I did, they're not having any of it, they steadfastly believe LDCs are *not for use on stage*... despite the obvious example that such a product already exists (i.e. the AE5400)...
I can quote the entire convo if you like:
//
Me:
Hi,
Call me crazy if you like.
But do you think it might be possible for me to mount one of your LDC capsules/kits pointing upward in a mic body, so as to act like a normal vertically-orientated cardioid microphone, specifically with
stage use in mind?
As per the KMS105, or (a better example) the Audio Technica AE5400, which simply uses the capsule from Audio Technica's 4050 studio mic - but is itself intended for stage use?
The reason I ask is this:
I sing (
/).
And as you can hear, my voice is loud/deep/full (Oktavist-ish), and very hard to get mics to pleasingly represent (see e.g. the rest of my recordings, which are terrible).
I considered SDCs at one point, but prefer the sound of LDCs.
If I used IEMs, turned off stage monitors, and perhaps added some form of acoustic shielding to the back and sides of the capsule inside, do you think I could somehow get this to work - whether in your case, or a custom 3D printed plastic one?
Or is there some fundamental reason why your capsules aren't usable on stage, but the 105 and 5400 and e.g. KSM9 are?
Thanks in advance,
Cameron
(With my regards to whoever helped the guy in 'Where Does The Tone Come From In A Microphone' [
], without whose remarkable comparison test (PopCan vs U67) I wouldn't be here!)
Sent from my Galaxy
P.S.
Sorry, it was a Telefunken 251 in his video, but you knew what I meant haha.
C
Them:
We’re familiar with the Jim Lill video. I think he overstates the case. I mean, we’re psyched that he loves our capsules, but his audio samples had very limited bandwidth, not much expression, and were short. We’re quite sure the circuit and the housing make a bigger difference than he suggests.
Anyway, the short answer is no, there’s no easy to mount a capsule as you suggest. Even if you fabricated such a mount, the mic would probably feed back horribly. Designing a stage vocal mic is a bigger challenge than simply rotating the capsule in a studio condenser.
Me:
Hi, thanks for your reply.
Haha I thought you might be. Yes, there are limitations to the video definitely, including the obvious fact that he's playing back a sample through a dynamic speaker, and putting the result on YouTube through its own compression. So time domain similarities can perhaps be disregarded, as the condensers could only hear as fast as the dynamic speaker could play, but you must admit the tone similarities between your kit and the vintage condenser (and his kit with your capsule and the fancy condenser) are remarkable. They're not identical, especially on the first sample, but *hot damn* they're close. Especially considering the massive, measurable differences between multiple examples of the same microphone model, each of which sounds and graphs wildly differently, with much more variation than there is between your circuits, or your capsule in his pop can and the vintage condenser!
Anyway, the more compelling/relevant test to me was the bit at the very end anyway, with the acoustic guitar, which sounded really rather nice through your capsule in his mic. I've just double-checked through my Stax electrostatics, so I'm not listening through dynamics and he's not playing through one either, though obviously various things could have happened in between. I really like the sound though (full, and detailed, but still sweet and not grating), and that's a compliment/testament to you - imagine how the original condenser company must feel!
Re. Stage use, surely there must be a way to do it (don't call me Shirley haha). First of all, small diaphragm condensers are routinely used, though from I've heard they may be less sensitive - perhaps due to being this electret type which even i headphones is supposed to not be as good. Fragility is one concern too, though they're surely not as fragile as ribbons, and anyway if I break it - it's on me.
So is pad use a workaround for the sensitivity? Many even fancy studio condensers seem to have e.g. -10dB/-20dB pads, which from what I gather is just a separate circuit with less gain? Is there a tone disadvantage to this? Presumably not, because it's just giving it the same starting voltage, but amplifying the resulting signal less?
As mentioned, the main reason I think it must be possible is the existence of e.g. the Audio Technica AE5400. Maybe i just need to buy one of those, and either use it, or do something similar to Jim - i.e. use its circuit, with your capsule. Are these things all the same voltage etc?
Yours annoyingly
C ❤
Them:
> Re. Stage use, surely there must be a way to do it
There is a way to build a large-diaphragm end-address stage mic. We do not have a kit for that.
> small diaphragm condensers are routinely used, though from I've heard they may be less sensitive
That’s a design choice. One of the ways to combat feedback is to reduce the mic’s sensitivity.
