Giant Squid Mircophones

sinfonian · Post by **sinfonian** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:14 am

I took delivery on a Foxtex MR8 digital recorder yesterday. As I suspected the built in microphone kept me happy for a bout 15 minutes. I am looking at getting a Omnidirectional Powered Stereo Microphone from Giant Squid (http://www.giant-squid-audio-lab.com/gs ... ttery1.htm) . This seems for the price ($90 plus $12 for XLR connectors) to be a great microphone for recording tuba (20Hz to 20KHz). I have a couple of questions:

Should I get the fixed "Bass Roll Off" option or would this defeat the purpose of getting a mic to record Tuba?

Where is the best placement of these mics to record tuba?

Am I going to be unhappy with the small size of these mics in the long run?

Is there something better I should consider for under $200 for a pair? Most Mics I looked at that had a 20Hz bottom seem to be over $200 each.

I should probably add that I had three purposes for getting this setup:

Record my own practice
Record my children's band concerts and solo contest etc.
Record small family ensembles (at Christmas we have a 10+ mixed exteded family ensemble)

Thanks in advance for your help.

Phil Dawson · Post by **Phil Dawson** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 10:08 am

Ben had many good points. Good mics just like good horns are not cheap. Why do you want an omnidirectional mic? Mic placement varies depending on the size of the room, the mic, and the type of sound you want to capture. Good mics under $200 are hard to find but you might see if you could find a used Shure SM81 in that price range. To find out more about microphones you might check out the microphone guides from Shure and Audio-Technica. These can be found on line.
Good luck, Phil

dtemp · Post by **dtemp** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 4:56 pm

Since that Fostex only has mono inputs, I don't think a stereo microphone would do much good. Your best for stereo recording would be two seperate micrphones.

FWIW - I've been a fan of using an SM57 for basic self recording. I think it works just fine.

For more "professional" sounding recordings, I'll throw in a high quality dynamic mic, but usually there are a pair of 57s as well.

d(whose "recording business" has been flooded with recording tubas lately)temp

sinfonian · Post by **sinfonian** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:11 pm

dtemp wrote:Since that Fostex only has mono inputs, I don't think a stereo microphone would do much good. Your best for stereo recording would be two seperate micrphones.

For an extra $12 they can add two male xlr connectors instead of stereo plug.

It sounds like I should go for a pair of SM57s. I think the 40Hz bottom should be prettly close to as low as I normally go. I can always add a low response condensor later if I build up my bottom better.

dtemp · Post by **dtemp** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 9:30 pm

The 57 should be able to pick up almost anything.

I've recorded The Ride, Prok 5, Fountains, etc. without any trouble.

Good luck.

tubajoe · Post by **tubajoe** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:18 pm

SM57's are more for live performance than for recording -- recording with them *can* be tinny compared to mics that are made for actual recording.

But, they are fairly cheap and very durable. They can even still work well after smelling like stale beer and cigarettes.

for not too much more there are the SM88 (I think?!?!?... the long skinny silver ones) that work great for recording (for a low priced non-tube, non-ribbon etc)

Take to someone that is a recording engineer (are there any on here?)
might be able to suggest the latest and greatest bang for your buck.

If you are friendly with one, you might be able to take your horn and your recorder and try a few (stores might allow that too that's what I've done with effects etc)

Phil Dawson · Post by **Phil Dawson** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 9:40 am

There is nothing wrong with the Shure SM57. They are a great mic for the price and they are very durable. That being said they are also not very sensitive. The nature of the design of dynamic mics makes them less sensitive than a condeser mic. You will not get the fine detail of attacks and tone color and warmth with an SM57. As for the 40Hz low limit you must not ever play pedal tones. If you don't you need to practice them. The low E below the staff (lowest note on the string bass is at 43Hz). Mic selection and placement is a major part of the art of recording music. A bit of research and study is in order if you wish to make an enlightened choice. Isn't that true with most everything?
Good Luck, Phil

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 12:37 pm

Phil Dawson wrote:There is nothing wrong with the Shure SM57. They are a great mic for the price and they are very durable. That being said they are also not very sensitive. The nature of the design of dynamic mics makes them less sensitive than a condeser mic. You will not get the fine detail of attacks and tone color and warmth with an SM57. As for the 40Hz low limit you must not ever play pedal tones. If you don't you need to practice them.

