well my best mic at the moment is my shure 520 ( 70's mexican , with cm element) , I have one of those Shaker dynamic mics in my harp case as a back up , Tend not to use anything else , unless i save up and buy an old one someday what's your squeeze ?
EV RE-10 is my mic of choice. It's seems many players are switching to the mic. I just sent a couple of my spares to Steve Baker and Howard Levy used the RE-10 on his last album.
I have always held the opinion that bullets are junk and people only use them because that what other people use.
I really don't like my bullet mic. I have big paws, but I still don't think it is as comfortable as when I play through my neighbor's sm57.
I'm interested in learning, in layman's terms, what the general concensus is on what makes a good harp mic? And I'm not talking about individual favorites. I'm sure everybody can say, "I like this mic because...." I mean technically speaking what is the advantages of one over another.
i have a brown bullet with later-60's maybe- cm. it's good but my favorite at the moment is a custom ruskin bullet with a crystal ala jt30.
what makes a good harp mic? that is so subjective past a point. i'm from the school of "run what ya got". and the relationship of mic to amp is a huge consideration, as is style of music you want to play and who you want to emulate.
bullet mics are a bit cumbersome but many of them can be mounted on a mic stand. then with a bit of tweaking at the amp they can be used like that and more hand effects are a definite plus. not having to hold the mic in one hand, harp in the other, frees up the hands for better hand effects.
Surely though, if you don't tightly cup a bullet mic, then you lose the tight compressed, bottom heavy sound that gives you that dirty Chicago tone; that really is the only reason to use a bullet mic. On a stand uncupped, it just becomes weak sounding and because it's omindirectional, it'll pick up all the stage noise.
If you're not going to cup a bullet, you'd be far better off playing through a cardioid, dynamic - like a 57 or 58.
Hey Pauley, last night at our jam we had John O'Leary as our guest player (Ex Savoy Brown Blues Band). He had already set up his rig by the time I got there and he let me use it during the jam. He was using a Shure 545 running through a Crate 50W valve amp with a touch of reverb via a Danelectro pedal and an EQ pedal that he used to avoid feedback. I've have played through 520dx, JT30s, Shakers and lots of other mics and have got to say that this was the nicest sounding rig I have ever played through. The 545 is very easy to hold and cup and although alot more clean than a green bullet, it was easy to get a dirty sound by adjusting the cup.
I have two Astatic JT30s. One that I bought in 1987 and sounds awesome. It didn't come with a VC, but I later had one installed. The second JT30 I bought about 1991. It came with a VC, and it just doesn't sound as ballsey. I think it might have something to do with the VC it came with. The installed VC had no effect on the tone of the first mic whatsoever though. I also have another mic, an Electrovoice that is stored 100 miles away from where I'm living right now. I've had it since the 70's. I couldn't tell you what model it is, but I can tell you it is rather long and thin. Good harp mic? I dont know. As soon as I'm able to test it, I'll post a report...
This topic reappears every month or so. Once again the discussion rolls on, but nobody qualifies their answer to a perfectly reasonable question with "for what" and "for whom".
I have built and sold a lot of microphones to a lot of musicians in a lot of different styles, from blues to celtic to country to jazz to bluegrass to classical. ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL!!
Your choice of mic should be contingent upon your needs.
First, do you want:
a) A completely clean signal that can be routed through digital effects with no input clipping? Think SM58, Lee Oskar's kind of sound.
b) A primarily clean sound but one you can "cup into overdrive"? Think SM57, or 545 - Jason's or Chris's kind of sound
c) A dirty enough sound you might not like it for vocals, but you can drive it into really dirty territory when cupped? Think Kim Wilson, Rod Piazza kind of sound. This is usually bullet territory.
Second,
How big are your hands? What shape is your face? Remember that good amplified tone often comes from the ability to not only seal the rear of the harp to the mic, but the front (unplayed holes). Now, Chris accomplishes this with thumbs up over both ends of the harp. However the shape of Chris and my face and hands are obviously different, because I can't get close to a good seal that way. In my case, I have a thumb up on the right side, and left thumb under the harp. This allows me to seal the left side of the harp with my mouth (TB embouchure), the bottom with thumb and chin, and the right side with thumb and cheek. The point here is that the size and shape of the mic will affect your ability to cup and seal, and therefore is an important choice indeed.
