7]

Vintage King is awesome. Nice shoutout.

[@jacquelamontharenberg]

Very good tutorial Barry. I discovered for Tenor Saxophone ribbon mikes work well. My favorite is the AEA R84 Passive Ribbon Mic paired with the AEA RPQ500 pre amp. This combo captures the true essence of the saxophone. This combo will set you back about $1800, but it is most definitely worth it. The best sound ever for sax. Add about 2 to 3 db of compression and a touch of reverb and you're in heaven.

[@neol07707]

So true, my own experience with one of the "industry standard" expensive mics, the U87AI was frustrating when I heard how honky the mic sounded. Honk which I knew was not part of my natural voice. I ended up going with the Manley Reference cardiod which does well for my voice. All goes to show the importance of trying out different microphones to determine what is best.

[@trebleboost7]

OK - this seems strange to me honestly. Could it be the pairing with other elements in the chain?

[@DonaldMerrit]

I have a u87 and it's the most beautiful vocal sound.

[@AtTheSourceStudios]

Great video man. But the question is WHATS GOING ON WITH THE DESK BEHIND YOU???? Have you ever done a walk through video on it??? Looks like a great desk!

[@JedWunderli]

I have a variety of mikes for different situations and different singers. I have a WA-47 for my voice and it works great. I use a WA 251 for my female vocalist. I’ve got a c414 b-uls along with many others for specific uses like a Royer ribbon paired with a dynamic mic for my guitar cab.

[@ItzrealMusic]

I have a expensive mic and I do not regret it one but it helps with long processing times for me I’m cutting corners with this mic along with my high end preamp can’t go wrong with the sound

[@CS-xi9dz]

Shure SM7B, without the foam screen and using pop filter, works better on my voice than my KSM32. Great of course when room acoustics aren't the greatest. Would love to get a higher end vocal mic sometime ...just because but for now, paired with a 1073 clone, SM7B works great.

[@skiiizo]

Yes ! The answer is Yes ! 😁

[@JimCaputoMusic]

My main vocal mic is a Flea 47. I paid about $3400 for it brand new and I'm pretty sure I can get every dollar of that back if I wanted to sell it now. But I've come across some truly excellent mics at lower price points: Lauten Atlantis - for anyone wanting a mic with a really nice 47 vibe, this gets you there. I've said it and I mean it, if I had bought the Atlantis before I bought my Flea, I might never have bought the Flea. The Atlantis is that impressive. And it's a versatile mic that has three voice settings. ($1750) Beesneez BU67 - I've long wanted a mic that gives that vintage 67 vibe. Nothing I'd heard, including the reissue, came close enough for me to reach for my wallet... until I heard the BU67. It's as close to that 67 sound as I've ever heard out of a clone. ($1550) Serrano 84 - Anyone wishing they had a pair of Neumann KM84 mics but have been scared off by the price tag, the Serrano 84 is worth a look. It comes with three capsules: vintage, modern, and omni. They sound absolutely fantastic. ($830)

[@BarryJohns]

Well said! That flea though, it’s pretty special!

[@FlashRocket96]

The Atlantis is not a Tube Mic. How can a transistor sound like a Tube? Can‘t get it.

[@JimCaputoMusic]

@@FlashRocket96, I didn't say it sounds like it has a tube. I said it has a 47 vibe.

[@JBRRecordings]

Great info here for some alternative mics to the super expensive options 😎thank you

[@DavidDicksRFR]

I used a blue baby bottle for years until I got ahold of an AKG 414. Shot them out on a couple different vocalists and the 414 got selected each time. Still like the baby bottle but I usually just use it for BGV. I’ve used the SM7 be a use an artist requested it but I never really liked it.

[@enveloperecording]

My vocal booth is about 4 X 4 with panels on the wall. Since it's a small booth, it looses alot of the high end and makes it would like the client is sick. Is mainly use the Blue Blueberry

[@rockinvida1960]

My first and most expensive mic is a Rode NT-1…I am very happy with it..

[@JTAITSINGER]

I’ve had a Neumann TLM 103 mic for years now. Before then I had a Alesis AM61 (basically a Groove Tubes mic) which sounded perfect on my tenor voice. I didn’t even have to EQ it at all if I didn’t want to (my first understand of what Al Schmitt was doing with the mic selection). The only thing that kept getting on my nerves was when I used words with a c like can, can’t, carry, there’d be a click sound that I’d always have to edit out. I’d zoom all the way in on the wave form and erase the click, but I got tired of doing that so I got rid of the mic for the Tlm 103.

[@FransvandenBergeMuziekschuur]

Hi. I build a Protools 10HD set recently. The mic I use is a Superlux Pra-D1. It performs amazingly because of the HD 192 converters and Avid pre-amps. It works great for me to create my own songs. The microphone is nothing more than a modernized Shure sm58 .... The results are amazing. The microphone helps in an untreated livingroom. A 35 euro microphone that has an amazing build quality.

[@EddieJarnowski]

I bought a Lawson mkII and it beats any mic i've ever tried and sounds absolutely amazing. So YES

[@Bluelagoonstudios]

The SM7b is indeed a broadcast mic, but if you remove the cap, and place a popfilter on it, it's also usable. Last year I bought me 5 Lewitt LCT 440 PURE condenser mic's and these are very good. Price point $250, for drums a sm57 is still very good. In the academy where I'm in, we did the test with Neuman vs shure for drum, doesn't make very much difference. Except the room mic's were poor, and that's where the Neumans did shine. Or the AKG's. But the price is huge for these. And a few very good pre's like the API's and others that high end.

[@dopesnare]

I feel under experienced in this area of “right mic for the voice/ preamp combo” I was blessed to win a WA-14 years ago and I bought their API preamp clone as it was the most affordable.. I’m not %100 convinced it’s for my voice but it’s great on everything I throw at it otherwise.. I discovered I get better vocal takes when I’m actually backed up off a large amount.. it’s more crisp and airy.. If I’m pretty close it’s sounds too thick and heavy.. learning slowly but surely..

