mike_mccue
Here's an example where placing the mic is a balance of choice between capturing quiet passages and making sure the microphone doesn't blow out in the loud parts.
 
While the mic and its capsule are rated for very high SPL the electronics rely on phantom power. :-( and so the mic can start to sound stressed way before the SPL limit is reached. In this circumstance I place it back far enough to fulfill a hope of recording what the vocalist's voice actually sounds like rather than the characteristic sound of a mic being pushed hard.
 

 
The preamp the mic is connected to has no trouble with the signal level. It is the circuitry within the mic itself where the edginess can get permanently imprinted into the recording.
 
This is a remote recording done at someones house. I think a nice tube mic with its solid power supply would sound even smoother than the FET mic used for this vocal track but I am reluctant to drag tube mics around to remote locations.
 
best regards,
mike

 
Can you get into more detail how Phantom Power degrades the mic signal even below the rated SPL?

McQ turned me on to the idea of a Ribbon mic.
 
I bought the AEA R84. I feel it's best for my voice.
 
I have an AKG 414 that was modded to be transformerless. That only sounds good on females or acoustic guitars.
 
I have an AKG Tube mic. I think it's better for me than the 414 bit not as good as the R84.
 
I have two of the Chinese rip offs. They sound like the 414 to me. 
 
I once tried an SM57 on my voice. YUK!!!!!
 
I used a Shure sumpin' at ohgrant's house once. I liked it. But again the R84 is my go to and shall remain so.

Jay Tee 4303
 
 
Can you get into more detail how Phantom Power degrades the mic signal even below the rated SPL?

Hi,
 I was specifically referring to one specific aspect of phantom power and it was in the context of comparing how a few milliamps at 48vDc is relatively under powered compared to a system that get's a few milliamps at 105vDc, 120vDC or 200vDC.
 I was referring to the character of transient response. The sound of the extremely short term peaking that occurs to quickly to be recognized on a SPL meter, or as "loudness" by our ears. 
 
 
 
 If you want to learn about the general problems caused by phantom power I'd suggest searching out some info that explains why phantom power requires the insertion of 2 "blocking" capacitors that your audio signal must pass through. The tube mics I mentioned don't have to deal with that. Tube mics get their power from extra cable leads where as phantom powered mics get their power by sharing the audio cable leads.
 
You can also search out info about noisy phantom power. You may not be able to hear the noise but it's there smearing the most exciting nuances of the sound you are able to hear.
 
Finally if you are using more than one mic that needs power sent to it you can consider that tube mics usually each get their own, fully buffered, full size power supply unit while phantom power is commonly split off of a shared and questionably buffered source.
 
Phantom power has always been a compromise offered as a convenience. You can go an extra step and use dedicated independent, buffered, phantom power supplies but you can't get rid of the blocking capacitors.
 
Anyways, I think the bottom line is that you can hear the difference even when you compare a really nice FET mic to an ok Tube mic.
 
Back to the context of what I was referring too, things like ultra low noise floor don't seem, to me, as important as the character of the transient response. Things like frequency response graphs don't even begin to describe the character of a mics transient response. The most practical way to judge a mics response is to listen to it. 
 
Contrary to suspicions I often see voiced, I think that some people actually hear a difference in stuff and then go searching for the reason why. I don't think everyone is blindly enamored with name brand, or automatically reverent of gear because of high prices. I am of the generation that was told that phantom power and solid state was a great improvement, but at some point I heard stuff that caught my ear and it just seemed like it sounded nicer. I think the older guys figured it out sooner because they had experience with nice mics before the era of cost cutting introduced phantom power and electronic designs that were optimized for the ubiquity of telecommunications.
 
I think of listening to it all as an adventure and a journey.
 
best regards,
mike
 
 

Phantom power can certainly be taxed with high transient loads.  Especially with cheap usb preamps which are unable to supply enough current to each microphone.  This is where a high quality, dedicated preamp with an over-sized power supply is a real bonus.  DC blocking capacitors are unfortunately necessary since the 48v dc is running on the same cable as the AC audio signal.  Otherwise the audio signal would be riding on +48 volts of DC offset and that might be a little, well, unusable.  Most jfet amplifiers which create about 15 volts of DC offset will require these "coupling capacitors" or transformers for the same reason.   
 