Some people (Jason, Chris) like the smaller diameter of something like an SM57. Me? I can't hold one for long without a hand cramp - it is TOO small for me. However I developed the Ultimate series mics to maximize comfort with this class of mic, and based on sales I can tell you a lot of people love this combination.
My personal preference is a bullet with a circumference on the smaller side. I can get a great seal with all-night-gig comfort. But then again, I play a more "chicago" style big fat blues tone than Chris or Jason. (We weaker players sometimes hide behind a little more distortion because, honestly, it covers up small imprecisions. There, the truth is out, I said it!)
Third - do you want a low- or high-impedance mic? The answer depends NOT on the tone you want or feedback rejection - there is no difference between high and low impedance in these dimensions. It DOES matter what you connect to, however.
For best performance, the impedance of the mic and the FIRST ACTIVE DEVICE it is connected to - a PA, an amp, a stomp box, a computer interface, whatever - should be MATCHED. Low imepdance mics want to see low impedance inputs, high impedance mics want to see high impedance inputs. When you have a mismatch, the fix is simple and cheap - an impedance matching transformer. But who wants an extra transformer in the signal chain when it isn't necessary?
Pick the impedance for the setup you use most often. Guitar amp, guitar pedals are high-Z. PA inputs (XLR jack) are low impedance. Wireless transmitters come in both flavors, and the fact that they have an XLR jack tells you NOTHING. For example, the Samson Airline wireless unit like Jason uses, a barrel that plugs in the end of your mic with an XLR connector, is a true low impedance device. The AKG SO40, a nearly identical looking setup, is actually a high impedance device. The M-Audio computer interface has an XLR jack and is wired as a low impedace device (i.e., balanced), but the load is actually a high-Z load.
Confused yet? Here's the the deal. If you intend to connect to a guitar/harp amp with a cable, or to the same through typical guitar style foot pedals, you want a high impedance mic. If you want to connect to your computer, or a PA with only XLR inputs, you probably want a low impedance mic. If you have something else, ASK SOMEONE (like me) what's best.
About the only way to REALLY know what's right is to own and play, several times, maybe for several years, an assortment of mics. Bullets and stick mics, high and low Z,clean and dirty - to figure out what works FOR YOU and FOR YOUR SOUND.
/Greg
---------- /Greg
http://www.BlowsMeAway.com http://www.BlueStateBand.net
Last Edited by on Jun 06, 2009 8:17 AM
Hi all 1 the reason i posted this up is so to get an idea of who plays through what and to sort of get to know people , As I ma new on this forum , I don't want to trawl through old posts , It's always going to be subective to what people find is the best that works for them anyway, I've tried loads of diffrent types of mic through variuos amps , Thanks also to greg for his advice on impedance matching ,it's all useful ,so anyone out there with an intereseting mic for harp then post! I bought an old Telefunken tape recorder mic a while ago , I haven't tried it yet ,coz i need to change the cable , will let you all know what it's like Also To Oisi , I 've come acros peavey valve amps before , a rocakbilly band I know uses one for Guitar , they sound great! I nearly got one ,but went for a laney VC30 as it was going cheap , makes a good harp amp too!
well the point is, with a bullet on a stand, you CAN CUP IT MORE EFFECTIVELY! and you don't have to hold it in one hand. you cup AROUND it. but definitely like greg said, we're all a bit different and have our preferences.
i have a 545s mic that i sometimes plug into the p.a. and it's really nice for harp and vocals both. low-z. i have a cable with a built on adapter from the 4 pin shure connecter to a 1/4" plug, but it squeals through most bigger valve amps. i suspect the impedance is not matched well.
i'm still experimenting with different mics and have one set to go to greg for a mod or 2 when i can bust loose a few dineros to get it done right.
the other total important component to me is the amp you plug into. i don't use pedals of any kind so the amp and mic have to be a match made in heaven for me. i have in the past used an impedance matching transformer when needed but to me it's cumbersome and can be damaged in the heat of the moment on stage.
