Kik mic
in [Live Sound]
|
From: Joe Kotroczo on 22 Feb 2010 14:18 On 22/02/2010 20:13, in article 0001HW.C7A841910001226CF0284530(a)News.Individual.NET, "Ty Ford" <tyreeford(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:49:59 -0500, geoff wrote > (in article <Y8idnTZjCK5cABzWnZ2dnVY3goidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>): > >> Steve M wrote: >>> "Jerry" wrote: >>>> just curious about which kik mic everyone would recommend. >>>> >>> >>> Audix D6 >>> EV RE 20 >>> Beyer M88 >>> Shure Beta 52 >>> >>> Pretty much in that order of preference. >> >> Audio Technica ATM25 (discontinued). >> > > Audio Technica AE2500 twin element. Shure SM91 (discontinued) -- Joe Kotroczo kotroczo(a)mac.com
From: geoff on 22 Feb 2010 15:28 Ty Ford wrote: > On Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:49:59 -0500, geoff wrote > (in article <Y8idnTZjCK5cABzWnZ2dnVY3goidnZ2d(a)giganews.com>): > >> Steve M wrote: >>> "Jerry" wrote: >>>> just curious about which kik mic everyone would recommend. >>>> >>> >>> Audix D6 >>> EV RE 20 >>> Beyer M88 >>> Shure Beta 52 >>> >>> Pretty much in that order of preference. >> >> Audio Technica ATM25 (discontinued). >> >> >> geoff > > > Audio Technica AE2500 twin element. > > dynamic and condenser in one mic Thus completely diufferent ! geoff
From: Steve M on 22 Feb 2010 19:41 "geoff" wrote: > Denny Strauser wrote: > > What did you buy? > > > D6, to add to my RE20, D112, ATM25, and MD421 (which I would be too scared > to stick in a kick - I've seen results ....) > What "results" would those be? -- Steve <snip> McQ
From: Krooburg Science on 22 Feb 2010 20:11 On Feb 20, 4:15 pm, Audio1 <Aud...(a)where.net> wrote: > Jerry wrote: > > just curious about which kik mic everyone would recommend. > > I've tried all the ones mentioned so far and a few others but I always > go back to a Sennheiser MD-421, the older ones, not the newer ones, and > I like it set one click off of 'M'. > > The Audix D6 has no midrange, the newer Sennheisers have too much high > end, the Beyer M88 was OK but didn't have enough low end and sounded > like it was distorting, I've never liked the EV RE's, and the D-112 was > all mud, no definition in a busy mix. > > Caveat: Mixed through Meyer MSL-3/CQ-2/650/650P/UPA-2P systems. I find for most of the types of acts I do, the D6 works very well. The RE20 was my go to kick mic back in the day, with the 421 right behind that (421 on all toms too). It's true the D6 has quite a suck-out of the mids which I find lends itself very well to "modern" rock as well as the modern PA with good, ballsy subs that reach down very low. If you look at the response plot of the D6 on the Audix site, it's really carved out in the middle. Back in the 80's and earlier, I suspect the D6 would have been more of a detriment since you needed more mids for kick definition. And subs in the day didn't go a low as a lot of the newer ones - not to mention they didn't get as loud if they did go lower. A mic with the big mid suck-out would essentially look like it had a big low boost down to 30Hz and a bit lower. That could make subs back then a bit unhappy. Nowadays, I don't really use the RE20 or the 421 on kick. It's either a D6, SM/beta 91, or a combo of the two. A new use per suggestion on another forum which I've found for the D6 is floor tom. I also tried it on cajon. I used it the other night for the 1st time on both. One problem I've had with floor tom and other mics is a lot of the sustained "drone" that needs to be EQ'd or gated out. The D6 takes care of a lot of that and sounds good. On cajon put through subs, it sounds amazing. Throw an Audix i5 on the snare side and it's really great combo. K.
From: geoff on 22 Feb 2010 21:01
Steve M wrote: > "geoff" wrote: >> Denny Strauser wrote: >>> What did you buy? >>> >> D6, to add to my RE20, D112, ATM25, and MD421 (which I would be too >> scared to stick in a kick - I've seen results ....) >> > > What "results" would those be? Stuffed diaphrams, twice. From the repairer's point of view. And not from being in the 'wind-tunnel' - just SPL from the beater. geoff |