Some solid state designs from DPA and Sonodore have their own powering systems.  In DPA's case there is a 130v supply but an unbalanced mic signal output.  This delivers superior SPL rating and clarity to the 48volt versions, but you need a preamp close to the mics.   Sonodore uses their own unique 60v "active" powering systems which needs a special preamp and 4pin XLR connector.  Not unlike a tube microphone. 

Thanks Bat, yeah I hope to try it out soon. 
 
Bapu, I might try a ribbon in the future but it likely will be one of the entry level ones. I had been curious how they sounded. One reason I shied away from even looking is because I KNOW eventually I would plug it in with my phantom power on. I wish they would make them so that they don't turn themselves on unless they don't see phantom power.
 
Mike and Daniel, it's interesting to get a little deeper into the function or lack therof in these types of systems. I have noted many lower ended condenser microphones to have their own power supplies. A couple of other factors that I think would be intrinsic to  a set up that works well.  A decent mic cord.
 
When you plug in a condenser and especially a tube condenser then a good cord becomes a lot more important. Secondly many home studio users, including me,  are simply plugged into their power grids with no way to control voltages . In my area we tend to run a little high and this is better than the other way around as long as the voltage isn't overly high. Several weeks ago during a storm we had our power dim three or four times. This seldom happens here. It usually goes completely or it's there. I was really worried that the computer controlled stuff in my house was fried. Thank goodness my studio wasn't powered up when it happened.Luckily everything came back online ok. Really the only thing I can do about the latter is to simply use a power conditioner and backup system. In the real world though few home studio users have it.
 
Daniel it scares me to think that there are some home recordists using usb mics. In the case if USB interface I thought most of those were powered by a wall wart.I guess a few of the really inexpensive ones might use only usb power. I usually think of usb mics as something only a podcaster would use, but it seems like many companies are selling them as serious recording mics. I know someone will probably say they used one and had good results but good results compared to what?
 
In several of the mic specs I looked at the mics are rated to perform at ranges from 11-48 volts.What you end up getting at 11 volts though is another matter.  I believe most decent audio interfaces fall within range wouldn't you say? By "within range" I mean a few volts either way, maybe  10% + or -.
 
Mike , I guess the tubes .vs "solid state" is very populated by opinion and you are certainly entitled to yours. I don't necessarily see anything wrong with either one, just different designs. When it comes down to noise in a mic,  even some the loudest mic distortion in a circuit can be passable in many situations, especially if you work with the signal afterwards. For me at some point ,  it might be desirable to have a vocal signal that has the transients gently clipped by tubes and has some harmonics added . I'm not beyond owning a tube mic as a secondary mic at some point for tube coloration. If the question is simply , do we want to hear the closest approximation to what our ears hear , then I think the FET wins. One real biggie for me is response time and signal accuracy. No matter if tube or not. Inaccuracy of reproduction is mud and it might be a small amount of mud but it's still mud. None of it is perfect but a lot of it is darned near.

With regard to these so called opinions about FET vs Tube mics. I wonder if they are based on any experience with using a tube mic. Ideally it would be experience comparing a tube mic head to head with a nice FET mic. I get the impression that many opinions are just based on reading something somebody said.
 
Take for example; the reviews by owners of both the Neumann's M 149 tube mic and the studio work horse U87 Ai. Those reviews, that reflect actual first hand experience with two prominent examples of the two technologies, that use nearly identical capsules, are qualified as well informed opinion.
 
The phrase "incredible vocal mic" is often used to describe the 149, while the often used phrase "studio workhorse" is meant to imply that the other mic is designed to be affordable enough for a corporation to buy 20 or 30 mics and they will all sound, for better or for worse, the same.
 
In my onion, describing a preference between a tube mic and a FET mic, in the context of vocal recording, as something that is merely an opinion, is a claim that promotes further questions.
 
All it takes it a direct comparison to hear the difference. Any guest I have ever had listen to the two side by side can hear it.
 
That is not to say that some folks may prefer the gnarl of the solid state mic, but everyone can hear the difference on the raw track and I am confident that most vocalists who are actually singing with a full singing voice will instantly appreciate the tube mic. I mention this because, even though it has seemed more like a batting practice, this thread was purportedly introduced to discuss mics and vocals.
 