[@TheJonHolstein]

The cardioid mode should be pretty flat on that one, so they it is a matter of EQ'ing it to fit your voice. The idea of the "right" mic, is based on the frequency response of some mics, not really allowing to boost the necessary frequncies, either because it did not capture them at enough strength, or that there was a resonance that would become audiable when a frequency is boosted, or that the resspone is so uneven that it takes hours of tuning the EQ curve, and just switching mic was then easier. Most modern sound interfaces have good enough pre-amps, and they are pretty clean, in some cases depending on the mic, they may not offer enough gain, or enough clean gain, to work with certain microphones, but there are in-line amplifiers from SE and cloudlifter that can boost the level, so the pre-amp in the interface can handle it. Many classic pre-amps, or saturated pre-amps, like the ones a lot of people are looking for, in terms of external hardware, did not have enough gain for those microphones either, and many in fact come with less gain than many modern sound interfaces. Sound engineers are very stubborn, set in their ways, and often they teach newcomers their own ways, and everyone is mislead and live in their own bubble. Most serious listening to music today takes place on headphones. And even before, nearfield monitors in a treated room did not match any home environment either. But still recording engineers keep talkig about monitors. The fact is, that you actually can't mix for headphones with monitors. You may know not to pan the low end (our hearing is mono below at least 120Hz, some say 200Hz), but there is no way to get the stereo imaging right, because of the lack of crosstalk in headphones. And then headphones are superior, because they aren't impacted by the room. Every listening position get the sam sound. And when you are off to the sides tweaking that hardware or some channels on the mixer, you still hear it the same way with headphones, but absolutely not with speakers.

[@dopesnare]

@@TheJonHolstein there’s some solid insight in there

[@clicks59]

There is a difference but it can be done with a budget mic. Advanced Audio makes some killer mics that definitely compare to the high dollar mics.

[@clicks59]

@@MoreMeRecording Our recording class did a blind shootout between a genuine U47 and a CM47 on a male vocal track . There were differences but they were ever so slight. The school recently purchased a TLM 149. I can honestly say that you get what you pay for. It’s being used on vocals here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oofSkmiZltymhM0 Thanks for the tip on the Stam’s.

[@pioferro]

A friend loaned me his new ($500 / cardioid only ) Sony C80, WOW!! This mic sounds fantastic on my voice. I have too many mics and don't need one.. but admit I want one. Incredible for the price.

[@MiximusMaximus]

I have a Flea 47, a Blue Bottle with the B6, B7, B0 caps as well as a Microtech Gefell um92.1 for my money mics. The last vocalist I recorded I did with the 47 for main vocals and the Microtech on his harmony parts. He really dug that Microtech. Having said all of that, I think the Lewitt line is just awesome bang for the buck. Did a Lewitt deal where they sent me a 940, an 840 and a few others to try and review. My studio partner ended up keeping the 840. I was close to keeping the 940 but couldn't justify it with the mics I already own. I think some of the multicap mics are a good possibility like the Bottle. Plenty of options with that route.

[@DirkRadloff]

Years ago I used an AKG 414 together with a SPL Preamp and wondered how thin and shrill my high voice sounded. Now I mostly use a cheap ribbon mic without a cloudlifter and I am totally happy with the sound.

[@robflores5172]

I've got a townsend labs sphere l22, I plan to get a Shure SM7B and a Lewitt 1040 System. I think that'll be it for my locker because my setup is more tailored to me as a musician.

[@waves7300]

Exactly

[@hbrookes]

Still searching for my perfect vocal mic...15 years later..just ordered warm audio 87. I have a very flexible voice from country to journey.

[@perrykeshahwalker5321]

Hey Barry, it's been a minute, but I wanted to chime in on the conversation. I never owned a mic worth over $400. However, the best mics I've used on my vocal are the sure sm58 and the Sennheiser 835. I tried several great low noise condenser vocal mics but on my voice they didn't cut it. The best mic I found for my wife's voice is the neat worker Bee. I know some in the comments will say I need to try those big boy mics but I don't have big boy mic money. Besides most people that listen to our music don’t care because the vocals sound professional. While I do believe their may be some benefit to using an expensive mic, I don’t think it's necessary to get great vocals and make professional sounding music.

[@southpau]

Just because it costs more doesn’t mean it’s better! Been using a Neumann m149 for over 20 years. Just plugged up an Australian made rode nt1a and it sounded mostly identical to the Neumann. The rode was given to me recently. I was absolutely floored! Collectively my team has plenty of legendary mics and pres. Y’all would’ve believe how much we use the slate mic over the u87, m149, 414’s, etc! Some of the cheaper mics are so good now that some of these expensive mics are a little disappointing!! Same for preamps!

[@SonOfWalhall]

I got a tips from a friend who's doing alot of studio stuff. Its a tube mic (with PSU) for around 250 dollars. Which isnt much compared to other mics with smiliar specs (condensor, 24K gold-sputtered diaphragm, 12AX7B-tube). Very warm and very open and crisp. But, its a hassle with Powersupply and all cables. Only drawback really. Could be less with a USB dynamic. But how much fun is that 🤓

[@CS-xi9dz]

Used an Aston Spirit and it was actually pretty good.

[@ChristianLarese]

I've used the TLM103 quite a lot (still use it for demo songs, small projects, etc.), and "upgraded to a Telefunken TF29 two years ago. I really like and prefer this one over the Neumann on almost every voice. Also had some nice experience with JZ microphones. The Rode NT1A hast just way too much highend and sibilance for my taste but is still okay. My Audio Technica AT4040s are awesome as well. Work on a lot of sources really well. Unfortunately my worst experience was with a Lewitt (440 or 441; can't remember), that a singer brought with him, just to hear the difference to my mics. and this Lewitt unfortunately didn't sound good at all. And I couldn't even imagine a voice on which it would sound good in any way. It had some seriously weird frequency inconsistencies. A lot of microphones starting at around 300,- price range are quite usable and get a good job done without AB comparison. But I agree to wait a little and save more money to get something better.

