Early on I tried various mics and found good results with the stick mics everyone recommends e.g. Shure SM57 and 545, the Akai DM-13 and I also have an Astatic 333-6 which I was told has a ceramic element. I find them easy to cup and comfortable to hold for long times - I know not everyone does. But I didn't want to be limited by not being able to use a bullet mic so I bought a Superlux D112C, not because I expected it would sound magically better but so I could learn to use a bullet mic properly - how to cup it effectively and how to vary the cup to get the right tonal variations.
I've read plenty of discussions here about the pros and cons of stick vs bullet mics, e.g. Why Bullets?, and so it seems that there are good things to be had with both types and it comes down to aesthetics, comfort and personal preference. Although I guess if you are chasing a particular sound then you might have to use specific equipment? Don't know. Someone made a very good case for aesthetics being the most important consideration on the grounds that if you love an instrument, you'll pick it up more, play it more and most likely get the best out of it. That makes a lot of sense to me. In 'Blues with a Feeling' (Chapter 8), it's reported that Little Walter had used at one point ...two microphones [wand mikes] that were taped together with adhesive tape... so I guess anything goes. How do you get an airtight cup on that??
In this video Greg Heumann gives tips on choosing a bullet mic, and the issue of hand size. He discusses that comfort is a big factor. The Superlux is on the large side at 63mm dia (2.5 inches), the same as the 520DX, but unlike the JT30 doesn't have any lumps and bumps that would dig into your hand.
In lessons I've learned that hand position is a precision thing both for acoustic hand effects and cupping and the effects you can get from that. In Blues Harmonica for Dummies, Winslow doesn't explicitly cover cupping a bullet mic but he does refer to the chamber you can make using your second finger, curled in between the harp and the grill. And indeed this does seem to be a crucial ingredient in getting pleasing tone variations, taking advantage of little resonances that appear, as opposed to just flapping your hands around.
I have medium-small hands, and slim fingers rather than fat sausages, but could get a reasonable cup after some practice, again using Greg as a guide as to the sort of difference in sound to expect between open and cupped. This is a great video as you can really use it as benchmark for practice.
Holding the mic both hands seems ok, but one handed is a bit awkward as it has a smooth surface. It feels like it might easily fall out. So to do an open cup I've adopted using the heel of my right palm to keep the mic supported at the back. I can see why a lighter, wooden mic would be much better in this regard.
The Superlux sounds very much like the ceramic Astatic 333-6, so in terms of tone there would be no reason to choose one over the other. I tried a blind tasting with the family so I know this to be true. But you can't buy the Astatic in the shops, and everyone says that ceramic elements are easy to damage. So it's not to be relied on long term. I plan to switch between stick and bullet mics just to be sure I can play both, then if I ever did go for one of those desirable wooden mics I'd be able to use it.
And thank you for those great videos, they are very helpful.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 24, 2015 7:01 AM
Glad the videos helped. The mic should feel nice and secure in the left hand together with the harp. Part of the reason it doesn't is diameter, part is weight, and part is simply texture. Although my wood mics are smooth, there is something about lacquer that just feels a lot more grippy than painted metal, which is again better than chrome (the worst.)
My cupping has been getting better for many years. It is better today than it was when I made those videos. It takes practice - but knowing the goals up front will help you learn faster. Wish someone had told me!
Small hands, try a Turner type shell. They are on Ebay if you want to look. These typically have a fin on the top that most folks reduce or cut off. Going to this shell helped my tone a lot. I think it is the crystal mic element which is fragile, not the ceramic...BN
"But you can't buy the Astatic in the shops, and everyone says that ceramic elements are easy to damage. So it's not to be relied on long term."
I dunno that I'd say that. I have a couple mics with ceramic elements in them. They hold up well. Ceramic elements are simply artificially made crystals with better durability and resilience to temperature & environmental changes.