For the past month, I've been playing and singing in to a pair of LDC Chinese tube mics that were sent over direct from Shanghai. On paper, they are very low grade quality and in hand they were obviously made without any quality control. They were generic and unbranded and didn't enjoy any of the quality control that a brand name distributor might exact. Never the less, the gain staging and tonality exhibits a usefulness that has surprised and impressed me and so I've yet to "improve" them with mods because it as been so much fun to use them just as they showed up. I've been enjoying learning what they can do while leaving the fancy name mics I have sitting in the corner.
 
My initial posting in this thread was an open ended response because I think the effect of the basics of the technology overwhelms the effects of name branding.
 
Anyways... 
 
:-)
 
 
 
 
BTW, if anyone is looking for a great value on a outstanding vocal mic. This one, with the upgraded capsule, is probably the best value on the planet right now. It features an astute combination of cost cutting and premium parts in exactly the most important places and the result is that you get the very best vocal sound for your money. I've got the version with the additional power supply upgrade.
 
This one is the most bang for the buck:
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Custom-UM17R-Blackspade-Tube-Mic-w-Upgraded-M7-Thiersch-Capsule-/121232707879?pt=US_Signal_Processors_Rack_Effects&hash=item1c3a085127
 
tell Stephen mike sent ya. ;-)
 
 
best regards,
mike
 
 
 
edited a few spelling mistakes

Hi Mike. You are correct in thinking that my OP is based on reading a lot and gathering some presumptions based on the info gathered rather than real experience with any given mic. I appreciate your OP on the subject and it's these kinds of opinions I was looking for. Several of you gave some really helpful info on different mics that work well for you and  that I had no direct experience with. I'm not trying to start a tube .vs FET war. There are differences. It seems that there is no getting away from tubes for me, I mean I have them in the two best pre-amps in my interface and I have the choice to bypass the effect if I want to. I have been looking at pre amps  and many of them have tubes, so if you use an FET Mic you have other options besides buying a tube mic. Once again, I see  lots of potential redundancy in mic chains. This isn't a bad thing necessarily. We have a lot of options available.
 
Most of the preamp demos I see on youtube that  concern preamps that are either tube hybrids or include a tube in the circuit for effect add something subtle and I hear comments from users like- " Here is the tube effect, if you mix it in it does this but I either seldom use it or I add only a little bit". Now that was a composite answer but it covers several comments I have heard. It seems to be like a nice thing to have around for some material. If you have a tube stage in your mic preamp or channel strip then is it really necessary in your mic too? That answer is also subjective but I would say no.
 
It is kind of hard to talk about mics and not mention pre-amps and channel strips.In most cases it is a step up from the preamps in your interface. I've been looking around at those too. I'm not a rich guy and so I tended to look at an expense I could justify based on use. Trying to squeeze as much juice out of the orange as possible. I have been happy with Presonus gear and so it wasn't a surprise that I looked there first. Presonus has a few really nice units on par with anything Avalon or UA makes. Seriously if I were taking in a lot of recording jobs then 2000-3000 dollars isn't out of line for a decent mic preamp. These things with their pro grade electronics using the best components and transformers are worth that money.You use it every day, you use it hard...justified expense IMO. I looked a little lower on the ladder. Presonus shot themselves in the foot going to the Studio channel from the Eureka. In that change we lost the transformer and got a less effective EQ and compressor,yeah it is less expensive but money isn't everything. Any user review of either one shows that the compression and EQ are usable but not in a way that would justify not using either ITB so I started looking for something else that would give better bang for the buck.
 
I had known about the ART MPA 2, comes in two flavors with  SPDIF costing a little more than the one without. Since I don't have  SPDIF on my interface I looked at the PRO MPA 2, not to be confused with the PRO VLA 2 which is a nice compressor. If a compromise was made to lower price compared to the heavy weights on this box (and we know it was) then from most respectable user reviews it would appear that the compromise is really hard to find or almost not detectable. You get TWO mic preamps, an impedence control, even an M/S button and a tube coloration circuit for a great price.Users report that you can upgrade this thing with something like a few Mullard  or RCA 12AX7 tubes. These boxes have been around for awhile and so hopefully the bugs are pretty much worked out. In a blind listening test the ART MPA 2 won or went head to head with some really expensive preamps.
 
I went to an online auction site and found a store where they had them for a decent price. Then I contacted the store through chat and managed to get them to knock more off as I went directly through them. I payed less than what many of these things are selling for used on the auction site...if you want contact info PM me. I'll be glad to send you a referral, that is unless I get 500 PMs lol.
 
