What explains the response I'm getting singing into the body of the Lewitt Pure Tube?

[SubSpec]

As it says on the tin, I'm not certain what is at play here. I was singing with my mouth unintentionally directed at the body when testing the Lewitt Pure Tube and realized I suddenly liked the sound (was not loving the proper on-axis sound for my voice). The effect is immediate and drastic, my voice sounds particularly thin (it is thin) with proper usage, but directed at the body it takes on a significantly different character.

I assume it is a mixture of body resonance and reflection, perhaps more reflection than resonance? I'm really not sure, as noted in the video off-axis but not directed at the body certainly doesn't do that (and you wouldn't expect it to).

What surprised me the most was not that the sound became more full when directed at the body, but that it did so while retaining clarity and detail. I would have expected the combined factors of being off-axis and sound being concentrated on the body would significantly degrade the capture, but it did not.

I'm not kidding, I had all but decided to re-sell the mic when I stumbled on that and at this juncture it is enough to keep hold of it.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

As it says on the tin, I'm not certain what is at play here. I was singing with my mouth unintentionally directed at the body when testing the Lewitt Pure Tube and realized I suddenly liked the sound (was not loving the proper on-axis sound for my voice). The effect is immediate and drastic, my voice sounds particularly thin (it is thin) with proper usage, but directed at the body it takes on a significantly different character.

I assume it is a mixture of body resonance and reflection, perhaps more reflection than resonance? I'm really not sure, as noted in the video off-axis but not directed at the body certainly doesn't do that (and you wouldn't expect it to).

What surprised me the most was not that the sound became more full when directed at the body, but that it did so while retaining clarity and detail. I would have expected the combined factors of being off-axis and sound being concentrated on the body would significantly degrade the capture, but it did not.

I'm not kidding, I had all but decided to re-sell the mic when I stumbled on that and at this juncture it is enough to keep hold of it.

I would conjecture that the effect you are experiencing may either be from the current moon-phase or the meteor that is currently whizzing past the Earth that NASA predicted had a 72% chance of hitting us!!! Or.....probably mic-body and/or vacuum-tube resonance adding in some needed low-end along with the natural clarity of the microphone being a condenser mic!!!

Perhaps this could be the beginnings of a whole new career for you where you design and build a line of microphones that instead of using a capsule diaphragm as the primary audio input source, your mic's use a skillful blend of microphone-body and vacuum-tube placement as the primary audio input source!!! Audio magazines will print stories about you and your discovery for years on end and your name will be mentioned with revered tones during the AES, NAB and NAMM conventions for decades!!! A bust of your likeness will be placed within the Smithsonian next to your LEWITT "Pure Tube" microphone!!! >> HISTORY HAS BEEN MADE!!! <<

Maybe I should just get out some more!!!

/

 

[Khron]

Or.....probably mic-body and/or vacuum-tube resonance adding in some needed low-end along with the natural clarity of the microphone being a condenser mic!!!

That, and/or the (more) on-axis sound coming from the nose area rather than straight from the mouth (some occlusion going on, plus the lower-frequency resonances from the nasal cavity etc...

 

[MidnightArrakis]

That, and/or the (more) on-axis sound coming from the nose area rather than straight from the mouth (some occlusion going on, plus the lower-frequency resonances from the nasal cavity etc...

While your conclusions and deduction may certainly all be true.....they're nowhere as nearly as "much fun" as mine!!! HA!!!.....

/

 

[SubSpec]

Audio magazines will print stories about you and your discovery for years on end

I know it's nothing revolutionary, but it surprised me that misuse of the mic achieved the sound it did without notable drawbacks (in a subjective sense).

probably mic-body and/or vacuum-tube resonance adding in some needed low-end

Okay, I didn't want to be the one that suggested it but did wonder if the tube itself was resonating. I'm set on my new course of designing microphones which use vacuum tubes as transducers!

That, and/or the (more) on-axis sound coming from the nose area rather than straight from the mouth

I hadn't considered the role of the nasal passages, that definitely makes sense as a factor.

