Sigh...long story here...

This has been my vocal chain for some time:

sm58 (sometimes sm57) > GAP pre73 > PBC-6A > Duet > imac/logic

It's works pretty well, my vocals are typically heavily processed (lots of compression, delays, eqs, reverb) and i figured it didn't really matter what kind of mic i used. But I've always thought the sm58 was sort of muddy, needed a bunch of eq and an LDC would be a vast improvement.

So, after MUCH reading and researching I grabbed a Blue Baby Bottle hoping it would be good for my voice and acoustic.

Now, something about this mic really confused me..much of what i've read describes this mic as having a "rich and present midrange response" but if you look at the frequency response graph it shows a hugh dip in the 1.5khz range...is that not considered mid-range? I guess it's low-mid.

from MIX review: "Sonically, the Baby Bottle has a very full, rich sound, with a little bump (at approximately 2 kHz) that slightly emphasizes upper mids."

say what?? it looks more like Dimebag's scooped amp!



sound on sound review is much more accurate to what i found:

"It seems to be a very ‘crisp’ microphone, handling transients well on percussion and acoustic guitar, for example. The slightly emphasised presence region means that the mic needs to be positioned and angled carefully if the source is not to sound too hard or edgy, but, conversely, sources did tend to work well within a mix, cutting through cleanly…"

yeah..exactly.

in any case when i took the mic home i loved it, beautiful mic (especially comparing to my old sm58!) i sang some quick tests over backtracks of a song i'm working on and immediately noticed a huge difference in sound. Clear, crisp, open, very nice. But then i quickly noticed something else:

SIBILANCE!

Once I noticed it all I could hear was TSSSS TSSSSS TSSSSS TSSSSS.

No matter how I sang, or where I positioned the mic (pointed down at my chest a bit), pencil, pop screen etc. (I know how to record, I know all the tricks) it was all TSSSS!!! TSSSS!!! TSSSSS!!!

I tried eq'ing it down a bit with a few notches (logics de-esser worked a bit too) and of course i could automate gates and compressors and all that nonsense....but no matter what I did the TSSS TSSSS TSSS kept seeping through...like blocking a leak in one place and having it leak out right beside it. Shelving off the top end a few dB starting at 7000 and also notching down a spike around 8500khz helped quite a bit.

but what the heck is the point of buying a $400 mic if i just have to fight with it to get a good sound? At least thats what i initially thought. I think i've discovered that I need eq band aids in one way or another regardless of the mic i use. I'm just trying to get as close to "prefect" on the way in.

So, phase 2: rent a bunch of other mics and see how they compare..

I'd post audio samples but I did the tests in a less-then-perfect room, and did a separate vocal pass for each one. Not exactly scientific but good enough to find out, more or less, how they sound on my voice.

before i get into specifics here's what I found:

1/ I have a sibilant voice. the sm58 has been disguising it for years.

2/ mic reviews are pretty much useless. 1 mic on 5 voices will sound 5 different ways. you really have to use the trial and error method.

3/ the SM7 might be the exception to #2. maybe the at4040 too.

4/ Apex makes decent mics at dirt cheap prices

5/ eq can make one mic sound much like another.


Blue baby bottle:

I love everything about this mic except for the pronounced TSSS TSSS TSSS it emphasized on my voice. All other parts of the spectrum sound fantastic. I really want to keep it so I'm desperately trying to figure out how to make it work for my voice without having to de-ess and eq the life out of it...it may be a losing bottle, I mean battle. Also it sounds great with my j45 rosewood acoustic. Sometimes the PBC-6A seemed to help sometimes it made sibilance worse. This mic really cut through my dense mixes well though which is why i want to keep it.

Shure SM7b:

Great mic, worked well on my voice, tamed sibilance well. but it sounded a bit..lifeless. dead. my sm58 already does that. the presence-lift switch helped but gave my voice a slightly artificial sound. I'd rather record flat and eq in post. i can see for live radio work it would be good, but for studio recording it's nothing my sm58 + eq could not do. It would be a step up, maybe, but in a mix I doubt it would matter. Took to PBC-6A quite well. I really wanted a LDC though. But this is a great mic that gives you a solid recording.

AT4040:

This may be the mic for me. it wasn't as nice sounding as the bottle but it had much less pronounced sibilance. as you can see by the chart it actually dips right where my TSS TSSS sounds are worst:



more detailed than the sm58, less than the bottle. i think i'll re-rent one and do more tests.

Apex 460 tube: Nice mic, airy, detailed, if slightly artificial and maybe a bit hollow sounding. sibilance was still too much. though for the price it might be a useful mic in some situations. with eq i could get this to sound a bit like the bottle but with less ..balls.

Apex 480 FET: I really liked this mic at first but then it started to sound really thin. Seemed to have a hole around 5khz, lacked presence. It needed a lot of eq. But, like the 460, on some voices this might be a real steal.

So...that main thing I found out from all this is that I could make good recordings for pretty much ANY microphone. Some are more suited to my voice than others, sound "better" when compared directly to each other. Some , like the apex mics, neeed a lot of eq. But in the end, mic positioning and EQ can disguise and fix almost any problems stemming from less than ideally matched mic and source.

I am curious to try some Rode mics and the bluebird...

I also wonder if it's better for me to use a bright mic like the bottle (which to me is actually both bright and dark with scooped mids) and eq down the top to control sibilance rather than getting a darker mic and having to add "air" that it didn;t necessarily capture in the first place. (which i seem to have to do with the 57s and 58s). that what i'm thinking. the bottle sounds very clear even with the eq notches.

I think the general rule is it's better to cut than to boost...?