[@KeysMcGhee]

Hey Christian, my vocal mics are Neumann U87 and Telefunken TF29. Most of my singer mates prefer the TF29 ; at half the price. Just goes to show .....

[@ChristianLarese]

@@KeysMcGhee Interesting! 🤔 I've heard before that these two mics are quite similar. I wonder why some people prefer the TF29. Is it the tube behaviour on high dynamic parts, the high, mid or low freq.? Anyways I never had the honor to work with a u87, but I love my TF29. I think the whole tube TF line from Telefunken is pretty awesome. 🙂

[@SocaFirst]

I think a rode solo would be nice lol I mic USB blue too and one stereo input

[@KenTeel]

Get a Shure SM57 and an Audio-Technica AT2020. That's all you'll need. Just use a mic that you can afford. No consumers, except audiophiles, are going to know whether you used a $30 mic or a $3000 mic. Just record a great performance. That performance will reach them far sooner, than the extra 5% that you get out of spending a thousand dollar, additional, on a microphone. You don't need to be concerned about the resale value of your microphones, either. Use the heck out of your humble mic, and don't worry about how much you'll get back out of selling it. You didn't get into music to be a car salesman. You got into it because you love it. Don't think about the resale value of a mic, before you've even bought it. Buy something that you can afford (there are plenty of good mics below $200), and play your best music on a recording. If you want to get involved with resale value, go be a real estate schmuck. PS: I just played two gigs with a $14 Pyle PDMIC58 for my vocal. The people loved the music (I only play originals.) Nobody stopped me and said "hey, you've got to stop playing because your mic didn't cost you enough when you bought it. Buy what suits your needs, and don't buy, just because something has a particular brand name on it. Use your ears to judge the sound of a product. Judge it by what you hear, not brand name or price.

[@joshdaniels2680]

I've been in this exact camp for the past 15 years. Solid advice. If the source is good and the room is not horrible, can't go wrong.

[@MurnerJoel]

Infamous u87ai do you love it or hate it? I bought it because I had the opportunity to record singing through a vintage u87 in a professional studio but mine sounds not the same. Fascinating but very different to my ears

[@TonyThomas10000]

There are plenty of sub-$500 microphones that can do great vocal recordings. If you are really broke, start with a SM58. Another option is to rent or borrow a mic for important sessions or track at a studio with a decent selection.

[@Pocemon]

Would it be a good idea to get a mic modeling system like the UA sphere first to try out the different models, sort of get used to them before deciding to go all in on a certain mic?

[@michaelperez5273]

I would.. that's just my opinion. But if you don't like it you can sell it

[@TheJonHolstein]

some of the modelling mic have had a tendency to sound a bit harsh, distorting the captured sound. If they are distorting the sound, they can't perfectly model a mic after that. But if the capture is clean, the difference in the actual mics are mostly the frequency response, and that can be modelled, or even EQ'ed. The advantage of modelling mics, is that they typically also support a clean recording, and you can they apply the modelling afterwards. But the modelling is really a lot like applying different EQ curves, you just get a number of presets from famous microphones. The cheapest modelling mics have only a single membrane for capturing, so they lack the ability to do polar patterns. But typically in a normal home studio, a studio microphone will capture too much sound pollution, so what you want is a good mic with good off-axis rejection. If you get an SM7b, you have a good mic, as long as the singer can handle the off-axis rejection of it. And if you want a bit of polar pattern emulation you can use a SM57 turned away from the singer. You could also just get a matched pair om small membrane microphones and to a stereo recording that you can then mix with the capture of the main mic. Such a collection of mics, will come in handy for other uses as well. So it will serve you better than investing a lot in a studio vocal mic. But yes, if you have the room for it (sound proofed), a higher end modelling mic can be a way to get a lot of flavor from a single microphone. It will not sound exactly like those microphones that they are supposed to model, but you can have both the pretty clean recording, and then test out different flavors, or just EQ and mix the original dual track, as you prefer, without thinking too much of what microphone it might sound like.

[@thaexception3406]

Do it!

[@joeydego2]

I have 3 Townsend spheres. Absolutely. Check one out.

[@CS-xi9dz]

First mic was an AKG Perception 150. Meh, but was less then 200. Thought about modifying it sometime.

[@allenlocke1935]

I got to sing into a Sony c800g or an older version of it at high end recording studio going into a Neve console that was previously owned by Stevie Wonder and then wound up being the board for Austin City Limits way back in the day. I must say with the proximity effect in play, I could channel some Barry White effortlessly! It was crazy... and I've never had that feeling since. Any suggestions on an alternative that would get me back to that realm?

[@thaexception3406]

Look into UA Sphere modelling mic - it has C800 emulations and close to the sound when compated on Audio Test Kitchen and I think actually liked UA Sphere version better.

[@officialdiomer]

try the Sony C-80. it just came out a few months ago. i just got one and really like it so far.

[@Bek-bl2ed]

Sony c-80 and a tube tech pre amp? Lol

[@thumbody1]

Buying quality microphones on the used market is a surefire way to retain the value in your purchase. You will almost always be able to get what you paid for it if you decide to sell it. My first quality mic was a U89 I bought used in 1984 for $600. I used it for decades with great results. After buying a host of other quality LDC's I realized I never used it anymore so about 2 years ago I traded it for about $3000 worth of hi-end outboard gear. He got a pristine vintage U89 and I got some despartely needed upgrades for my studio.

[@budgetkeyboardist]

I keep going back to my Rhode NT1-A. I bought it for $200. I bought a AKG 214 for $400... and it doesn't sound as good as the Rode. Ooops. I keep debating buying an $800 mic - maybe something from WARM... but I know it won't sound 4 times better than the WARM. Probably just stick with the Rode.