It's the crystal elements you really have to watch, because they don't take kindly to extreme cold or heat, humidity, or sharp changes in either/or. And all it really takes is one drunk at a show knocking the mic to the floor for the crystal to shatter because they're more fragile than an emo-kid's self-esteem. I have a friend with an early Shure brown bullet who suffered this very mishap at a gig, and now the Brush crystal's output has been reduced to about 20% of what it used to be.
But BN hit the nail on the head just now. Ceramics can take a little more abuse and exposure to the elements (no pun intended). Yes, there are some noticeable tonal differences between the two, and not every ceramic is gonna be as loud or tasty-sounding as the next, but you have to make the trade somewhere unfortunately.... ----------
The ceramics Gap is talking about are not the same as an MC127. There about 3/4"-1" in diameter and they hold up a lot better than the bigger ceramics. Most of those small stick mics still work, both crystal and ceramic.
There good elements, but they don't have the tone or bottom end of their big brothers.
Greg - Yes, I'm sure that varnished wood would feel more secure. I can see all those factors (size, weight, grip) have an effect. My hands aren't exactly small, so it's the weight and slipperiness that are the issues I think. It's interesting finding these things out.
Thanks for the info on the ceramic element, I didn't know that, I thought they were fragile. Yes it's a small stick mic, as in the photo above. And yes, it's quite trebly but I quite like that.
"There good elements, but they don't have the tone or bottom end of their big brothers."
"Yes it's a small stick mic, as in the photo above. And yes, it's quite trebly but I quite like that."
There's a couple ways to get some better low end and tone through them though. Greg told me about this recently....
One is to fix a small ceramic disk cap across the element terminals or the signal leads of the volume pot (if applicable) to allow for more bass to get through by rolling off the highs. Like 0.01uF or even 0.1uF. Shakey has been known to do this on his crystal element Shakers.
The other thing you can do, which I did on the MC-564-1 in my JT30, is fix a 1M ohm resistor between the leads, which in parallel drops the visible impedance of the element by a meg or two. Closer matching impedance to the amp can allow for better tonal response.
Before I swapped out the stock cap in my JT30 for a higher value one, the mic was extremely hot and shrill. I bumped the value up to a 0.1uF, but it was still way hotter and high ended than I would've liked. I called Greg about this because I had concerns that the volume pot in the mic may have been too high-Z for the element. He recommended I try the resistor across the terminals. Lo and behold...he was right. She's still a hot sumbitch, but she's more tame and sounds much deeper in tone than she did before. ----------
Thanks for the tip. Something cheap and simple to try maybe with an external inline box, rather than take the mic apart - which looks quite difficult to me.
Talking of which, that's another issue. That little astatic has a captive lead which if/when it goes might be tricky to repair, whereas I get the impression that a bullet shell in general is more accessible for maintenance? I've not taken the Superlux apart yet but it does at least have screws holding it together.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 25, 2015 2:34 AM
Here is a NON fragile, NEW element that sounds GREAT. Gaskets available to fit Turner, JT30, Shure Bullet, T3, BlowsMeAway Mics..... Seriously. Before you sound a bunch of money on a crystal or ceramic that might die tomorrow (and in my experience, I have to differ with hawkeye - I don't think they're any more reliable - they were just two different chemical formulations of man-made crystals) Consider The Heumann Element.
The Heumann Element is a high impedance dynamic element made from a modern vocal mic element to which I have made both mechanical and electrical modifications. It has big, fat tone with plenty of bass. Ronnie Shellist says it reminds him of a Ceramic element but with more output. It sells for $159 and is available now.
This is a really, really good element! I ain't lyin!
Agree to disagree? Works for me. ;-) All I know is that out of the three crystal mics I've owned, they were all dead within a year of purchasing them. Whereas my ceramics are all still going strong.
