I posted a few weeks ago asking about which microphone is best for crazy awesome distortion, and I've heeded the advice that it's not just the mic but the amp, pedal, speaker, etc. combination. But in regard to microphones, I've decided on some sort of bullet.
My question now is: Which bullet is best for achieving the most dirty, distorted, crunchy, oomphy sound. I'm looking for a bullet that-especially in the lower frequencies but also in the mid frequencies-produces a full sound, lots (LOTS) of grunt and can work with lots of gain well without way too much feedack.
Hope I've conveyed the bullet I'm looking for well enough. Look forward to y'all's responses!
PS - Can someone very briefly describe the difference between Hi-Z and Lo-Z mics? Is it that hi-Z microphones are better for distorting the high notes/frequencies of harps, and Lo-Z's are best for the lower end?
Last Edited by ElliotChild on Mar 18, 2013 11:04 AM
No, high low impedance have nothing to do with with high and low frequencies. All you really need to know is that you want your bullet mic to be high impedance. That's what you amp will expect. ----------
Apparently you´re set on a bullet, but if you want something that, as you say, "produces a full sound, lots (LOTS) of grunt and can work with lots of gain well without way too much feedback," is that by necessity a bullet? My queston is genuine, not polemical, and something I asked myself many years ago, before I shelved my green bullet and thus got rid of some very insistent problems. Never looked back, as they say, after I´ve bought another mic -- also for considerably less money than what I payed for my Shure.
Martin, I am still in fact considering any mic, as long as it can achieve the sound I'm looking for. From what others said and from what else I've read, bullets have a great reputation, but I'm very open. What did you have in mind?
Last Edited by ElliotChild on Mar 18, 2013 12:47 PM
"Tone: It's not the mic or amp it's how you play..."
If only that were true! none of us would have to pay more than a minimum amount for a mic/amp combination... I would respectfully suggest that tone is a combination of how you play/amp and mic. No amount of technique is going to get a real classic dirty tone out of a solid state amp and a neutral mic. I would agree that out of the three technique is probably the most important, but gear is also a major factor! Its time to drop that old chestnut!
The important thing is the element; the shell won't make a huge difference. A lot of players, myself included, prefer a bullet because they find them easier to hold and they like the style. Stick, pistol grip or bullet; its the element that counts. ---------- Lucky Lester
Agree with all of the above. Player technique is HUGELY important of course, but in the end, nothing beats a great old crystal (getting VERY hard to find) or hot Shure black CR. ---------- /Greg
and by technique, it includes not only the technique with the harp, but the microphone technique; I spent a lot of time searching for my preferred tone with different mics, but now I can get a pretty good sound from most mics with a good airtight seal. ---------- Lucky Lester
Thanks DJD - I should have been clearer - that is exactly what I meant. Microphone technique is easy to talk about and much harder to accomplish in practice. It takes a lot... of practice. ---------- /Greg
Hi Elliot, I think it would be better to post a video of the sound you are after from you tube and we can advise you better.
Here is me a few years ago playing through a computer sound card with a Black Lable CR. My technique was pretty rough then but it may give you an idea.
I'm a fan of the napkin theory that tone is 80% player 19% mic/amp combo 1% harmonica. If you buy a bullet with a known good element and you have a suitable means of amplification you are ready to play.
You will pay a little more to get a good play tested element and that insurance may be comforting to you. Random ebay Mics can be a crapshoot.
Big hands a shure 520 shell is probably fine. a lot of guys like a smaller shell for comfort.
I think most people over think microphones and amps. There are really great 1 in a 100 or more elements but most are good sounding. When suitably hot.
I don't think there is going to ever be a person who can say buy a shure bullet or a ev605 etc because if you buy 100 shure 520s probably each one will vary slightly. Same for any crystal and some ceramics as they age and lose power in many cases.
The only microphones that are pretty predictable and uniform is if you buy some modern dynamic like a sm57 for example. The variance is tiny. Impedance transformer to boost it.
Like I said though I sound very similar with any of the bullets I own and aside from how hot the mic is the differences are pretty much slight and could be mimicked by tweaking the eq on the amp.
Also good luck using a bullet with any real output and a "a lot of gain" as gain on the amp end of the equation is even for really dirty harp not wanted in huge amounts. You get to sound like a jar of hornets at low volume and squeal at volumes that you'd be buried by anything.
Last Edited by Willspear on Mar 19, 2013 2:27 PM
interesting thought: if you can have modeling amps, you could, in theory, have modeling microphones, that could emulate classic mic/element response. it'd be tricky making it small/light enough while still being good, but that's just engineering.
----------
Last Edited by garry on Mar 20, 2013 3:20 PM
I like the tone I get out of a cheap Park amp and my basic Shure Prologue if I play with the settings enough. A better mic and amp could probably give me more control (and an on mic volume control would be awesome) but it's all relative. I turn the bass up and the treble and middle down and adjust the gain knobs and reverb. Sound can be so subjective though.