[@dopesnare]

I feel like I need to process the heck out of it to the point that I'm better off with mic that sounds closer to the way i want off rip.

[@TheJonHolstein]

If you have a microphone with a good fequency response and good transient response, and not too much resonance, then you can just EQ your way to the sound you want. And if you think the NT1-A sound "small", because it isn't a dual membrane microphone, you can always test to either set up a microphone recording in the opposite direction, or get a couple of microphones to do a stereo recording, and then mix that in, for "air", and a stereo recording, will add more room feeling than any dual membrane microphone will. Some classic mics have an issue with the frequency response, and can't be EQ'ed to sound right, so then you might need a set of classics, to have one for each voice type. If the response curve is fine, the EQ will be able to solve the rest.

[@BabeRock1]

Firm believer in you get what u pay for and for the record i hate top heavy eating utensils

[@gcardinal]

Living in Norway there is virtually no where I can go to try even 1 or 2 mics - which makes this a exceptional expensive trial and error process. Recommendation I got at the store is Neumann TLM 103 with AUDIENT iD14 MkII - but again not sure about it all. And really no real path forward on how to solve it

[@edwarddodge7937]

Highly detailed expensive mics will pick up your room like crazy. If you don’t have a studio or want to use sound deadening treatments, then save your money.

[@cristian-marius-albu]

My observation after investing over the years in many mics from the 150-1000€ range is that the capsule is the weak point. Many mics use chinese made capsules which have different levels of quality. Over their years the quality improved but not on same level with famous brands which completely produce their own capsules. Some mic manufacturers have a process of selection and even calibration of these chinese capsules to ensure a certain level of quality (Manley, Telefunken Alchemy, Warm, GAP, Adv. Audio, etc...). The circuit of the mic can be SMD type (FET) with a good quality capsule and deliver an excellent sound (Neumann TLM, Microtech Gefell M series, Austrian Audio, etc...). If you cannot afford a good tube mic as they are pretty expensive, you can run a fet mic into a tube preamp. Tried for vocals and the results are really good.

[@germancarluv]

Chandler TG mic for me.

[@americanbigelow]

Thanks for the video, Barry. All: Please, Please, Please note that if you don't like your recordings with an inexpensive mic, the mic is not the problem. Please work on your technique before you dump a bunch of money into a mic. Also... if you don't like the recordings/mixes you're making, you're disqualified from pairing a mic and/or a preamp with a singer. That is "Years of experience" level stuff. No disrespect to anyone. I'm just trying to prevent heartbreak. Cheers!

[@donrich3927]

Warm audio? what which one Barry?

[@Cpt_Adama]

What do you think about the UA modeling microphone? Would that be a good choice for getting multiple mics for one price or is it a mediocre representation of all those mics?

[@alsoulmusic]

I bought that mike back when it was being crowd sourced (I also have the slate mic). The greatest advantage of that type of mic is the different flavors. I don’t know if they sound exactly like the originals but you can’t beat the price. It will also give you a chance to find out what works better on your or others voices without having to put up a bunch of mics.

[@thaexception3406]

Do it!

[@joerectifier]

You absolutely do not! However, if you want to bypass dealing with trying to get a sound you want with different gear, then buying the expensive mic can be worth it. If you love the art of micing and exploring all the tones of a field of mics, then spending the money makes sense and is fun and worth it - however that is sonic alchemy. Personally I love it, but I can make recordings that I love and cherish with an SM57 for everything - one of my favorite vocal tracks I ever recorded was with a Samson USB mic direct into Cubase….you do not *need* fancy mics to get great sounds. The Beatles only needed 4 tracks - so that is an extension of this thinking of minimal gear, less sonic alchemy and more *performance*.

[@Vybescube]

Love this well said

[@TheJonHolstein]

I don't think beatles every only used 4 tracks, they recorded on to one tape, then on to another so they could record 4 tracks multiple of times, cut them and then combine them on to another tape. But yes, this is just a video feeding the GAS monster. Sound-interfaces will have a good enough pre-amp, but one might need an in-line amplifier like the ones from SE or cloudlifter to get enough clean gain, for some microphones. Good monitors is a waste for most people. The overwhelming listening to songs will be on headphones, even the overwhelming majority of engaged listening, or on phone speakers, tablet speakers, soundbar, portable speaker or something else not worth mixing for. Heaphones will be your best method of getting close to experience to any relevant situation for people listening to the music. Great headphones start at 300 dollars/euros or less, at that price point, at best, if you are lucky you can get an ok pair of monitor speakers, and then you have to deal with room acoustics. I'm quite fed up with all engineers that keep talking about monitors, as that is so out of touch with consumers. And it always was, as nearfield monitors in a treated room, never matched anything in a home, it was a recording for other recording engineers to listen to in their studios. There are parts of the process where speakers can be used, but for the critical listening, today, headphones is where it should happen. And to work with clients, get a set of matching headphones, like the ATH-M50x, and set up a talk-back system. That way everyone will be fed the same sound, something that is not possible in a room. Their hearing will impact what they hear, but at least they will have the same sound fed towards their ears. For longer sessions of mixing an mastering, they may not be the most comfortable, and there are better headphones, in terms of frequency response and transient response, so they may not be everyone's choice for the studio desk. The talk about microphones suiting different voices, is misleading. A microphone with a pretty flat frequency response will suit any singer, if you EQ the recording. If the microphone does not have a flat frequency response, and some of the most sought after mics don, well then you might end up with a microphone that one will not be able to EQ to sound good with any voice. So yes, to some degree it is true. But you don't need a specific mic for a specific voice, if you have a mic that works well universally with just some EQ'ing. What you want is flat frequency response, good transient response, and no resonances. And for most non professional studio situations, a good off-axis rejection is preferred, although that may take some time getting used to, as you have to stay within a certain field. But then like you say, it is possible to experiment. Set up a couple of stereo mics, have a mic facing the other direction, so you can partly emulate different polar patterns. But the stereo mic'ing will probably give you more "air" than any high end studio microphone. And if you want to play with analog pre-amps, well, you can always re-amp the signal, and I would probably go for stereo-equipment, that would not be able to handle every microphone, but where the pre-amp, when re-amping, will ge enoung to add some character, and by being stereo, it can be used for all sorts of tracks. Instead for getting that single mic pre-amp, that can drive almost any microphone. And to have freedom over the saturation, depending on the mic, that one with a lot of drive, might not actually add any meaningful amount of saturation with some mics, as it is typically when driven harder, that comes to play, and on some, the sound will just fall apart when turning up the gain to the levels needed for some microphones. So for a lot of cases, something like the SE Dynacaster 8 DCM, should be enough, and if you want the famous version, the Shure SM7b, that costs a little extra and may need that in-line amp. That new Audix PDX-720, could turn out to be interesting as well, but I don't think the price has been released, and no tests. And then SM57, and/or a matched pair of cheaper small membrane microphones, and one till have most of what one may need, to get different types of sound, from the singer, and also have a set of microphones that can be used for all sort of other tasks.

