I see that the Fireball's frequency response goes up to 16khz, considerably higher than a JT30. It's a commonly held notion that the lower frequency response of the old "dispatcher" mics makes them well-suited for harmonica.
So, have you run one through an amp? ---------- Call me J
It sure looks like a Fireball V, very visible when he stops and lets the keyboard take over.
It is a very clean, full range low-z mic, with tolerance for high SPL, and very feedback resistant. It will not dirty up by tight cupping, though I have achieved a compressed sound by turning it down a little and cupping tight.
I have used it direct to the PA and also with a tube amp, my '61 Gibson Explorer 2-6V6, through an impedance matching transformer. It sounded pretty good with the amp turned up and distorting. The key is that the mic won't distort, so you need an amp/speaker combination that will distort a clean mic input, if that is he sound you want. If you really want the classic Chicago sound, you probably should use a CR or CM bullet mic, but I like a cleaner distortion most of the time, anyway.
I have used my Fireball V to mic cabs, and even sung a few songs through it to the PA. No proximity effect that I have noticed, unlike a 58. I have used it through my Digitech Genesis 1 to good effect, and Richard Hunter recommends it for more modern Digitech modeling pedals. A versatile clean harp mic. ----------
@1847 You are right, Cotton is certainly the Chicago sound! Good call!
He is said to have sometimes used the SM585AV, which is my favorite harp mic, a high-z dynamic ball mic with built in volume control. It will dirty up a little bit, but is still pretty clean. ----------
I find it quite amusing when harmonica players refer to "the Chicago sound". Sonny Boy Williamson I &II, James Cotton, Big and Little Walter, Butterfield, Carey Bell all played in the heyday (for harmonica) of Chicago blues, yet all gave markedly different sounds. There really is no such thing as "the Chicago sound", even though we are all guilty of using the term.
IMO the Chicago sound is tongue blocking blues thru a heavily distorted tube rig with big PHAT Tone. This is a sound that I am not good at achieving. ;>(
I want to thank 1847 for calling attention to my use of "the Chicago sound" when it really isn't defined. I have heard it commonly used to describe what Barley Nectar notes and I used it to describe that sound, but 1847 and then Kingley correctly point out that Chicago blues harmonica had a variety of sounds.
As I noted above, I tend to prefer a less distorted sound, one with warmth that breaks up when chords are played into a cupped mic, but one that has a cleaner, but warm sound on single note lines, not with constant fuzzy distortion. ----------