 

Hi Tim,
 
I just wanted to mention a few things to you on the tube stuff. It's really personal preference. If I want coloration (which is rare for me going in) I'll do it non-destructively in Sonar for most everything UNLESS I need something specific that must be done going in.
 
With mic's....it's the same old fight like tube amps vs tranny amps. The only right is what's right for an individual. Tube mics have a place, but not everyone likes them and not everyone hears them as "good" or "better". I hear them as "different and dependent on the voice". If I have a client in my studio that likes the sound of our Focusrite pre over our Manley tube pre....who's opinion matters most? Same with a mic. It either sounds good on a voice, or it doesn't. None of the science matters to me really. I see that part as being something people WAY over-think. Something either sounds good or it doesn't. If the sound that doesn't sound quite there yet has some good qualities about it...by all means, mod it and experiment until you get what you want and of course make sure the reason for something not sounding good is due to your personal preference and not an actual problem with a piece of gear/power etc.
 
Not everyone is in love with "warm analog tone" that most times, doesn't accentuate the nice low end or air highs the same way as digital or non-tube gear. I got clients that swear by this old stuff...yet it's always got some sort of noise going on in the back and to me, just sounds dull. Like it just lacks excitement in the upper end. Sort of vintage and 70's. Nothing wrong with that...but my ears prefer a bit more excitement up high and a tight bottom that isn't saturated due to the tube. I mean ok, they may be pushing things a bit...but these are really good engineers with credibility that are pretty known. I just can't imagine me NOT being able to get close to something they swear by without noise.
 
Quick example on the power of today that's a bit off track but....I've used tube amps my entire life for my guitar rig. I'm a die hard tube man because to me, the sound I need comes from 12AX7 tubes. I don't need that output power tube sound. That's old plexi type stuff...and as much as I love Van Halen and tones like that, it's not for me. I like a pre amp that drives the sound so it's more modern and sort of processed sounding drive wise. I like a sound that doesn't have to be so loud, you have hearing damage. And last but not least which is my point here...I now use the Fractal Audio Axe Fx II and cannot tell that it's not 12AX7 driven. The modeling in this thing is so ferocious and realistic, it literally modeled my best amps and tones to the point of picking up every nuance of the tone. I sat here comparing my amps to the tone matching I did of my amps inside it. I cannot tell a difference and actually like the AxeFx a little more. It has a certain something for the better that I can't explain.
 
That said, you use what gets the job done. The problem with tubes (not really a problem, but you'll see what I mean) is nothing in the software world can simulate what they do quite right. The same with tube pre's (although UAD has had some really close alternatives....the new stuff they have out is pretty impressive considering it's plugin) as no plugs I have tried to date sound much like an actual tube, hardware pre. So for sure they have their place along with the mic. Think of it like this Tim....as far as a tube pre and a tube mic at once...when you get the right combination (even if you decided to hybrid with a tube mic, tranny pre....or non-tube mic, tube pre) you use it. Sort of like real amps. Some guys like the front end on a Mesa for their guitar tone but use a different tube poweramp like a Carvin...some use a tranny power amp like me because I don't need output tube power saturation.
 
Mics, pre's....all of it is like building a guitar rig until we get the sound we like that works for us. At the end of the day, 30 of us could say Steve Howe from YES had one of the most abrasive tones of all time.....60 people would chime in and say "it was a great tone". Everything with tone and gear will always be subjective. There is never a right or wrong other than what is right or wrong for an individual user really. If you use some strange combination of things to get the sound you want, you're right where you need to be even if Chris Lord Alge says it sucks. :)
 
-Danny

Thanks Danny for your views and opinions on this subject, they are regarded highly.
 
My first experience with tubes was back in the mid 70's when I worked for a TV shop. As is usually the case, people were still using and repairing older technology. The best tech in TVs back then was a modular solid state TV and before that it was tubes so we tended to get a lot of tube TVs to repair. Anything back then was fairly easy to troubleshoot and repair, Most of the time you simply replaced a few tubes on an older set and it was up and running again.
 
 I remember a lot of home owners making those repairs themselves because it was so easy to simply replace a tube and be done with it. Tubes were cheap back then and it seemed like things were much easier than they are now. After that it was modular solid state. We could roll into a customers yard and replace a video output board in less than 20 minutes and be done with it. Then companies started to make everything on one board and then surface mount technology came along and the IC chips got smaller and smaller and did more and more.Most people in the mid 70's didn't know what software was, now it has advanced to the point that IMO Tubes have been emulated so close that a blind test would have most people not hearing any difference. The catch though, is that everything needs to be right in a digital system in order to get that close.Not many of the earlier systems seemed to measure up.
 