[@barneyrubble8255]

mic, monitors, interface, room treatment, instruments, pre amps, this hobby is EXPENSIVE!

[@jackedkerouac4414]

Yes it is. All my friends think I love to cook. I really don’t I’m just saving for an Apollo Twin x 😂

[@barneyrubble8255]

@@jackedkerouac4414 Hey Jack

[@thomashalstead9121]

Thank you sir, your videos are really helpful, and its greatly appreciated that you take the time to share. If you happen to come across this comment and find that you have time to share some incite, it would be really appreciated. I would like to invest wisely on equipment for both mine and my partner's vocals. We unfortunately are unable to make trips because I serve in the Armed Forces, so any help to narrow our search would be awesome. For my vocals, I have been considering the WARM Audio 47 tube that you mentioned in this video, but after you mentioned microphones falling in the 1400 dollar range that might be worth looking into, I thought maybe I should ask before spending the money on the WA 47. I have a voice that resembles Frank Sinatra's, Julian Casablancas' or Anthony kiedis' voices depending on the song. I am a punchy warm baritone with a 4 octave range, and I could really use some advice on what microphone would pair well with me. I often find that when I project, microphones loose a lot of my tone. My partner has a very warm voice that falls comfortably within the alto range. Her voice resembles Ingrid Michaelson, or Sara Bareilles, and it is full of color and inflection. She really focuses on softer singing, in a singer-songwriter fashion, often accompanied with acoustic instruments. Again, We don't have the freedom to make a trip to compare microphones, so, your professional experience would really mean the world to us. Much appreciated sir! Happy holidays!

[@gkurtenbach]

Barry, what do you think about experimenting with different types of mikes by using some like Steven Slates VMS? Why not find an emulation that suits your voice and then try to get a hardware version of it?

[@TheJonHolstein]

Slate only has a single membrane so it can't emulate polar patterns, some other brands can do that. The issue though is that if your room is not perfect, you are in most cases better of with a dynamic mic with off axis rejection, like the SM7b, or SE Dynacaster DCM 8 (that one has flatter response curve and has a built in pre-amp to bring the level up so it should work with any interface). Some microphones have some resonances inside them, so you can't boost certain frequencies, and that has been the issue with some modelling microphones. If you have a microphone with a pretty flat frequency response, no resonances, and good transient response, you can simply EQ the recording to fit the singers voice. Having to pick microphones, comes from having microphones with resonances, that made it so you could not EQ them easily, and thus it would be easier to pick another mic. Or they had a fall off, at either end or a dip, that made it so that it wasn't possible to boost it back up without distorting the sound. What engineers should learn is how to EQ a mic, not switching mics or roughly what mic might work. If you know how to EQ the sound, you can work with many mics at many budgets. And the modelling mics, to a large extent is just applying an EQ curve to the captured signal, so that is really the same thing. For a studio wanting business, that has the budget for it, a mic cabinet makes a lot of sense, as it will attract customers. But a good engineer that can quickly get the tone right, might be able to win the client over, and get recommended anyway.

[@gkurtenbach]

@@TheJonHolstein This makes sense to me and is great advice. It strikes me that the mic used in a modeling product like Slate's probably has a "pretty flat frequency response, no resonances, and good transient response" so, with the exception of off-axis rejection, one could eq to fit the singer's voice and ultimately the mix. So modeling mics are really just selling signal chain settings to some extent. So the question is: can you get the desired sound faster by trying presets or by manually eqing etc. thanks!

[@TheJonHolstein]

@@gkurtenbach Well, jumping presets/mic models is a bit of a hit and miss strategy, so in general it takes more time than if you have some knowledge about what you are doing. But if you have a client that knows what mics sound good on their voice, it can give you a good starting off option (however, you can also have a cheat-card, with frequency response curves of various mics, and just set it up to something similar to that). Austrian Audio and Lewitt audio makes some really good microphones, that you could work with, instead of getting a modelling mic, where you will be paying for the modelling software (presets), and may find at some point that the software is no longer supported, and thus have a lesser quality mic for the same price.

[@gkurtenbach]

​@@TheJonHolstein you are right about preset jumping. I know with channel strip presets its generally a miss strategy. It's way more productive to know how to just record well and apply comp/eq/saturation/echo/rev/limiting to get a sound that works in context.

[@jimrogers7425]

With the appearance of inexpensive Chinese manufactured capsules, there is no need to purchase a $1000+ microphone. Some microphone manufacturers who use Chinese capsules select the best ones from a batch, which adds to the quality of the mic. The MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR in buying mics is always have more than one manufacturers mic. The mic is your ears and different mics have different characteristics. if you use ONE mic to record everything, the sound of your recordings won't be as varied! Get a small pencil condenser, a large capsule multipattern mic, and hopefully a ribbon mic. If you leave them out overnight, put a plastic bag over the mic to protect the capsule from dust. Great video, Barry!