The problems you’d have to overcome to build an LDC stage mic:
1- attenuating the naturally very high sensitivity
2- plosive protection
3- dual diaphragm LDC capsules tend to have poor pattern control, meaning they’re omni at low frequencies, so you’ll have massive feedback issues with floor monitors. You’d need a true single-diaphragm capsule.
4- handling noise
5- fragility
That’s just off the top of my head. Basically, it’s a terrible idea, which is why nobody does it. LDCs offer no advantages (within the context of stage vocals) and several significant disadvantages as compared to smaller condenser capsules or dynamic cartridges.
Me:
> attenuating the naturally very high sensitivity
Circuit from an AE5400, or post-mic XLR male to female PAD?
> plosive protection
Multiple layers of increasingly fine mesh, as per KMS105?
So either DIY mesh, or salvaged KMS105 or AE5400 body/head?
Anyway, why are plosives more of a problem on stage?
Surely they're also a problem in studio, and don't prevent LDCs?
Or is it because one is jumping around/breathing more heavily?
I know I often see pop screens used in studio, but not always.
Great mic technique (singing at an angle to/above the mic)?
> dual diaphragm LDC capsules tend to have poor pattern control, meaning they’re omni at low frequencies, so you’ll have massive feedback issues with floor monitors. You’d need a true single-diaphragm capsule.
Yes, bass is inherently omni, and it presumably picks it up.
What if one were to not use stage monitors (IEMs only)?
Or to cut out the mylar film from one side of the capsule?
Again, what does the AE5400 do about this problem?
Omni dynamics have been used on big stages, e.g. Elvis' RE15.
(He may have liked it due to the omni lack of proximity effect.)
Perhaps they're incomparably less sensitive/feedback prone.
> handling noise
Yes, though this can happen with even dynamics with bad paint.
E.g. KMS8,
- from
1:55 to
2:15.
And SDCs, e.g. KMS105 -
-
8:38.
How does the AE5400 handle this, I wonder once again?
Also do they really have much more than an SDC inherently?
Is this just because they're inherently better at picking up bass?
In the second link he 'solves' the KSM8 problem with high-pass.
But that 61-100hz is exactly what I want to keep with my voice.
Which is part of why I'm interested in LDC over SDC anyway.
In addition to the fuller/more natural/less robotic sound overall.
> fragility
Yes.
But I'm reminded of him stabbing the capsule in the video haha.
So they're more resilient than I for one realised.
And anyway, again - AE5400.
The reason I'm still interested in it though, despite the above challenges, is purely because of how much better they sound. See e.g.
again. The Neumann just sounds desperately tinny to me, by comparison, though it's not helped by the weird EQ boosting they do (maybe people need this when they don't have as much low end as I do? [
/] I just clip the bass end immediately when using anything boosted, e.g. SM58 with proximity). Even on a flat one though, like this,
,, or
- less flat, but good demonstration) it's still incomparable. I mean I'm preaching to the choir anyway, surely, you make these things haha - you must prefer them to SDCs. I completely understand your concerns, but I just wonder whether it might be fun/possible to try. On a scale of easy to hard it goes from swapping out the capsule on an AE5400 with one of yours, to designing a new circuit with the same design as the AE5400 but better chips, to designing a whole new circuit from scratch haha
I mean
maybe I can achieve the distortion (which some say is its only advantage over an SDC) of an LDC more effectively with an SDC + valve preamp (I've just bought an ART StudioV3, but it's not enough by itself), or a virtual effect of some kind, but where's the fun in that haha? I, like most musicians, am a soppy old romantic for getting the 'real deal' and not some electronic (or electromechanical) simulation thereof, if at all possible.
As the following short hilariously takes to the extreme, an impressive amount can indeed be done with EQ/effects/chain etc, but still, there must be a point to LDCs... right?
Much love ❤
C
Them:
[no response]
//
I can try emailing them again just asking 'theoretically' what one would use if replacing the capsule on an AT4050 I guess, just to save them being triggered, because supposedly it uses the same capsule as the AE5400.
I do understand the concerns about LDCs on stage.
But I still want to try haha.
P.S.
My IG is the same as my username, and my voice on there makes it clear why (goes down to C2/65hz, but with lots of higher harmonics, and I like the full spectrum clear sound of condensers - and want the warmth/distortion/not-metallic-robotic-ness of an LDC. I've bought a second-hand little Valve preamp (Presonus TubePre V2), which definitely helps add a bit of that pleasant distortion, but I wonder a) whether it's as nice a sound as an LDC and b) whether it distorts in an unhelpful way too.