@ MTG
The Superlux design has been issued under at least three different names that I know of...Superlux D112/C, the Digital Reference Red Howler, and the Peavey H-5 and H-5C "Cherry Bomb". They all have the same basic overall size and general shape as a Green Bullet but with flattened sides and grip grooves on the top. The Superlux and the Howler are pretty much identical aside from difference in color. The Peavey has an on/off switch added, and a STUPID mini-XLR disconnect jack instead of a hardwired cable. I have one and the mini-XLR cable went bad on me no less than three times and I had to send it back in under warranty.
But getting into the bullet housing itself is easy. Just take the screws out of the sides of the grille and you're in. But the wires they use inside are very thin gauge and delicate. One wrong move can pull one loose and then you're pretty much screwed unless you can solder a new wire in its place. The impedance transformer is mounted directly to the backside of the element. Overall though, its a pretty easy shell to modify and play with.
@ Cotton
The only Shaker I have is an early-issue Retro Rocket. It was nice while it lasted...strong output with moderately bright tone...but as I said earlier, it's one of the three crystal mics that went dead within a year. I think Shakey has since changed the RR to carry a dynamic element instead. ----------
HawkeyeKane - Thanks for the info. Because of that I had to take it apart, and indeed the wires are very fine. Do they really need to be that thin? It's not as if they are in a twisted pair, so I can't see the merit in it.
On the plus side, the captive cable is secured with a screw terminal and there is a grub screw at holding it firm so I hope it would be quite robust, but repairable if damaged.
Greg - I had a listen to the six mics demoed in your link Serko Niemenen 'average guy' element comparison and to me they all sound more similar than they are different if you know what I mean. Which might mean I'm looking at all this with less subtlety than you guys. Or maybe the differences don't come across strongly on a YT video, or maybe they really are all fairly similar in which case it does suggest the choice should be about comfort and aesthetics. I'm not sure what to think.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 26, 2015 1:46 AM
I should have added the obvious point that, in the video, the Heumann element sounds very much like the other classic, vintage microphones. With the caveat that I may not be listening out for the particular features you experienced players rate highly. I'd be interested to understand what they are.
It's not that I don't hear any differences, just that I don't know how you would say one was better than another.
Certainly in all the many records I listen to, I hear a much wider range of amplified tones. All kinds of things from very thick and bottom heavy, to much lighter weight.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 26, 2015 1:56 AM
There is nothing, and I mean nothing, that will ever substitute for A/B'ing elements in person. Period. Although I certainly get business from videos of my gear in use, the fact is that digitization and more importantly significant compression reduces audio quality - then 99% of people listen through their computer speakers or ear buds - come on. You can't tell shit. You want to compare elements, there's only one way worth a damn. Stand in front of an amp and blow them back to back. Not on separate days through separate amps in separate rooms by separate players recorded with different devices compressed with different codecs and heard through tiny speakers.
The best you can do in lieu of that is to trust the opinions of people who HAVE done that, AND know how to play, AND have a track record of giving straight advice.
Greg, what kind of frequency response does the Heumann Element have on the upper end? [Lovin' my new Hi-z Ultimate 57! Thanks, Jay ---------- Music speaks where words fail.
@9000 - I do not know. I'm afraid I don't have the right gear to do an accurate test. But I just used my ears to develop it, and still use them to listen to it. Now, of course, I have the reports of many happy users as well. Compared to your 57 it definitely has less high frequency response and a fatter bottom end.
I've been collecting feedback from the early customers. TBlues of this board summed it up this way:
Great job on by Greg on installing the Heumann Element in my Turner shell. Compared it to a Black Label CR (1250 ohms, if you are curios), that I have in another Turner shell. It has a little more output than the Black label CR. Slightly less crunch than the Black label CR. Noticeably stronger Bass response than the Black Label CR. Fatter sound than the Black label CR. Overall I think it has a better quality sound than the Black label CR, which is of course a matter of taste. Amp use was a Mission Amps Chicago 50w. Greg is also excellent to work with. Thanks, Greg (Tblues1 on http://www.modernbluesharmonica.com/board/board_topic/5560960/5472582.htm) ---------- *************************************************** /Greg
Greg - Yes I see, everything gets blandified in recordings over the web. I remember one of Superbee's threads where the same thing happened, the recordings of different amps were hard to tell apart. The detail e.g. in TBlues report is more helpful in this regard - a commentary by a player.