[@subtonic24]

Nope! A super expensive mic is nice to have but is not required. I think most mics between the $500-$2,000 will be just fine and give professional results. I record my wife mostly nowadays and we found that the TLM103 pairs best with her voice (we paid $875 used for it) so that is our 1 high end mic. We tried a $3,600 Vintage U87 and she didn't like it on her voice.

[@thaexception3406]

Try UA Sphere mic!

[@NURREDIN]

The question that should be asked is can the "end user" listening to Spotify through cheap ear buds tell the difference after you record,mix, and master your song between a $10,000 Telefunken U-47 and a $500 MXL Revelation II U-47 clone?

[@rmyrie5963]

Nope

[@ndavies8]

Yes you will hear a difference

[@TheJonHolstein]

If the frequency response is good, the transient response is good, and there is no internal resonances that impacts the sound, then you can just EQ your way, to fit any singer. If you use a condenser mic like those, in a room that is not soundproofed, and not treated, you might actually ruin the recording. So for home studios, and project studios, dynamic mics with great off axis rejection, is the better choice. So SE Dynacaster 8 DCM, Shure SM7b (but that may require an in-line amp from SE or Cloudlifter for your interface to be able to handle it). The downside is that the singer has to be able to stay within the recording field. If you have a decent room, you can also set up a stereo system of small membrane microphones, to add "air" to the recording, and some natural room, to compensate for the small polar pattern, and the effect can be even greater that way.

[@PurpleMusicProductions]

Why is this question ALWAYS asked as a response to buying garbage? So should Mozart not have composed and written symphonies because everyone would not have found classical music inaccessible or been able to make it to the theaters to witness it first hand? Geez. I am so thankful the maters of the craft did not choose this mentality.

[@NURREDIN]

@@PurpleMusicProductions You OBVIOUSLY have a problem with READING COMPREHENSION. Your reply doesn't make sense. Music creation and music production are two DISTINCTLY different things. The quality of your composition has NOTHING to do with the equipment used for production. Your analogy is downright STUPID. The mentality I employed is COST EFFECTIVENESS. Obviously you don't work for a financial institution. Can you ACTUALLY tell the difference in what equipment was used to record a song from a $40 pair of earbuds? Anyone who says they can is LYING. How many people do you know who listen to a song on Spotify or KZbin and can tell you which microphone was used? The man who taught me how to record,Bud Hobgood (James Brown's producer/engineer) recorded James on either a Shure SM58 or a Sennheiser MD 421 because he kept blowing diaphragms on the Neumanns. When Spotify is only paying .00521 cents per play,and KZbin is only paying .00175 cents per view,you need 6 MILLION views to purchase a top of the line Neumann or a Telefunken. The point is to turn a PROFIT.

[@npinero1]

Neumann TLM 103 is insanely good especially if bought used, just watch out for fakes

[@scottharris5652]

I'm gonna quote Warren Huart on this one. Its more about the performance

[@johnlong9734]

Taylor Swift Wow does her Avantone mic come with her pitch corrector? The only time she hits the note is when she goes by. Ya I worked with her. Lady Gaga she sings. Nottoo Swift Barry😅

[@officialpoa3171]

*Veni at AUDIOPROZ, says that when you open up microohones and audio interfaces in average, when you open them up from the cheaper to the higher grade, there is very little difference in whats ynder the hood. Moreover with audio interfaces, in most case's the circuits are identical*

[@operasinger2126]

I once sang through a Telefunken 251 when I didn't know how to sing. I sounded like sh*t.

[@JSSTUDIO-wr2jq]

🙂👍

[@ThaRealDawn]

What do you think of the WA-8000?

[@nunu9849]

Very, very sibiliant

[@mikebauer6917]

Let’s see, untreated, ground level, New York apartment on the same block as a hospital and fire department? Yes, the perfect setting for a U87.

[@BarryJohns]

🤣

[@knelson1180]

It's all subjective. I think a Behringer C1 sounds better than a U87. To each their own. If you know what you're doing, you can make just about anything work for you.

[@robflores5172]

How can you say the SM7B isn't a well rounded mic while in the same breath say it's been used on Michael Jackson and basically every metal band ever? Sounds pretty well rounded to me lol ALSO don't neglect that it's a dynamic microphone so you get WAY less ambient room noise. Which makes it GREAT for people with small rooms who wouldn't benefit a ton from acoustic treatment. Also, if you're a loud singer or screamer, you probably don't want something like a Manley Reference mic cause if you blowout the diaphragm you'll be real sad. Of course this is just my take. Chris Cornell blew out a bunch of condenser mics on Superunknown. SM7B is a great mic, from Michael Jackson to Spencer Sotelo.

[@BarryJohns]

A person can find validation for any point they want to make using isolated examples. The video is for a “well rounded” “versatile” mic. They used SM57’s on the kick drum for Van Halen 1. Do you recommend that for everyone? I stand by what I said, the SMB is a very good in its price range but NOT a versatile mic. It’s great at what it was designed to do and it’s always good to have in a mic collection.

[@timothymowers6867]

TM 🎷Tody

[@SeventhSonMusic]

My advice is to look at the frequency response chart of the expensive mic you want .. Then search for a less expensive mic with a similar frequency response. And you or anyone else would know the difference ..