2Draw - I don't understand your question, if you have one. If you play through the mic that's there, hooked up to the PA, fine. There's a real art to getting good tone that way and not making people's ears bleed.
But if you have questions, please re-read my lengthy post above and answer some of those questions - what DO you want?
Greg: I recently purchased a Shur Pe35H dynamic microphone which has now become my favorite mic. Its high impedance, and I have been trying to use it with my Samson Airline 77 wireless system, but it just won't seem to work. any suggestions? I have tried everything that I can think of from using both the balanced and unbalanced jacks seperatly and together, and turning up the level control on the Ax1 transmitter. No matter what I do, no sound will come through. ---------- Brandon Bailey
I'm assuming you have the low impedance Samson transmitter - the barrel shaped doohickey that just plugs into the end of an SM58 or equivalent. I'm also using http://www.shure.com/stellent/groups/public/@gms_gmi_web_ug/documents/web_resource/us_pro_pe35_ug.pdf for reference and I'm assuming you have the straight H model that is High-Z only. If so, the signal is on Pins 1 and 3. You need a device that looks for the high-Z signal there, runs it through an impedance matching transformer and sends it out through standard low-Z XLR male. Such an animal doesn't exist on the common market. That, however, IS WHY I'M HERE. I can make you just such an adapter. I can build in a volume control if you want as well. Contact me off line if you're interested.
@2Draw: "Greg I do almost all of my practice acoustic, when I do practice amplified I use a very basic rig a blues jr with a blues blaster. and as I said when I go out I normally use the pa. I'm not a techy person I dont know anything about high z or low z or any of that"
That's all fine - nothing wrong, just have fun. If you have questions at some point I'm happy to help. ---------- /Greg
Random question here- does anyone here know of any major differences between the shure sm 57 and 545? ---------- "Without music, life would be a mistake" -Nietzsche
Patrick Barker, I believe one major difference other than looks, is the 545 is a duel impedance mic, while the SM57 is strickly a low impedance . There may be other differences as well.
Well, I might as well give my experiences here. I've played acoustically for year or so (actively, before that I played some every now and then).
I've used my old "SM58 copy" mic to record harp on the computer and there I've used TonePort USB interface which has XLR input, so I think it's low impedance connector. That has worked very well and with the digital amp emulators I've been able to modify the tone very well for various kinds of songs and styles.
I also tried that mic with my old 80W Marshall guitar amp, but that wasn't very impressive sound. (I sold the amp and look for new one for the harp)
Recently I've started to play in two blues bands where I'm suppose to sing also. The bands have separate training facilities and thus different equipment, but both have SM58 mics. First one has better PA's with some effects like reverb. There I've used the same SM58 for singing and harp and thus the same reverb and EQ positions. The sound is clear and quite nice, but obviously not very Chicago-styled. I think it's still decent for our purposes.
The other band doesn't have any effects for the PA and thus I've used my old Behringer V-AMP2 to modify the harp sound. I've used different mics (both SM58's) for singing and harping. The sound is pretty good, but seems to miss just something. Reading Greg's post I think that I should use high z mic or impedance matching transformer to get the best out of that setup since the mic is put directly to that amp emulator. I tried the V-AMP in the other training room as well, but for some reason the feedback became a big problem and on the other hand the effects were'n very hearable (the room is lot smaller than in the other facility which is basically a small amphitheater stage).
With these experiences the SM58 seems to feel good in my hands and so I think that vocal mic might be my choice of mic. However, I've had no chance to ever try bullet mics so it's hard to know. Perhaps I'll purchase Superlux D112C which is pretty cheap just to get some experience. I've tried SM57 but it felt somehow too small - perhaps because I've got used to the 58.
Another mics that I have considered are the Shure 545SD and 565SD mics, which are dual-impedance mics. I feel like it would perhaps be better to be able to sing to the same mic that is used for harping and thus the 565 might work better. Unfortunately these are just speculations since I don't have much experience about these things yet.
It would be good to hear your experiences about these things.
Last Edited by on May 19, 2009 4:22 AM
Patrick - the SM57 was the successor to the 545. It is true that the 545 is dual impedance and the SM57 is low only (unless you use my Ultimate series mics which allow you to "have it your way.")
