Jump to content


geeteethree

Member
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About geeteethree

  • Birthday 01/19/2022
  1. I saw one of the last shows Ray Charles played, maybe the last, and I remember that he was doing that on piano sounds in a way that was surprising, but very good sounding.
  2. Dave, I think just about anything, so far. I have tried it on electric and acoustic guitar, vocals, overhead (in pretty close). I am also finding it really works well with the Daking MicPreEQ equalizer points. I would typically be choosy about mics, and not lean on EQ as much to get tones, but there are times when you just want the timbre of the ribbon... and if you really know the general frequency content you want for a part, you just want to shoot for it and get the tone while tracking. The broad A Range type eq curves of the Daking are pretty hard to get in trouble with, when coupled with this mic. That said, if you are using it for multiple overdubs, no processing at all, it stacks very well. I don't want to paint a picture that you have to use a ton of eq it to make it work. One may end up using *less* than average with a ribbon. There is a certain natural taming of the low mids that winds up being similar to how I might wind up eq-ing various classic model ribbons. I had heard that said about this mic before, and find it to be true as well.
  3. There are exceptions to this, but : Not having a song that stands on its own before you start recording. If you have a song that has something to it, you can do almost endless interpretations and there will usually still be something entertaining there. There certainly are great songs that had substantial parts written during recording, or songs that came about from the "studio as an instrument" approach and sonic experimentation. Yet much of that is from people who are already very adept at the more traditional approach of hashing out the song via acoustic guitar and voice, or piano and voice. __ I think another is just not working at it enough, or rushing to get it out there. If you are working on your own music, and it is pretty good, it is easy to almost hypnotize yourself into overlooking things that could make it better, especially after you have heard your recording a thousand times. Letting the song be at its best might even involve recording the whole thing again! Nowdays there is a tendency for the demo stage to blend into the final production of the final product, which is not always the most constructive process for arriving at the best presentation of the song.
  4. I bet that Mojave compatibility won't be lost until Logic goes to 11.
  5. There was a patch named Bristol, in one of the Roland JV expansion boards that would do the trick.
  6. Neumann says on their website that it is safe to use a little olive or coconut oil to condition and clean cables.
  7. I have an R84, an R92, and have used the R88 and a few R44 versions they make many times. I think that the R92 is a rare case of figuring out how to bring in a product at a cheaper price point, and it resulting in something that doesn't sound inferior, and may in some cases be preferable. For certain things, if you are tracking with an R92, the lesser proximity effect and overall frequency response seems to work very well. The extra mesh gives me a feeling of a little more security that the ribbon won't get sagged with louder sources. Yet it still has a strong sonic relation to the R84 and R44.
×
×
  • Create New...