So this is what we have today unless you happen to like to play with Guitar amplifiers, old radios or mics/mic preamps.
 
I seen all of this change in electronics over time and so I guess this is why I see tubes as a step backward in some ways yet I can understand why they are used in the things they are in now.Like you say, it is still a great way to get a good guitar tone and give a circuit some gentle clipping. I haven't liked a huge output tube stage in the amps I have owned either and I guess this is why a lot of makers are simply putting the tubes up in the front end.
 
I think any time a new technology comes along and someone is going to loose out on some money then there will be sour grapes so to speak. If they see their share drying up (they being the makers of an older less effective technology) then they have every reason to launch a negative publicity campaign to save their interest. It's either adapt,copy or be forgotten sad to say.
 
The computer market is shifting right now and a new line has come along in the last several years. The touch pad or touch computer. I'm sure there is a lot of discomfort over at say Dell or HP. The game is changing and the game seems to always be changing. Us musicians can decide what we want to use. That old Roland VS880 EX I auctioned off could still make good recordings. I could have kept it I guess but I opted to move ahead with the herd. lol.
 
I'm sure the guys over at Neuman got a little nervous when companies started to make mics that sounded pretty good for a lot less. They are still in business and they still make good mics but how much will the next generation of users associate quality with that name? The game has changed. In 20 more years who knows what they will be using and what they will associate with quality? There are far more choices than there once were. 
 
 

Good post Tim, and I agree. There are so many different avenues to go down, I'm actually happy to see it happen. The folks at Nuemann should be nervous. Though they sell a very nice mic, it is NOT worth the price they charge. Watch for them to start price dropping. These days, people are emulating everything and some really have the emulations down. They may not be perfect but they are close enough to where the only person that would notice would be the die hard engineer. People forget....half of the stuff WE can hear.....can't be heard by the music buying public or the common folks that could care less if you used a Shure a Bock, a Nuemann or a Blue Bottle.
 
I also think that if a person is in business, they should have a little of everything due to how many different people you will have to process over time. For yourself personally or for myself, if we don't like tubes or old vintage gear, we simply don't buy it and ignore the ones that try to ram their way of thinking down our throats. It always seems to come from older folks that will fight you to the death with either vintage gear, what band was the best of all time, and how Page, Clapton, Beck, Hendrix or BB King should be worshiped as Gods by default and everyone else that YOU or I like, sucks. Kinda like Dave Grohl's last album and how he was sold on analog etc. I think it sounded terrible and wound up getting processed digitally....pfff. There is no "best" of anything other than what YOU personally like as "best".
 
Another thing I always keep in mind when gear shopping or listening to people that supposedly know what their talking about.....big engineers don't impress me. Ever hear some of the sounds the big guys are doing that are NOT the bands that got them where they are? People have to understand....9 out of 10 times, you aren't going to fail as an engineer recording/mixing Van Halen, Led Zep, Heart, Adrenaline Mob, Dream Theater or any band with talent. Meaning, you me or just about anyone on this forum with a clue couldn't fail as the engineer with those bands. And if we did, we wouldn't fail any worse than Bob Rock did with Metallica.
 
My point? Metallica sold nearly 6 million copies of that album...it sounded like garbage, people complained about it and the version you get with guitar hero obliterates the actual albums. People don't know if they used tube mics, tube pre's, top of the line gear or total crap. You can chalk it up as "the band called the shots, so that's why it sounded bad" or "Bob Rock was told to forget everything he learned" or "the mastering engineer ruined it" or "the band just wrote some bad songs and should have added guitar solos" LOL!
 
None of it matters. No big wig engineer or producer's opinion matters when a band can sell albums if they record in their bedrooms. That also means opinions REALLY become like a-holes and everyone has one. Do you really think you or I could make Pink Floyd sound bad to where we affect their sales? LOL! See my point? A great band will still shine no matter what gear they use. They shine even more when their die-hard followers buy up anything they put out. So....the advice you get from people...myself included....can be useless and worthless until YOU yourself can experience things for yourself in your realm. Tube, no tube, vintage, modern, use what works for you brother and embrace the new technology IF you like how it sounds as well as what it does. To me, that will always be the bottom line. :)
 
-Danny