Elliot, this might be a good place for you to start: The Bottle O' Blues mic does not cost much and actually sounds pretty good. You can get some raspy distorted tones from it if you try. It is a good product, been around for a number of years.
ElliotChild, I wouldn't expect whatever mic you end up with to sound like what you are imagining or wanting it to sound like. Especially if this will be your first mic. I've wasted a bunch of money (as others) trying to find the "right mic". If it were me I would buy a cheap vintage stick mic like a Akai DM-13, Voice of Music/Sonotone and practice with it for a long time. Then go looking for an upgrade.
"interesting thought: if you can have modeling amps, you could, in theory, have modeling microphones, that could emulate classic mic/element response. it'd be tricky making it small/light enough while still being good, but that's just engineering."
There all ready is mic modeling software. There is room/places/reverb... the list comes on and on. It is amazing how much audio software has evolved over the past 27 years that I have been messing around with it. What is really cool is working with audio in frequency instead of waveform. And with layers like Photoshop. Crazy stuff.
I disagree that nothing beats a good crystal or CM/CR. I've got a collection of 30 or so mics including several excellent crystals, ceramics, various CR/CM's, other dynamics dating from the 40's to modern. I am all ways surprised/impressed with how good some of the lesser known/thought of dynamic mics sound in my collection. Just as good as any of my CR/CM's/crystals/ceramics. And on some of my amps even better than. My favorite mic right now has a 1930's speaker for the element. Way to subjective a subject...
Last Edited by shbamac on Mar 20, 2013 6:02 PM
Drat, called out. Okay, so there is a silver bullet. :)
It's too bad there are so many steps in creating sound. It would be much easier to isolate the individual parts responsible if there weren't mics, amps, pedals, harps, players... Unfortunately, you can't try different harps at the store (at least not the reputable ones!) but you can try different mics, pedals and amps. If there aren't good stores around, for the price of what some setups cost it might be cheaper to take a trip to a store out of town than to try something and not be happy with it. If you can name people who have or post tracks of the sound you want, people can give you more focused feedback (er, harp pun?- as a complete aside, I've got a ringing ear. The band that hosts the open mic I like to go to had their bass player over playing on a mandolin into the mic tonight, and when he started getting feedback he panicked and grabbed the microphone to try to silence it. Ouch! At the very least, get a mic with an on off, better yet, a volume.)
My best bullet or your best bullet? I have 3, I bought em on spec, they're all different. I like two of them, one I always use for its balls, but it lacks mids. The other has real nice mids but I have to work harder for the bottom.. They both have their place. I like an EV605 shell, but I also like a JT30. Strictly I dunno if a 605 is a bullet, but mine has a 99B86 in it and its not a stick so it may as well be called a bullet. Anyway there isn't a best. Spend some money, make some mistakes, ----------
I would second the "Bottle-o-Blues" recommendation. I use mine in conjunction with a Digitech RP 155 and Richard Hunter's "harp patches". Pick a sound you like or modify one or create one of your own.
I don't know what the effect was, but my friend (ex-bandmate) has a Korg board that has an awesome effect that he used to put on my (rather weak) vocals that made them all old-timey sounding, like something from a 50's car radio. It wasn't microphone modeling, but we used to call it old time microphone sound. (He never really let us play with the Korg so I don't know the setting name. He still has some of our old tracks and isn't being very forthcoming about getting us copies.)
garry, everything happens downstream in a modeling amp. In basic: it takes a signal and modifies or makes it emulate another amp then sends it on down the line. So a modeling mic that could "emulate" classic mic/element response would do the same thing. So there really wouldn't be any difference between running your mic signal through your mic modeling software then out to your amp or having a mic with it all built into a nice little package with a switch on the side that you could flip to emulate a different mic, element. The only real difference would be running it through another piece of hardware/software is that you could have way more possibilities. You could make you mike sound like a RCA 44 and if you where playing in Carnegie hall and so on and so on...
"no, those thing model amps, and cabinets, and effects, things that happen downstream from the microphone, not the response of the microphone itself."
Well that is not what you stated in your first post.
"could emulate classic mic/element response"
Emulating is different than changing the response of the microphone or element.
Last Edited by shbamac on Mar 21, 2013 10:38 PM
Hey there, Elliot Child, I remember your post about crazy-ass distortion. I and others suggested that a pedal might be the way to go.
Anyway, just for fun I put a Lone Wolf Harp Attack and a Lone Wolf Octave Pedal between my microphone and amp. Yes, crazy-ass distortion! I had the HA drive way up and it's volume down. (Part of what is cool is that the two pedals have a different effect, so you can hear the additive effect.) I suppose if you really wanted to go nuts, you could also get an anti-feedback pedal, in case it let you turn the other pedals even higher!!!
Last Edited by TetonJohn on Mar 23, 2013 5:13 PM
Last Edited by 