I have found through shootouts that its best to have at least some music playing in a session to decide. You may have done that, I don't know. But, how the sound of the Mic fits into a track is just as important as how it sounds by itself. Unless you are doing VO work, which even then will most likely have a music bed down below. You'll probably have to eq any Mic, for the purpose of a mix. I have found, in general, the more money the Mic costs, the less eq will be necessary. That's just the nature of the low end fight to get everything to sound as good as humanly possible. In my case, I tried for about 10 years to get vocals to sound they way they did naturally with budget mics. That didn't pan out. So now, no matter where I am, I use a nice mic, at least for vocals. Dynamic mics are suitable for most stuff, drums, amps, maybe even acoustic instruments if it sounds good. But for vocals I'm recording, I have to use at least a mid-end condenser....think I just made that up...mid-end. Mid end being like 500 series stuff for pre's, or mics cheaper than a U87 or so. $700-1,750 is my new definition for mid-end. Akg 414 maybe, any of the Lawson mics, Peluso. Cause if Brauners, Wunders, Vintage Neumann's, are high end, then there has to be something in between. Granted, at the studio, I always use a Neumann 67, in fantastic condition for "All Vocals". It just sounds good. I couldn't find any other Mic to sound better for any other reason than special fx, on anybodys vocals...so I just use that. Most Chinese condensers do the sibilance thing. In the case of the Studio Projects C1, I use the brightness as a tool to my advantage, instead if thinking of it as a disadvantage. When I need something ultra airy, ill use that. Brightness comes with low end mics. Luckily, de-essing is better itb than it ever was otb. Of course, there was less sibilance in the world when people were using tape....

Sent from my HTC VLE_U using Gearslutz App

Funny, I have a moderately sibilant voice too, and the Baby Bottle is one of the 3 or 4 stock LDC's under a grand that work great.

IMHO if it's in the budget, 2 other usual suspects (for you) are the EV RE20, and the (discontinued) RE15. Particularly if your recording area isn't fully professionally treated. Also the 635a that's fine on me, but YMMV as it's not quite as flat in response.

FWIW lots of great studio vocal recordings have been cut on a RE20 or RE15.

Chris

i read that from many people which is why i bought it...for some reason it's very sharp on my voice...turning down my preamp and moving back from the mic helps.

i did test with music..yeah i'd like to try some akg mics as well for sure.

Don't blaim the mics, that preamp spits like a camel. My GAP 73, even with mondo mods still spits out major league silibance on most any mic, mics that sound beautiful through cleaner preamps.

The major source: the chi-com output transformer. It also robs the unit of low end and smears the midrange badly.

Install a Jensen JT-123-BMCF and those problems go away.

#1 the mic matching the voice of the artist is the most important aspect of recording proper vocals. Some $8,000 mics don't match certain voices.

#2 low end converters really hurt in the vocal tracking process. the "blanket", "harsh artifacts", etc.

#3 proper mic technique does help in reducing sibilance.

#4 over compressing and over eq'ing a mic that does not fit your voice are the main causes of sibilance. That and inexperienced engineering/tracking in general.

#5 Don't get sucked in by frequency response charts unless you have a frequency graph of your voice. You can generalize and say using a mic that boosts in the 2k-3k you will have to notch out some 2k-3k to avoid the nasal tone in that range. But it all depends on the voice.

#6 Cutting frequencies work much better than boosting frequencies. Being general again and not knowing the voice ie: If you tone down some 3k, with a tight Q, you will gain more bottom and not have to boost your vocals at 200hz.

#7 My younger brother bought a $400 mic that is very smooth, non sibilant, and sounds more expensive that what it really is. 3 Zigma CHI Lollipop 251

Good luck.

I agree with Jim. I start noticing some sick sibilance on nearly every mic I used with my stock Gap Pre73. It was a really nasty, distorted kind of sibilance. Switched to a clean preamp, and presto, sibilance was gone! I ended up selling the Gap in favor of the ART MPA tube preamp.

rca 77

rca 44


Will make you sound like you have ten pound nuts and no sibilance.

Your milage WON'T vary

Sennheiser 441!!

I've had no such issue (like I thought I might would) with my AKG C214 running direct into my Focusrite Saffire Pro 40.
Try renting it!

Following up on what Jim said, maybe rent a different preamp and report back! Would love to hear if your baby bottle all of a sudden works well for you.

I own a GAP73mk2 that I pair with my sm7b and just bought a Focusrite ISA-One that sounds amazing with my Stellar CM-6 tube condenser. I'm getting much less sibilance from the Focusrite than I was with the stock preamps in my interface.

I also find that a really great preamp tends to tame sibilance even with cheaper mics. If you get a preamp that retails for $800 and up you will start to appreciate almost every microphone and then you can better understand their useful qualities, yes, even the SM7B *gasp* and you will probably love your sm58 a whole lot more too.

But don't let sibilance stop you from making good music. Most people will forgive a little sibilance if your song is worth it. Just do the best with what you have.

Try the ISA-One. It's older, so it's on fire sale prices now. Neve-designed. MSRP $799 but I picked a new unit up at the advice of some way sluttier Gearslutz at $355.

According to the response graph for the 3 Zigma 251, there's a peak at 5k, dip at 8k, and another peak at around 14k. In other words, it's similar to the AT4040, but probably smoother, since the first peak on the 4040 is at around 7k.

I would agree that the preamp could be a big part of the problem. Slow attack times on compressors can also bring out sibilance.

i do notice a difference between using the pre73 and the duet pre...duet seems a bit clearer, slightly less sibilant maybe, and i don't seem to need as much gain to drive the mic.

will try renting a higher end preamp see what it does.

thanks!