 

[MidnightArrakis]

I hadn't considered the role of the nasal passages, that definitely makes sense as a factor.

A-AN-N-N-N-N-NDD.....N-N-O-O-O-O-OW!!! -- IN-N-NTRO-U-U-DUCING THE ALL-NEW PROFESSIONAL MICROPHONES!!!.....

>> SENSE-FACTOR MICROPHONES!!! <<

Available at select audio-outlets everywhere!!!

/

 

[micolas]

It is nothing strange.
There is no misuse of the microphone.
*
I use this microphone technique all the time.
Whatever microphones I use, with different characters, I listen in headphones (which I know well how to translate the sound) how it sounds first on the axis.
I don't like most of the cases.
Then I look for various positions from microphone, in spherical spatial mode, at different angles, distances, sometimes parallel, etc. to interact with the microphone, using different areas of my face, mouth or nose as emission zones or as resonant cavities,
distances from the microphone, etc
This way I get an acoustic EQ.
The body of the microphone generally does not introduce noticeable self-resonances.
Even using or not using a popfilter affects the sound.
In general, I like to form with the surface of the microphone (usually below the lower edge of the headbasket) and with the face (often very close) a kind of partial resonance cavity. By changing its shape and volume, I change the EQ.
All this combined with the direct effect of attenuating the highs and mid-highs by off-axis or by combining the phase-shifted reflections from the surface of the microphone body with the direct sound, allows me to achieve a nicer, more mellow, more musical response, reduce sibilants, etc. .
I hope it makes sense as I explained.
The fact is that it works very well, many use these techniques both live and in the studio.
I consider the microphone a musical instrument and at the same time an extension of the acoustic source.

 

[SubSpec]

In general, I like to form with the surface of the microphone (usually below the lower edge of the headbasket) and with the face (often very close) a kind of partial resonance cavity. By changing its shape and volume, I change the EQ.
All this combined with the direct effect of attenuating the highs and mid-highs by off-axis or by combining the phase-shifted reflections from the surface of the microphone body with the direct sound, allows me to achieve a nicer, more mellow, more musical response, reduce sibilants, etc.

That is a gem, and helps me think about things a bit differently. I always try to approach instrument micing flexibly, knowing what works in the general case but experimenting to best fit the performance. I have not been so flexible with voice. Even when off axis or distance micing I'm always seeking to orient the mic so the capsule is aligned with the mouth. The only exception being that I'll often aim slightly off axis when close micing, particularly without a pop filter.

So, rather than thinking in terms of a line between the mouth and capsule, I'll try framing it more like a triangle between the mouth, nasal passages, and target (which may not always be the capsule). This should be a good addition to my internal knowledge base

 

[steveland]

I suggest one more thing: Mount the mic the other way round with the capsule facing down and body on top. Then repeat testing...

 

[micolas]

I suggest one more thing: Mount the mic the other way round with the capcule facing down and body on top. Then repeat testing...

I tested. In my case it created a more 'curvy smile' response and I got exactly the opposite effect of what I wanted.
Returning to the position with the headbasket up: singing with the mouth oriented towards the upper edge of the headbasket produced some high, airy, slightly more pronounced, but pleasant, which sometimes in different scenarios is beneficial.
Also to be tested is tilting the microphone to the front or back and turning it to the left or right (separately or simultaneously)
For me, turning 30...45° to the left created more pleasant results than to the right, possibly due to some anatomical asymmetry).
Those with experience in VO use these techniques with success, again remind Mark @Wordsushi
Positioning the microphone in relation to the 'artist' is preferable in the studio, in the case of those who do not have a good control of personal vocal technique and microphone technique.
The habit of positioning the microphone upside down comes from the times when the heat dissipated by the tube in the microphone did not have to go up to the capsule to affect it.
And due to the need to have free space in front, under the microphone, to view texts, etc.Some feel comfortable singing if they tap their feet, dance, and all the low-frequency vibrations are transmitted through the support, especially since in many cases no shockmount was used, so hanging from above was better.
I also tested with the microphone positioned horizontally. It provided the most inconsistent, unpredictable, variable results, impossible to control in post-processing