Dan Appleby Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I work regularly with a band who have a glockenspeil (is that how you spell it?!) as part of their line up - there are a couple of issues with this in that a) it's not the best glock in the world and is pretty quiet even by a glocks standard (not ideal I know) and b) it's played by the lead vocalist of the band, so is located at centre stage (not the quietist of positions!) I'm having real trouble making it cut through the mix... My initial thought was to go with a condenser (tried an AT 4033 and 3528)... but struggling to get decent gain before feedback, and getting the obvious massive spill from the stage sound - gates aren't really an option here because of the low acoustic volume. I'm thinking that sticking something like an SM57 on it (or two) might be the way forward, just wondered if anyone else had any suggestions or tips? (short of getting a new glock that is!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Get your player to use brass mallets, these are the hardest and most cutting you can get. I can cut through an orchestra with a pair. If it still needs mic-ing then several lapel type condensors under the note bars gives the most gain before feedback in my experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil dekked Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I was going to say the same ... Try mic`ing from underneath, as it points the mic away from the stage monitors!! I`ve used an Akg C1000 with good results that way. But depends if there`s room underneath! .p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulears Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Most lapels are omni and work really well when you are miking up instruments like this, but the worry for me in this example is the on-stage volume - I might be tempted to use a couple of cardioid 'thin' condensers looking down if spill was a problem. I know it's personal preference, but I don't like the sound of C1000's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbuckley Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I'd be tempted to try a differential mic, like the Crown CM310A, and/or a feedback "eliminator" Edit to add a link to a PDF on Crown's website (PDF) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j_b Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 How about a boundary mic located inside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arran Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 I'd be tempted to try a differential mic, like the Crown CM310A, and/or a feedback "eliminator" Edit to add a link to a PDF on Crown's website (PDF)I think you'd have to have the diff' mic so close that you'd not get an even balance across the blocks.How about a C-ducer and different mallets? it'd need trying first as strike noise may be an issue.my instinct would be to try 2 or 3 hypercardioid condensers close up off-axis to the mons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RustyBrooks Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 A Shure SM81 placed a few inches away, with a denoiser if you really need it will work fine, cut through a mix, even on a noisy stage 6 feet from a drum kit. Last tour I did with a glock used this. I'm afraid a feedback eliminator would be pointless, the frequencies produced by a glock are probably very close to the freqs that will feed back, just use your eq. The de-noiser (only used on monitors last time) will stop unwanted gubbins coming down the mic, but won't "chatter" like a gate. Thats how you do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Appleby Posted June 1, 2007 Author Share Posted June 1, 2007 Thanks for the ideas guys... will try out a few and let you know how I get on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbuckley Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I think you'd have to have the diff' mic so close that you'd not get an even balance across the blocks.Reflecting on it, I think you're right. For vocal you need the vocalist to swallow the mic, so a few inches away may be far too far. I'm afraid a feedback eliminator would be pointless, the frequencies produced by a glock are probably very close to the freqs that will feed back, just use your eq.Thats exactly wrong, but a very typical response, especially from pro sound engineers who are, as a genus, very anti-feedback-"eliminator"-thingies. I suspect (but dont know) that this is because the most commonly occuring FBEs have a certain brand name that audio professionals have extreme disdain for, despite the fact the dBX and other "proper" manufacturers make such an offering. Because the frequencies are similar, then an EQ (assuming either a desk parametric or a graphic, both being blunt tools) will hack the glock audio to pieces. A feedback "eliminator" being a much narrower EQ will do a better job with less destruction to the glock tone. A feedback eliminator is nothing more than a parametric EQ, but typically without the usual complement of front panel knobs, but with the ability to cut much deeper over a more reduced bandwidth than a typical PEQ. Another trick that can be tried is a couple of milliseconds delay; that'll quell the onset of feedback by a few dB. However, if the glock mic is picking up 95% stage wash then the louder you get the glock mic the louder will be the mush, which ultimately is self defeating. Maybe a (albeit fairly large) collection of the five quid CPC bud mics under the bars might be the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Thats what I suggested, and I agree would be a good solution especially when coupled with harder mallets, which not only increase the volume produced, but produce a harder more cutting sound that will cut through a mix much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixermend Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 If you have electret type mics - they will work well with the Contact Mic System we make. This has 2 inputs, with an adjustable balance between them and an overall volume control. It has an XLR balanced output and power for the electret microphones is derived from the +48 Phantom power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbuckley Posted June 5, 2007 Share Posted June 5, 2007 Thats what I suggestedSo you did, not like me to suggest something already suggested, must pay more attention... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.