Hello,

I would be interested what microphone would be good option if I would need as low proximity effect as possible, more scooped 500-700kHz and with smooth high end to avoid sibilance?

Talking about proximity, I know about distance, but I have two clients which have huge proximity effect even standing 40-50cm from mic and both of them sound boxy in 500-1000kHz. Also, I know about Re20, Sm7b but they sound a little bit boring, I am thinking maybe there could be some better options?

I am thinking about LA320, WA47 or WA251 or maybe LEWITT 440?

And maybe I should combine the mic I get with some specific preamp which could smooth hard sounding low end/mid range and sibilances?

Thank you!

The solution is if you are using a condenser, is to put it omni and record that way. It will smooth out the response (will usually make it flatter), so much so that you can record without a pop filter if you choose (which sometimes makes the vocals sound boxy).

Only issue is you best have a nice space to record the vocals in, because omni will pick up any anomalies in the space.

If they're some distance from the mic, you're not hearing "proximity effect" which by definition only happens when people are close to mics, they just have boxy sounding voices

Plus the room maybe coming into play more. If I were a gambling man, that's where my money would be regarding the boxiness the OP is experiencing.

Yes, you are all correct. It's already not proximity but vocals have very huge low end, even if they rap in calm and not aggressive manner. Also, I agree that they have already quite boxy voices and low's treatment in the studio is not the best it could be. So maybe I should change the question which microphone would at least not even increase/emphasize the boxyness and low end on the vocals and make it sound more smooth? For example, does tube microphones would even increase low end or smooth it out? There is quite noticable difference if we record with TLM 102 or Rode NT1A, TLM lows sound more huge recording in same condition, so I believe there should be some more options with could smooth it out more

The first reply nailed it. Use an omni mic.

Okay guys, just the problem I still don't have microphone which has Omni pattern. What would you recommend that have it and sound like as described, smooth in low end/mids without boosting it and have nice presence without too much sibilant harshness? As I see WA251 have omni pattern, but I am little bit afraid of harshness with it. Any good recommendations till 800 USD?

I could add that from what I hear from their voices recorded in other studio with SM7B/U47/U87 (originals) I can say that we would like to avoid mid forward mics, because the boxy vocal becomes even more emphasized. TLM 102, 103 even Rode NT1A in this situation gives more nice vocal tone, just sounds little bit too harsh. Would be nice to find something between these options, with little bit scooped mid range, nice low end and presence but not too much, because voices are also quite sibilance. WA251 looks best according to my search in this case, but maybe any other options to check out?

The Shure KSM42 has a controlled proximity effect and is designed for vocal recording, it sounds very nice, the omni thing works but if you have a poorly treated room it's not going to sound as good.

I would not attribute problems in the 500-1000 range to "proximity". And 50 cm? Your artists are already farther away than I ever put singers.

Do any other artists who come to your studio have this boxy issue?

Maybe you can borrow a couple of mics to try that have multi-patterns?

Personally, I would not be too certain that a mic with an omni pattern will solve your problems. Like several others, I am beginning to suspect the source of your 'boxy' problem is the room, in which case omni could make it worse.

I like this suggestion.

Maybe Austrian Audio OC18 (or OC16 if you're on a budget). Not mid-forward. Some high end extension but not harsh like the TLM-103.

When I said 500-1000kHz I meant the boxy effect, especially in the 500-700 range. I completely agree that 50 cm is a lot, maybe I exaggerated a bit, but let's say 20-30 cm is really necessary to avoid proximity, but what I meant is that even at a large distance, a rather large boomy effect is obtained up to 300 kHz, especially in the fundamental and first harmony. And the performers do not try to do this with their voices on purpose, it happens when rapping rather non-aggressively. I think there is definitely a problem in the studio too because it is completely covered with foam, the recording room is about 10 square meters, there are no bass traps or rockwool. However, when recording performers with higher voices, such problems did not occur. And yes, now that I've looked into it more, I understand that the first problem will be the acoustics, but as I mentioned, I've heard their voice recordings made in professional studios with excellent acoustics and U87/U47 microphones, and we all agreed that the voice tone sounds better through the TLM 102 and 103, because the U microphones really accentuate the unpleasant boxyness/grittyness in the voice itself. Maybe if we fixed the acoustics, the mid-range problem would disappear somewhat when recording with the TLM microphones (but apparently not completely, because as I mentioned, this is also part of the voice, and it can be heard from other studio recordings as well), but the harshness in the high end and top mid range would remain, which is why I think it would be best to have another microphone in the cab that scoops up the low mid range and has a smooth high end with more presence and as clean a sibilance control as possible.

For a better understanding, I can show examples of what kind of voices I record in this case and what kind of performance style, only here are recordings of popular performers who have good technique and know what they are doing and record with the best possible equipment selected for them. In my case, it is more amateur and with poorer technique at the microphone.

first verse half from 0.14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_zY_lmPQDw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rotHDBf2VsM 1.52 verse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIxdqGo4zIM 0.22 verse

If you think the RE20 is boring, wait until you spend a bunch of dough on a preamp.

I like the RE20 because it lets me carve it into whatever I need. Plus they look a bit like a communist spaceship.

Austrian Audio OC818 in omni mode
Electro-Voice RE-20 with the variable D vents

And maybe they also have one other thing....?

Yes, I think they have great sound engineers. In order to become one, I think it's important to find out which microphones are best suited for which vocals. That's what I'm interested in.

True. I was thinking of a different "other thing" though.

Well, it sounds to me like you're facing another engineer task, and that's working with tradeoffs. There is no perfect tool. It sounds like you had a few options that came close to what you were looking for. That's where a good engineer rolls up the sleeves and makes due with what he has and takes it to the next level.

