The sound! It sounds like farting!

April 10, 2007 2:59 PM

Help me find a good microphone for recording LOUD band practices.

I have a sony minidisc recorder and wish to record my band practices. Last time I tried with a small stereo electret type microphone and the sound was horribly distorted. I'm guessing the room volume was way louder than the microphone was rated for. So I'm looking for a mic that will do the job. The smaller the better.

Any ideas what I'm looking for?

posted by gergtreble to technology (15 comments total)

Never had a problem with these guys. Both for gigs and practice. They can also offer great advice for the less experienced buyer. Testimonials. I don't work for them.
posted by fire&wings at 3:15 PM on April 10, 2007

I think the problem is more likely to be your recorder. It's probably bringing in too loud of a signal and clipping the audio. I'm guessing you may be needing professional gear here, or at least some sort of pre-amp.
posted by rolypolyman at 3:23 PM on April 10, 2007

Can't you record at a lower level? It's doubtful that you're overloading the microphone.

Anyway, an SM57 is rated for something like 174 dB SPL if you're looking to get a new mic.
posted by ludwig_van at 3:36 PM on April 10, 2007

I had surprisingly good results using the built-in recorder on an Apple laptop. It's worth a shot if you have one sitting around before you go and spend a lotof money.
posted by PercussivePaul at 3:37 PM on April 10, 2007

turn down the recording input level..
posted by rhizome at 3:40 PM on April 10, 2007

The minidisc has the option to lower the recording level. I had it down to its lowest level and It was still distorting. Normal sounds were indistinct but as soon as we started playing it was a mass of distortion. Im pretty certain it was the microphone I was using.
posted by gergtreble at 3:41 PM on April 10, 2007

Something I have found that works great for recording loud band practices is just setting the recorder/mic right on the other side of the practice room door. It cuts the decibals down enough that i can do rough demo recordings just using the mic on my powerbook.
posted by miles at 3:47 PM on April 10, 2007

As others have stated, to eliminate the digital clipping you need to reduce the input level which you cannot do with the MiniDisc recorder alone. Smartest solution? Buy a small portable mixer to pass the signal between the mic and MiniDisc. All mixers these days have mic preamps built in that allow you to adjust the input gain as well as monitor the levels so you don't spend your afternoon rockin' out and then realize later it's entirely unlistenable. I bet this one would suit you well.
posted by inoculatedcities at 4:28 PM on April 10, 2007

Shure SM57 and some sort of cheap mixer that lets you control the level.

A mixer like this would be fine, and is only $45. Mic input goes to the microphone, and the tape outputs go to your recorder via an RCA to minijack cable.

Basically you need to set the level so that the signal isn't being clipped. If the MD recorder has any sort of level indicator (even a clip light) that would be helpful, if it doesn't, then you'll have to guess-and-check and see where it starts sounding less crappy.
posted by Kadin2048 at 12:05 AM on April 11, 2007

Sorry, SM57/8 is not the answer to every microphone question.

Recording a band with an SM57, or a pair of SM57s, is going to sound *crappy*. That's a close proximity vocal/instrumental mic.

I highly recommend the Audio-Technica AT822 or 825 (phantom powered) stereo condenser mics. They run about $25 ($350 for the 825) and have a low rolloff setting that cuts bass frequencies only, where most of the energy is in your band practice room. I've recorded extremely loud concerts with that mic successfully. But of course you do need input level control.

Another trick: tape the mic to the lead singer's mic stand, pointing *away* from the singer, toward the imaginary audience. You'll pick up reflected sound in front.

Another hint from an aging guitarist who made the same mistake you are making: don't rehearse so f**king loud. That's what amateurs do, and it destroys their hearing. It sounds great loud, because you can't even hear all the screwups, which may be why you need to listen to a recording of your practices in the first place. If you can't record it clean, it may not *be* clean in the first place. Ever consider that your band sounds distorted live and in person?

Many pro rock musicians practice at much lower volumes than they perform. And they've got pros to worry about the gear.
posted by spitbull at 4:53 AM on April 11, 2007

Whoops, $250, not $25, for the AT822. Don't I wish.
posted by spitbull at 4:54 AM on April 11, 2007

Recording a band with an SM57, or a pair of SM57s, is going to sound *crappy*.

No crappier than what he's got now. I didn't think he was trying to make a great recording here. The SM57 wasn't made for vocals, and I've never heard of it being a "close proximity mic." It's a microphone - it picks up the sound that hits it. It's also cheap, rugged, and good for many other applications which the OP might use it for.

But sure, the $250 pair of condensers is probably decent, too.
posted by ludwig_van at 10:32 AM on April 11, 2007

You might be able to get a listenable recording by putting a towel over the mic. We've had some success with this using a very old cassette recorder, but it isn't anything you'd want to share outside the band.
posted by InfidelZombie at 10:38 AM on April 11, 2007

SM57s and 58s are optimized for a signal occurring within a few inches of their capsules. They are thus close proximity mics. That's why you hang a 57 over the guitar amp, or sing into a 58.
posted by spitbull at 2:20 PM on April 21, 2007

Late return to the thread to point out that while, technically, the SM57 is the "instrument" version of the SM58, which is the world's gold standard for a durable, good-sounding vocal mic, they have *exactly* the same capsules, and a 57 works quite well as a vocal mic in a pinch.
posted by spitbull at 10:06 AM on June 2, 2007