[@TheJonHolstein]

or pick a mic with a flat as possible frequency response, good transient response, and as little internal resonance as possible, at your budget, and you will be able to EQ it to sound good with any voice. This picking mic concept comes from a workflow of the past. But for some of those expensive mics, due to their frequency response, you may have to pick a different mic, despite it being expensive. Some cheap mics have resonances or a response that may take too much time to fix, but going for a expensive mic that accidentally fit ones voice will then not be a great investemnt. Learn how to EQ, is the best mic investment. Engineers are quite stubborn, and they like to pretend that gear is more important than it is. If anyone can just get a software EQ and both emulate the nice things about a specific mic and hardware pre-amp, they bar of entry will be lowered, taking business from studios that have made investments in to a lot of hardware. This is not a balanced and objective video. This is a video promoting having to spend more than you have to. And like so many engineers, he keeps talking about monitors, like that is relevant, when most serious music listening takes place on headphones. Very very few people have a good speaker system at home, and fewer also with decent acoustics, and even then, nearfield monitors is not a good way to reference how the sound will sound in a home set-up, they are only good for referencing how it will sound in another studio. Whereas headphones much more accurately gives you a sound that will come close to match how the audience will hear it, in any scenario where they really do care how it sounds. external pre-amps are almost never needed with modern sound interfaces. If they lack a bit of gain, get an in-line amplifier from Se or cloudlifter. And many external pre-amps don't have enough gain either.

[@SeventhSonMusic]

@@TheJonHolstein " its not the gear its the ear " when it comes to recording.. But the better the gear the less you gotta do to make it sound its best... But a good performance is most important thing ... But recording like everything else is an art ...

[@SeventhSonMusic]

@@TheJonHolstein and I would disagree about preamps .. While most pres on interfaces are OK ... External pres can color your sound add weight , body and depth to the signal .. Especially if you do any analog summing ..

[@TheJonHolstein]

@@SeventhSonMusic Not particularly true, no matter what hardware you have, you will have to work with the signal to get it right. There is no magic box. If anything there is some software that can do all sorts of things under that hood, that are much quicker to work with. And the issue with spending a lot on pre-amp, is that the ones that are expensive typically saturate the signal, in a way that may not always be desirable, and then you have to do more work actually. The best way to work, is to get a clean signal, then learn how to process it, and most of the time, the critial part will not be using hardware, but simply know what to do, to get it to sound in a particular way, there is some argument, that some hardware saturates in a way that plugins never or rarely do, but a lot of hardware has no more special saturation compared to software, and you do not want that imprinted on everything you record, you can always send a singal that was cleanly recorde through hardware to saturate it afterwards, and then you still have the clean signal to work with, typically, a mix of saturated an clean signal will give you the best results. Good enough microphones are not that expensive, and clean pre-amps are found in about every interface these days.

[@BarryJohns]

It’s never that simple.

[@DaveWestGuitar]

Sure I need an expensive mic. Like an M1 Mac. Ha Ha. What I really need is videos on mixing and getting the most out of the equipment I have. Oh, and manners, can't forget those.

[@squelch84]

You mean SM7B.

[@germancarluv]

Makes me wonder.

[@brianwynn10]

I got the tlm103 I just got a 1176 and la2a I didn’t know if I should have got a u87 or the hardware one thing I do know treating my booth with bass trap help me sooo much more then any plugin ,I may still get the u87 I just gotta find a way to make some more money cause I’m broke

[@kedavis]

I 2nd what Bazman said. I have an u87ai and I love it. However, I recorded a duet with someone who had a tlm103. My vocals were with my 87, hers with her 103. It was eye-opening how similar they sounded. The main differences were the 103 was brighter and a tad bit harsher than the 87.

[@brianwynn10]

​@@MoreMeRecording thanks so much, right now my setup is (, tlm103-neve1073spx-1176lindell-warmaudio2a- ApolloTwin ,) Any recommendations ? IM Only tracking Vocals, Rnb & Rap ,I want clear smooth vocals

[@brianwynn10]

@@kedavis thanks my friend upgraded from the tlm103 to the u87 he said the same thing,Once he seen me Buy hardware,He now wished he would have spent the money on a compressor ,right now my setup is (, tlm103-neve1073spx-1176lindell-warmaudio2a- ApolloTwin ,) Any recommendations ? IM Only tracking Vocals, Rnb & Rap ,I want clear smooth vocals

[@kedavis]

@@brianwynn10 What does your current setup sound like?

[@bjslugzbeatz2103]

how about billie ellish using the $99.00 Audio Technica AT2020......

[@PurpleMusicProductions]

Sound advice and I agree. Definitely get the best mics you can afford that fits your source material.

[@lucianappleton1212]

What about the people who can roll their own gear. I have built a dozen mics that would cost more than I would be willing to pay for off the shelf. Period. This includes mic pre and compressors as well. But as understand most studio cats are purely consumers! Which defeats the beauty of having unique pieces.

[@grahamtaylor6883]

Not sure what I got from this? Do I need an expensive mic? From what you said, it would be better buying 5 cheaper mics for different options on different voices, rather than one expensive one, which may only work on one type of voice? It was ll a bit unclear and on the fence to be honest. But thanks anyway.

[@imnotoriousnate]

Microphones are cars. Every car isn’t for everyone. You got your fords and you got your lambs. Most of us are good with Cams.

[@frankpaws]

Look at the Slate.

[@ndavies8]

Moral of the story is to not get ahead of yourself.

[@DonaldMerrit]

No you don't but it sure helps

[@MonsterChuck]

I just watched your video on not needing preamps and now you are saying these great mics NEED to be paired with a preamp...... Dafuq, bruh?

[@Jabbaerwocky]

No, I don't need expensive mikes. I WANT expensive mikes just for the sheer love of expensive mikes.

[@tdeardor]

Thanks Barry. It would seem that clarity, accuracy and room noise rejection would be the most important criteria. Eq and compression can be done in the daw and most preamps can be emulated with plugins. With the ever increasing power of computers and software it would seem that you need less and less sophisticated hardware. It would be fun to do an A/B test between a high end Neumann with high end preamps and a good sub $300 mic with a neve or ssl console plugin.