I understand your point of view, yes I am quite new into vocal mixing especially in low male, because I worked for years with EDM music and mostly with female voices. But still, I started recording others and I want to have different microphones, if females sounds mostly good on TLM 102/103, I dont feel the same for more harshy male vocals, so I believe I should have some other options for these vocals. So thats why I am asking for. Advices from people who have experience what microphones works on voices I added samples and described

By the way, acoustics panels and bass traps already ordered, so acoustics will be fixed, so for now I am just in searching what microphone I should add to my cab in this case

My advice would be to work with what you have. You're looking for something that doesn't exist. Anything that de-emphasizes the "boxy" region, as you put it, will have a scooped midrange. By nature, a scooped midrange means the highs and lows will sound exaggerated in relation. But then you say you don't want that. So you have to decide what you can live with, and then use something like dynamic EQ to get you the rest of the way.

Personally, I think the boxiness should be the easiest thing to EQ out, so you could start with some of these other options they've used in other studios, and EQ out what you don't like. Or you could go the other way with something like the TLM 102 and work the EQ (or dynamic EQ) to tame some of the proximity effect and sibilance you're not liking (Keeping mind, by the way, that doing that might bring out some boxiness).

Yeah maybe because of lack of knowlegde something what I say sounds a little bit out of logic 😁 in case I am recording myself too I know for example that I really dont like how my voice sounds with U87 and I much more prefer TLM102 over myself. 103 sounds good too, but a little bit too harsh for my sibilances. SM7B sounds too dull on me too. I know I can use saturators, mb comp, parallel comp, even splitting vocals to 3 auxes low/mid/high and treat everything different and etc. but when vocal already sounds good with suitable mic, there is much more less to do in post production. Also I understand that every voice is different but in my case and I have for now two later maybe more artists with low voices, harshness/boxyness in them and looking for some options that mostly should work on this kind of vocals

Have you just tried a dynamic EQ on the problem areas?

I know it's "get it right at source" but if the source has a lot of freqs in those areas...maybe you can't get it right at source?

Any chance of having the talent take 'ownership' and 'responsibility' for addressing their own impediments? Help your clients understand how they can build control and discipline—or get them to a coach who can.

At the extreme, I can appreciate the challenges of poverty and needing dental work—but that extreme is not going to be solved by a different mic.

Otherwise, I'm not certain why a mic that works on female vocalists all of a sudden turns unreasonably sibilant and whacked on these two male clients?

Fix the acoustics in your space as best you can—as you indicate you are doing. Then try it again with what you have. Get a reasonably inspiring collection of mics over time.

I tend to fault the culture for not pressing vocalists here. I expect most of GS to disagree. But that would be my path.


AmdIamNotExactlyNewHere,

Ray H.

The OP is avoiding having us hear a bit of the actual vocalists he wants advice on recording. So we can all imagine or extrapolate helpful recording advice based only on his writing and on clips of other vocalists using other microphones in unknown spaces. I am not faulting the OP’s intentions or accusing him of anything sneaky, I am trying to point out that specific real examples can result in specific comments and help. There are many good general tips in this thread, but none of them are specific to the OP’s rappers, mics , room or whatever else we might hear in some examples. Does he have a clip or short example of his specific situation?

Good day All,

After reading your comments in this and my previous topic regarding microphone advice for a slightly different situation and after doing my own research on microphones/mixing, I'm starting to understand the situation better. A microphone won't magically solve technical problems, but I can definitely say that the right microphone choice has a lot to do with the "vocal tone" itself, I don't know how to describe it more precisely, but I personally feel a strong difference in how the emotion and tone of my voice are conveyed, as I mentioned when comparing the U87 with the TLM102. Maybe it's just a small thing, but I like to understand everything from the smallest details.

The most important thing is that the performers have dirty and ear-splitting midranges with boxyness and harshness, in order to get the cleanest sound possible, you need to scoop the midrange quite strongly, which is why microphones that pick up the low end better and raise the high end cleanly sound better (at least in my opinion), but again, the "sizzly" high end suits one performer, it sounds bad on another, etc. What I noticed in professionally mixed songs of a similar genre, although the midrange is scooped more strongly by some performers, is the feeling that the vocals are still "in your face", I checked the mono/side information, I notice that the vocals are quite wide in stereo (not always, but often), and the midrange itself "stands like a brick", as if it were a rather beautiful/powerful sound for the vocals, but not dynamic. I also think that the presence of L/R doubles and maybe even quiet mono double adds a lot. But they are combined very precisely and the whole thing seems like one vocal, without going into details and analyzing it, sometimes you can't even notice it when just listening. If you sometimes have some mixing tips on how to put strongly midscooped vocals "in your face", I would be grateful, I shared my insights. Of course, I agree that everything also depends on the context of the music and the song.

Goodbye and good luck!

So it's not proximity effect, and switching to an omni pattern isn't going to help.

This is a classic mistake in amateur studio construction: There's way too much damping of high frequencies and nothing of consequence below. The result is an architectural "boom box". Forget about microphones for now; your first task is to fix this. Put in some serious bass trapping and consider ripping out some of the foam, as well, just to make the room more pleasant to work in.

Yes, a U47 will contribute to hyper-focus on midrange details that may be unflattering on certain voices, especially if the performer has poor vocal technique. The U87, OTOH, is well-known for boxiness in the 700 Hz - 1 kHz range. The studio should have tried something in the C12 lineage. Most commercial rooms have a '414 or two in the mic locker. These days, I tend to recommend buying an OC18 or OC818 instead. They are firmly in the same tradition, but better than current generation '414's, IMO. Moving up in price, the ELAM 251 and its better modern clones are a frequent choice for rap vocals. A '251 has the kind of mid-range scoop you're looking for.

David L. Rick

Someone just got Rickrolled.