More importantly, the Sm57 is a little cleaner with a little better sensitivity and frequency response. It still gets nicely dirty when cupped. The 545 gets dirtier when cupped but uncupped isn't quite as clean. These differences are slight when the current 545 is compared to the current 57. BOTH mics were dirtier in their earlier incarnations. ---------- /Greg
http://www.BlowsMeAway.com http://www.BlueStateBand.net
Last Edited by on Jun 06, 2009 8:17 AM
About the impedances. What does it mean in practise if the impedance doesn't match? Does it mean that it cuts some of the high or low end of the voice, or does it affect the volume, or what?
ps. Greg, are you aware that the www.blowmeaway.com web address has been hijacked?
I think there was a misstype. If you enter Blowsmeaway,Gregs site shows up. Greg, you may have misspelled your own site on this thread. http://www.BlowsMeAway.com
Yesterday I received a packet from Thomann online-store, where I ordered impedance matching converter(14euros), Superlux D112 bullet-mic(48euros) and Behringer FX600 effect pedal(28euros). (Plus a didgerdoo, but that's another story..)
The importance of impedance matching that Greg has been talking about really can't be overstressed:
First I tried the impedance matcher with my SM58 copy mic in the home-made 15W tube amp I got from our guitarist. The difference in volume level alone was HUGE! The sound transformed also very positively towards that "crunch" I like with the harp. It really didn't seem to be the same amp at all, I was really positively surprised.
Then I tested the bullet mic, and I was totally blown away. The volume-level increased even more and so did the "crunch" in the sound! I mean I couldn't turn the volume knob even to the 1/4 and still the amp sounded very good.
Then I tried the effects pedal with the bullet mic and there I couldn't get a very good setting, actually I think the sound was better without the delay (or other effects). The amp itself has very good reverb, so I think that was enough. With the SM58 copy mic I think the delay actually gived some value to the tone, but overall I wasn't very impressed with the pedal. I'm not sure if it was the pedal or if I just don't care so much for the delay - would have to try different pedals I guess.
Anyway, the right impedance really transformed the amp+mic setting so much that it really isn't possible to REALLY try an amp with non-matching mics. I can't wait for the next training session with my bands. I might even give another try to that Behringer V-AMP2 + PA's now when the impedances match. I think I could get lot more from that also.
So thank's for the advices, these minor investments to the tone really make a difference!
Interesting stuff on this particular site and although a little old I guess still absolutely relevant today. As a relatively new harp player learning my way through amplified harp playing I have a few questions for you more clued-up guys: I have a green bullet 520SL CR so high Z. This is cabled through 3 Lone Wolf pedals (close coupling), one to try and get some control on feedback, a delay, and a splitter that matches impedence of the mic. The first amp is a Lone Wolf Harp Train 10 and the second tube amp the splitter feeds is a bit of a hybrid but has a good spec and a nice fat sound. The Harp Train has an external cable to the Samson PA. Questions: 1/ Do the cables have any impact on sound output? They are plain guitar cables. 2/ Am I right in assuming that to eliminate feedback when it occurs I need to get the other guys in the band to turn down, because the mic picks up everything (though I did buy an in-line volume control)? 3/ Can the PA be made to replicate the sound output from the Harp Train? Or will it have other characteristics? 4/ To avoid the fact that the green bullet picks up everything I'm tempted to try another mic. I know of an older Shure 568SA being sold (says it's high Z)so does anyone have any experience/views on this mic?
here lester explains what the best mic to use is. if you like the sound he gets, or others like rod piazza kim wilson, rick estrin, and so many others, there really is only one choice, and one choice only
a jt 30 with a crystal element. nothing else even comes close.
Hi, Kenyukan! Welcome to the forum! You might be better off starting a new topic with your question as it gets kind of buried here. I'm sure you'll get lots of good input. But here goes:
1) cables have impact on sound, imo. Greg H sells nice cables if I remember correctly.
2) well a HT10 is kind of an small amp and will feedback when pushed. Make sure your bandmates doesn't get you to push it too hard. Also if you get run the signal into the PA make sure you don't put it in the monitor to avoid feedback. Good cupping and a volume control will help, too.