[@KenTeel]

Well said. The inexpensive gear, now a days, is down to a science, for manufacturing it. They can make it inexpensive and good sounding. To some extent, the party is over for the high end stuff. People, especially in home studios, are discovering the virtues of equipment that costs far less than the expensive stuff.

[@thepick5663]

No.

[@RobertMatichak]

@7:39 … 3D imaging …. Really??! A little over the top wouldn’t you say? 🙄

[@BarryJohns]

No, not at all

[@TheJonHolstein]

No, this whole video is about feeding the GAS. In most cases, your interface has a good enough pre-amp, and with some microphones you may need a in-line pre-amp like the ones from SE or cloudlifter. But then you are mostly good to go. And even with an external pre-amp, you may still need that in-line amp. If the frequency response and the transient response is good, then you can EQ your way to a curve that fits the singer. Large condenser micrphones, pick up noise, so the way to reduce that is to have a really well treated studio. So the less sound pollution from those high end mics, are from the recording room. But some cheap tube mics come with a lot of noise. Any "3D", or depth to the sound comes from the polar pattern. And if you want that, I would recommend getting a pair of micrphones and set up as stereo micrphones, to then mix in, to add room, depth and air to the sound. That avatone mic, has pretty much a flat frequency response, to it is just about EQing it. And make sure you have the room for it. That SM7b, has a good off axis rejection, so that works pretty well for less than optimal rooms, and that is the audience he supposedly is targeting, when he talk about home studios and project studios. The SE Dynacaster DCM 8, has a flatter frequency response than the SM7b, is cheaper and should not require an in-line pre-amp. Combined with a pair of SM7, or a matched pair, for that stereo image, and you can add in more room. But one has to know how to sing in to a microphone with good off axis rejection. If anything, many of the classic mics, do not have as good frequency response, and precisely therefor may not suit any voice. For a pro studio, having a mic cabinet, and some good pre-amps to get people to come there do record, can be a good investment. For the Home/project studio, there are some really good mics, that don't cost a lot, and those expensiv pre-amps are probably less clrean than the one on ones interface, so they will affect the sound more. And if you have a good clean recording, you can always re-amp it later through hardware, if you want that coloration... but then I should go with a stereo unit, that perhaps don't have as much gain, but can be used for all sorts of material, as it is stereo.

[@RobertMatichak]

@@BarryJohns you’ll have to explain 3D space using only one mic. Unless of course you were referring to a stereo capture.

[@BarryJohns]

@@RobertMatichak context please, I did not mean it literally, if you want to criticize me for choosing the wrong word, then ok, but come on.

[@RobertMatichak]

@@BarryJohns Hey Barry. I wasn’t criticizing you. Rather I was questioning what you said. I’ll criticize you now by saying that I like your videos and your personality! My post was not intended to be negative … just inviting conversation. Thanks and keep it up!

[@cate01a]

but whats so fucking fancy with microhpones. isnt it like water: its all the same shit. cant you get the shittiest cheapest noisiest $2 mono microphone, but then fix it up to sound flawless with software?

[@GeorgeAmodei21]

Thats weird, No comment from you when I Commented on your last YT Vid about NAMM? ...Oh well. George Amodei

[@user-jq4fz6co8b]

HELL NO, you don't. Getting into mics is like being a heroin addict...you're never gonna catch the dragon! It's not like a guitar--something that's fixed to your hands, so the tactile quality of it HAS to be a certain level in order to even be usable. All you really need is an outboard EQ and a mic that has 1) good enough detail in the midrange 2) low self/handling noise and 3) good at rejecting outside noise.

[@TheJonHolstein]

A lot of feeding the unnecessary GAS here. Don't get nice monitors, invest in a set of good headphones. And ok monitors, just for certain tasks, keep most of your listening in headphones, as that is how people will hear your songs (engineers that haven't moved primarily to headphones are just stubborn, even in the home stereo-system days, nearfield monitors in a treated room, had little relevance to how people would hear sound, and with headphones, the experience is just so much closer to how people will hear, and becaus of the lack or cross-talk and panned low end sounding panned in headphones, but not in a room, you will not be able to mix/master accurately for headphones using studio monitor speakers). And if you plan to sit a few people in the room, with headphones, everyone gets a similar experience. To simplify the process of communicating, find a "talk-back" system, where it is easy for everyone to talk through the system, not having to get everyone to remove their headphones all the time. Typically even in a room, people would have to shout, so that wasn't all that practical either. Don't look at external pre-amps, most sound interfaces have good pre-amps, very clean ones. But you might want an in-line amplifier, from SE or Cloudlifter, if you have something like an SM7b microphone, because even if the figures say so, you may not get enough clean gain in your pre-amp. Many of the most hyped pre-amps, colors the sound. And that is fine as a process of sound. But you can always re-amp sound, so if you want to color sound, and believe that hardware does that better than software, a mic pre-amp is not the most flexible, there are several of products that can color your sound, that may have a pre-amp, but not necessarily one that on its own would be able to drive your mic anyhow, but if you get a stereo product, you can then also process stereo tracks through it. The thing to look for in a microphone, is one with a pretty straight frequency response, and a good transient response. If the recording is clean, both in terms of pre-amp, and in terms of captured frequency response, you can then EQ the sound, to emulate the different characters of different microphones. A supercardioid microphone can not do figure of 8 recording, but you can have more than one microphone, and blend. Expensive studio-mics are really sensitive, so if your studio isn't soundproofed, chances are that you will ruin recording, by having captured to much noise/sound pollution. So in many cases you would want a super or hyper cardioid microphone, with off-axis rejection. But they can be problematic is the singer is not used to them, as one has to stay within the optimum capture bubble. For a professional recording studio, microphones, and outboard gear, and pre-amps makes sense, as that can be the thing that gets people to record there. But if you know how to EQ someone's voice, from a clean capture, you can get great results without that. And if you can deliver really good results at a much lower price, chances are that you can even get some business, even without all that nice hardware.