Looking to add a second vocal mic for recording

[Pathfinder]

Just a small home studio for myself. I have a shure sm57, Sm58b and a Warm Audio WA-87r2 and a WA-47. WA-47 for vocals. 
I was looking t add a good NON tube condenser for vocals mainly and thought the AKGC414 XLII would be perfect.
is it a good choice considering what I already have? Never owned an AKG mic before. When researching this model kept showing up.
The Wa-87r2 and the shures are great for instruments-especially acoustic guitar. The WA-47 Tube is great for vocals.

Thanks

 

Edited Wednesday at 08:38 PM by Pathfinder

[Pathfinder]

Wrong Forum Sorry 😞 Well not now it was moved here where it should be!

Edited Wednesday at 09:40 PM by Pathfinder

[Duncan Stitt]

414s come in two basic flavors: the ULS models are flatter, the XLII/XLS models are brighter. All 414s have a bit of a dip in response in the 1k-2k range, which would contrast nicely with your other mics, which are all midrange-heavy, to different degrees. 

One big advantage of the 414s is their four-position multi-pattern switch, which can be helpful if you need more isolation. I often use one 414 on vocals and another on guitar for a live guitar/vocal recording, with both set to hypercardioid mode. If you aim the vocal mic up and the guitar mic down, you can get almost complete isolation on the vocal, and good isolation on the guitar.

You might want to get a foam pop filter, so if the XLII is too bright, you can take the edge off.

[Alan Tubbs]

The microtech gefell m930 is hopefully cheaper and a great mic.  the original Neumann factory was moved across the Elbe river to what would become east Germany because of the allied bombing.  Microtech still makes the m7 capsule,for example and their m930 is a best in class for about @$1000 for instruments and solid vox.  It sounds great on about everything.  
 

The Austrian audio oc818 are akg guys who started a new company.  A good replacement unit and a little cheaper.

[Pathfinder]

1 hour ago, Alan Tubbs said:

The microtech gefell m930 is hopefully cheaper and a great mic.  the original Neumann factory was moved across the Elbe river to what would become east Germany because of the allied bombing.  Microtech still makes the m7 capsule,for example and their m930 is a best in class for about @$1000 for instruments and solid vox.  It sounds great on about everything.  
 

The Austrian audio oc818 are akg guys who started a new company.  A good replacement unit and a little cheaper.

Actually it is MORE expensive and in MOST stores quite a bit more.....

That aside....$$$ is not an issue in this for me- 
I appreciate the input-Thanks

Edited Thursday at 03:28 PM by Pathfinder

[Alan Tubbs]

You doing used mics?  AKG 414s start about $1000 at Sweetwater.

[Duncan Stitt]

Expanding on my earlier comment, mics come in 3 basic flavors: Flat response, mid-scooped response, and mid-forward response.  This is an oversimplification, but there's a technical explanation. Condensor mics either have a center-terminated capsule or an edge-terminated capsule. A center-terminated capsule pushes the mids, and edge-terminated capsule scoops the mids. Neumanns are center-terminated, 414s are edge-terminated. You can see the difference if you compare frequency response graphs, which you can find on the Recordinghacks.com mic database page.

To generalize (again) a mid-scooped voice like Rod Stewart. (extreme example) would benefit from a mid-forward mic like a Neumann or Shure SM7b. A honky or nasal singer like the guy from Queen might benefit from a mid-scooped mic like a 414. That's why reputable recording studios have a collection of mics to choose from. They'll do a mic shootout at the beginning of the recording process to determine which mic sounds best on the singer. The thing is, the actual frequency response of  the same mic model can vary from one mic to the next, with peaks and valleys that might be a couple of DB different than the published response graph. If one of these little peaks or valleys coincides with a peak or valley in response in the singers voice, it can sound magic - or terrible.  That's why you hear about people complaining they got a bad copy of a U87, for example.

Getting into the minutiae, the high frequency peak can vary from mic model to mic model. If the sibilance range of your singer is in the 7k range, a mic with a peak at 7k is going to magnify sibilance. An example from a few years ago was a lady singer who was getting too much sibilance on my Gefell MT71s (same capsule as the Gefell 930, but different electronics and housing.) She said, in another studio, she was using a Shure KSM44 with no sibilance issues. I looked up response graphs for both mics and saw a peak at 7k on the Gefell, and a dip at 7k on the Shure. I sold the Gefell , even though it sounded awesome on acoustic guitars. 

Musical context is important. Some singers might use a mid-scooped mic on one song and a mid-forward mic on another song, depending on how the voice is interacting with the musical accompaniment.

For recording instruments, a bass roll off switch on the mic can be crucial. The other day, I wanted a sort of warm sound for a sloppily strummed acoustic guitar, where I wanted to increase the sound of the body and decrease the string sound. I put up a AT4047 which is known for its big low mids and reduced high end. No matter where I put it, I was getting too much low end. I changed to a 414ULS (the flatter response model of 414s) with a foam pop  filter to reduce highs, and the 2-position bass roll off switch set to 150hz and got the sound I was looking for.