Back more on the subject of comfort and aesthetics, I tried the Superlux throughout a 2+ hour rehearsal and didn't drop it on my toes once, but would have appreciated a lighter and grippier shell. People said, "Ah, a harmonica microphone!" So a bullet-style mic is clearly an icon to people. I probably used to think that too (before actually playing) - but not sure exactly where I picked the image from.
The volume control was a bit too easier to nudge accidentally. I can see that putting it out the back (like Greg's Stealth VC) would be helpful there.
I had more headroom before feedback vs an SM57 and (when I pushed it for fun) the feedback was high pitched rather than low, and easier to EQ out. But I expect that would vary from place to place.
It all felt good, during play I mean, quite natural. I have to say that harmonica involves the least discomfort of any instrument I've played.
Last Edited by MindTheGap on Feb 27, 2015 3:07 AM
i have a couple JT 30 style mics with VC built in. one has a very notchy VC and that is OK, the other doesn't have the stops and its a pill, i'm always bumping it and having to check where its at...
the best VC in that regard i have used is an in-line control which Greg makes.
Brod Smith (Backsliders, ex-Dingoes, ex-Carson etc.) once told me he considered most mic problems are due to volume controls. i think he said he'd been using a volume pedal and was liking it.
"I do not know. I'm afraid I don't have the right gear to do an accurate test."
Greg, you have an iPhone yes? With something like an iRig and the correct mobile app, couldn't you interface with your phone and get a readout of what frequencies the THE responds to? ----------
Hawkeye - no. First, you need an accurate way to generate a test tone from, say, 10Hz to 20Khz - a signal generator. You need an amplifier with 100% flat frequency response to turn that signal into loud audio, and a speaker with 100% flat (or known) frequency response. You need a way to verify that setup, which means a microphone and input chain with 100% flat (or known) frequency response. Then you need a away to measure the response of the mic under test, and it needs to be done in an echo-free room with no resonant frequencies. In other words, doing it properly needs a lab with tens of thousands of $$ of equipment.
I COULD fake it. I have signal generators, oscilloscopes, etc. But in the end? It's about ears, my friend. ---------- *************************************************** /Greg
Superbee - I thought that having a volume control on the mic would be a big plus. The Superlux only boasts one detent, in the middle. Not sure of the thinking there, as the signal is pretty quiet at that point. Ten click would be better.
That said, I played it in a 'cosy' pub yesterday, where elbow room was tight and there was that minefield of pint glasses and cables. I appreciated not having to move from the spot to make adjustments. Toes still intact.
I could imagine habituating a nervous tick of checking the control before playing.
About 98% of my customers prefer a "smooth action" volume control over the detent one. The most common reason they request a detented control is fear of inadvertent adjustment. And that CAN be an issue when the VC is mounted right in your grip path as it is when mounted directly under the mic like a JT30VC or Shure 520DX. However when the control is in-line like my Vintage Volume Control, or the "Stealth" volume control knob on my wood mics, it is not within your cup/grip and inadvertent adjustment isn't a problem. Then the smooth control has the advantage of being easier to adjust to the right spot. ---------- *************************************************** /Greg
That lines up with my experience. The blowsmeaway inline vintage volume control works well and doesn't get in the way. Pretty good as a feedback protection device too. Much better than a noise gate IMHO. Come to think of it, the mic which sometimes gives me trouble has the VC in front of the lead . The other JT has the VC closer to the rear of the mic. That's probably a better arrangement regardless of detente stops.
Thanks, useful to know. I do take notice of much of the good advice on here! So I've ditched ideas of looking for an anti-feedback device in favour of creative use of a VC.