I'd recommend several mics and a mixer over a single stereo mic if what you're doing is cutting a CD for distribution. Getting recording balance right on a quintet is pretty difficult and sometimes it's useful to make sure that the horn can be heard well, for example.

That being said, our rehearsal recording setup uses a couple of SM-57s on booms and the results are good enough for reviewing what we've done.

All of that aside, don't pick a mic based on what you think the frequency of a pedal note is. Pedal notes contain almost no fundamental (and besides, the human ear is much less sensitive at very low frequencies). If you were recording a pipe organ, that would be a different matter.

FWIW.

If you're going to cut and sell a CD, make sure you've got mechanical rights from the copyright holders of the works. Owning a piece of music doesn't imply that you also own all rights.

Phil Dawson · Post by **Phil Dawson** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 6:32 pm

Please cite your source as to sound one hears when a pedal tone is played by a tuba. When I play pedal tones I can sure hear the fundemental and when another instrument such as a string bass or bass trombone plays the note an octave above my note the pedal is still quite pronounced. If the fundemental wasn't audible then the sound would just blend with the other instrument and not be heard as a distinct pitch because the first overtone above the pedal is at the octave. If a mic has attenuated responce in the pedal register such as the SM57 then all you will capture is the first overtone and above which should concern any and every tuba player if they care about their low register.
Phil

tuba_bloke · Post by **tuba_bloke** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 8:23 pm

If you search well, you may be able to find an old post where Al Baer talks about the Giant Squid Mics....

Good Luck!

Allen · Post by **Allen** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 8:59 pm

Phil Dawson wrote:Please cite your source as to sound one hears when a pedal tone is played by a tuba. When I play pedal tones I can sure hear the fundemental and when another instrument such as a string bass or bass trombone plays the note an octave above my note the pedal is still quite pronounced. If the fundemental wasn't audible then the sound would just blend with the other instrument and not be heard as a distinct pitch because the first overtone above the pedal is at the octave. If a mic has attenuated responce in the pedal register such as the SM57 then all you will capture is the first overtone and above which should concern any and every tuba player if they care about their low register.
Phil

Rick Denney has some interesting information about the spectral components of tuba sound at
http://www.rickdenney.com/the_tuba_sound.htm
although he does not cover tuba pedal tones.

The notion of synthetic pedal tones is quite well-known in the pipe organ field. See, for example
http://www.organstops.org/r/Resultant.html

Essentially, if all (or many) of the harmonics of a low tone are present without the actual fundamental, humans will perceive that the fundamental is present. Indeed, in some pipe organs with a synthetic 32' stop (going down to the C below the lowest note on the piano) that contains NO fundamental sound may vibrate the floor just like a real one (via the mechanism of frequency mixing in a non-linear medium).

Our perceptions are not a reliable guide to what is actually physically present in sound. A good grade technical microphone (with frequency response from say 5Hz to 100kHz) and an electronic spectrum analyzer will show that the pedal note of a tuba contains no fundamental.

The only wind instrument that can create appreciable amounts of low fundamentals is a pipe organ -- and only certain stops at that. And if your tuba weighed as much, and you could access a few horsepower worth of wind, you too could generate fundamentals in the 16Hz to 32Hz range!

Cheers,
Allen

Chuck(G) · Post by **Chuck(G)** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 12:01 am

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/brassac ... html#pedal

sinfonian · Post by **sinfonian** » Mon Mar 06, 2006 9:14 am

Thanks to all who gave me a lot to think about.

I decided not to go with the Omni-Microphones and buy a pair of SM57s. After Phil's comment that the E below the staff for String Bass was at 43Hz (and since the String Bass sounds an octive lower then written) it is very seldom that I worry about going much below that, the fact the SM57s don't need phantom power and I could buy 2 new for less the $200.

I know the condensor mics would probably be better but I didn't want the extra expense of a phantom power supply for now.

With the e-bay market now days if I find that I want to upgrade later I can always sell these and buy more sensative mics of course I would

Once again thanks to all for their comments.