3) it will have its own characteristics I'll bet. Try it and report.
1) Once you are past the $1 cables, all of them are good. If you can solder, you can make your own cables and they last for ever.
2) yes, that is a different kind of fedback (I think), because you are not the problem, the sound from the band is going into the mic, and when they are not playing you are ok. You can tell them to play softer, but they are going to play harder in a minute (or less). In this case, try to move arround, maybe is one amp in front of your mic that is the problem and not the entire band.
---------- Sorry for any misspell, english is not my first language.
Greg H. did an excellent job several years ago on a low z mic I sent him, an old new stock military issue Electrovoice. He installed a transformer to boost to hi z, added a screw on connector, and an inside-the-case volume pot. Smaller than a bullet shell but with every bit as much punch and tone. I use it often.
In recent years I changed mics around some. Let the brown bullet go along with the Ruskin crystal bullet, picked up an astatic 332 crystal, which I use sometimes for cleaner stuff, and a Shure 585, which I use a lot of the time now. Good over all sound but the mids are a bit higher I think, and it works well for me.
My situation is 99% duo these days, with low watt amps, either 5 or 12 watt. This has a bearing on what mic and amp is effective. I no longer own a Bassman or other high powered amp, just don't need it.
Last cd was recorded with the Greg modded mic or the 585. Both were very effective in given songs! ---------- http://www.reverbnation.com/jawboneandjolene
my go to mic is Greg's ultimate 545 mic- I also use a shaker mad dog mic as a back up- I hope to get some kind of bullet mic in the near future but I haven't made up my mind yet on which one I will get. I have thought about the copper head custom mic I am a fan of small mics that can give me the kind of sound that I want out of my playing style.
For the harp sounds I like best, if harp only: Shure 585SAV. If vocals, too: Ultimate 58. From time to time I like the sound of a mic with a good CM or CR element, but those two mics above are by far my favorites. ----------
rod pretty much always uses a crystal jt 30 check it out he did not have a harpking for the blues cruise. had to make do with a couple of re-issue bassman's.
My favourite mic is whichever one I'm playing though at the time. As long as it allows the audience to hear what I'm playing then it's doing it's job and I'm happy.
he plays loud, if you mic it, he has to turn down i think he is ok with that, however now he needs a monitor to hear himself. so now the issue is feedback
he has the harp mic, the vocal mic and that damn monitor in too close proximity with each other.
he also stands right next to the piano player and she has a 400 watt anp, the keyboard has a lot of the same frequencies as the harp,so it is best to not be drowned out.
not too long ago he played and i believe the sound man mic'd him up from behind the amp, that way he could turn up and just play the way he is use to. but why have the amp mic'd if you are already plenty loud. lol
There's something I find interesting about the photo on the cover of that Gary Primach album. Notice how he's holding the harp to the microphone with only his left hand. I've seen people here post that it's crucial to cup the microphone tightly with both hands to achieve the right tone, yet this photograph clearly goes against that.
To be fair, I don't recall ever having read that Primach's tone is considered to be all that desirable in terms of the classic amplified harp tone, but I do recall that Kim Wilson also often plays with one hand holding the microphone.
the whole point of posting his playing is that i consider his tone a perfect example of chicago blues tone.
watch the steve guyger video same thing, he is not always cupping the microphone with a tight cup.
i will be posting a william clarke video next same one handed technique.
the reason i am posting all these artist using a jt 30 is, i consider it to be the best choice in most cases for amplified blues harmonica. but why take my word for it, who the heck am i?.
but these harp players all share at least one common trait , two actually. "they all seem to like a marine band harmonica"
Dr. Hoy: Having seen Gary Primich live on more than a handful of occasions, I would consider his tone to be VERY desirable in terms of classic amplified harp tone. In fact, he's among the top 3 most toneful players I have ever seen and did a great job of exploiting the entire tonal range from huge and fat to thin and shrill, all very intentionally and musically.
Kim Wilson and William Clarke are also great examples of spending a lot of time playing uncupped/just one hand on the mic. So I'd say there's definitely a place for that method of playing amplified and still getting superb amplified tone.