In an ideal world, we EQ our tracks by choosing the right mic, since the EQ curve of the mic is baked into the recording. Of course we can fiddle with EQ to change the sound in the mix, but we can't replicate the sound of a different mic with EQ alone.  On the other hand, some companies are promoting their mic modeling system where you buy a certain mic and then run it through their software to emulate the mic of your choice. I have no experience in that realm, I have a bunch of mics instead. 

[Pathfinder]

7 hours ago, Alan Tubbs said:

You doing used mics?  AKG 414s start about $1000 at Sweetwater.

No-New. Mics are probably the ONLY musical stuff I will not buy used

[Pathfinder]

3 hours ago, Duncan Stitt said:

Expanding on my earlier comment, mics come in 3 basic flavors: Flat response, mid-scooped response, and mid-forward response.  This is an oversimplification, but there's a technical explanation. Condensor mics either have a center-terminated capsule or an edge-terminated capsule. A center-terminated capsule pushes the mids, and edge-terminated capsule scoops the mids. Neumanns are center-terminated, 414s are edge-terminated. You can see the difference if you compare frequency response graphs, which you can find on the Recordinghacks.com mic database page.

To generalize (again) a mid-scooped voice like Rod Stewart. (extreme example) would benefit from a mid-forward mic like a Neumann or Shure SM7b. A honky or nasal singer like the guy from Queen might benefit from a mid-scooped mic like a 414. That's why reputable recording studios have a collection of mics to choose from. They'll do a mic shootout at the beginning of the recording process to determine which mic sounds best on the singer. The thing is, the actual frequency response of  the same mic model can vary from one mic to the next, with peaks and valleys that might be a couple of DB different than the published response graph. If one of these little peaks or valleys coincides with a peak or valley in response in the singers voice, it can sound magic - or terrible.  That's why you hear about people complaining they got a bad copy of a U87, for example.

Getting into the minutiae, the high frequency peak can vary from mic model to mic model. If the sibilance range of your singer is in the 7k range, a mic with a peak at 7k is going to magnify sibilance. An example from a few years ago was a lady singer who was getting too much sibilance on my Gefell MT71s (same capsule as the Gefell 930, but different electronics and housing.) She said, in another studio, she was using a Shure KSM44 with no sibilance issues. I looked up response graphs for both mics and saw a peak at 7k on the Gefell, and a dip at 7k on the Shure. I sold the Gefell , even though it sounded awesome on acoustic guitars. 

Musical context is important. Some singers might use a mid-scooped mic on one song and a mid-forward mic on another song, depending on how the voice is interacting with the musical accompaniment.

For recording instruments, a bass roll off switch on the mic can be crucial. The other day, I wanted a sort of warm sound for a sloppily strummed acoustic guitar, where I wanted to increase the sound of the body and decrease the string sound. I put up a AT4047 which is known for its big low mids and reduced high end. No matter where I put it, I was getting too much low end. I changed to a 414ULS (the flatter response model of 414s) with a foam pop  filter to reduce highs, and the 2-position bass roll off switch set to 150hz and got the sound I was looking for.

In an ideal world, we EQ our tracks by choosing the right mic, since the EQ curve of the mic is baked into the recording. Of course we can fiddle with EQ to change the sound in the mix, but we can't replicate the sound of a different mic with EQ alone.  On the other hand, some companies are promoting their mic modeling system where you buy a certain mic and then run it through their software to emulate the mic of your choice. I have no experience in that realm, I have a bunch of mics instead. 

Thank for the info and I sure wish I could sing like the, "nasal singer like the guy from Queen"..................And write and play.

[jackson white]

vocals are the prime driver for building a mic collection here, finding some of the newer mics with A/B options to be interesting, versatile and a good value.

This one is great, with two distinct flavors (vintage/modern) and a transformer that can easily double as a boat anchor (lot of iron in this one).

https://unitedstudiotech.com/en/products/ut-twin87

And reading (so far...) good things about this one, on the list to demo.

https://chandlerlimited.com/tg-microphone-type-l/

Also good luck with JZs, (3 in the locker).

https://intshop.jzmic.com/

...

never used them, but would any of the mic modelers be of interest?  I work with a couple of (legit) producers  that use Slate.

 

Edited Friday at 04:08 AM by jackson white
added the reason why

[Pathfinder]

34 minutes ago, jackson white said:

vocals are the prime driver for building a mic collection here, finding some of the newer mics with A/B options to be interesting, versatile and a good value.

This one is great, with two distinct flavors (vintage/modern) and a transformer that can easily double as a boat anchor (lot of iron in this one).

https://unitedstudiotech.com/en/products/ut-twin87

And reading (so far...) good things about this one, on the list to demo.

https://chandlerlimited.com/tg-microphone-type-l/

Also good luck with JZs, (3 in the locker).

https://intshop.jzmic.com/

...

never used them, but would any of the mic modelers be of interest?  I work with a couple of (legit) producers  that use Slate.

 

Thanks for th info-Mic modelers are out due to ILok-I refuse to put that garbage on my DAW. I have done fine without it for decades