How to Set Up a Vocal Booth at Home

The vocal booth is a common image when it comes to modern recording. To the uninitiated, a studio isn't a "real" studio until it has a vocal booth. But is a vocal booth really necessary, or even desirable, for a typical project studio?

Vocal booth

For large, commercial studios a vocal booth makes sense. A facility like this will be large enough that even the "small" booth will be the size of many average home or bedroom studios, and can be well-treated to sound good. Having a large vocal booth lets the engineer isolate the vocalist during full-band tracking, using a sensitive condenser or ribbon microphone while drastically cutting down or removing bleedthrough from the rest of the band.

But even in large facilities, engineers and producers will often have the artist track their vocals in the control room. Some producers even prefer tracking vocals without headphones at all, instead playing the backing tracks through the monitors. Proponents of this method feel it's easier to get great, passionate vocal takes this way, and there are methods you can use to control bleed (see the sidebar Getting Rid of the Bleed below).

So even in a large studio, building and using a vocal booth makes sense only if you are able to make it large enough to sound good, and you want some amount of room sound on the song you are tracking. Or if you need isolation to track vocal takes while the rest of the band plays at the same time.

In contrast, a small private, project, or home studio is often of the one-room variety, and space is usually much more limited. Many recordists use a spare bedroom or a finished basement room. In such cases the most common mode of production is to build the tracks up, overdubbing one layer at a time, and not full-band tracking.

Vocal booths in studios like these are typically closet-size 'rooms,' often installed in the back of a control room. The booth is often made dead, with a thin layer of moving blankets, foam or fiberglass covering all interior surfaces of the booth. The result is a dead sound, which is desirable. But because of the small size and lack of bass trapping, many vocal booths are also boomy, which is not desirable and is, in some ways, worse than an untreated room.

These booths are so small, with all walls in such close proximity to both the sound source and the microphone, that peaks and deep nulls from comb filtering cause a jagged room response varying as much as 30dB throughout the entire frequency range. The effect of comb filtering is why small room ambience is always bad ambience - music recorded in such rooms has that boxy, small room sound that won't be fixed by $2,000 mic preamps or microphones. Compression usually makes the problem even worse.

The best treatment for small rooms approaches 100 percent coverage to get rid of as many reflections as possible. But it's also important to remember that small rooms need proportionately more bass trapping than larger rooms. So now you not only need to cover most of the walls and ceiling to deaden the sound, but you also need at least two to four corner bass traps as well.
When an enclosed booth really is needed for more isolation, it's better to use absorbing panels rather than rigid walls.

If you have the vocalist sing with the monitors in the control room going full tilt, the sound from the monitors will bleed into the vocal microphone. The following polarity trick will help reduce this.
After recording a take, record a dry take with only the monitors playing, and the performer remaining silent, onto a spare track labeled "bleed track." It is very important that you record the monitors without moving the microphones or adjusting the volume or the preamp gain, and that people in the room not make any noise while recording the bleed track. This will produce an identical copy of only the bleed that went into the mic during the vocal take.

Reverse the phase (polarity) of the bleed track and mix it with the vocal track with the gain on both tracks set the same. This cancels out the bleed in the main vocal take. If everything sounds as expected, render the two tracks into a new single track, and archive or delete the original source tracks.

Place the mic diaphragm facing your lips (sometimes off axis, if necessary). Listen with your headphones for the subtle differences. Try close (two or three inches) or mid-distance (one foot) mic’ing, depending on which sound works best for your track. Always use a pop filter in front of the mic to tame your “P” and “T” sounds. If you don’t own a pop filter, you can make one from scratch with a sock or stocking cap stretched over a wire hanger.

The acoustic problems aren't limited to the booth, either. The presence of the booth just makes the control room smaller, which is never good. A booth in the front of the room is even worse because it disturbs left-right symmetry, which damages monitoring clarity and imaging. It simply is not worth compromising your listening room in order to install a vocal booth that will produce questionable results.

In general, vocals are best recorded totally dry. It's easy to add reverb and ambience when mixing, and you can change your mind later about the amount and quality of ambience mix. A vocal recording with any kind of room ambience - good or bad - cannot be made dry again, if you find you don't like it (or that it doesn't fit the mix) the next day.

A PVB or also helps to a surprising degree with isolation. Careful attention to mic placement and pickup pattern along with the PVB's orientation can produce startling results. Admittedly, a PVB will not get rid of crying babies and barking dogs, but a booth has to be very well constructed, with a lot of mass and insulation in its walls and door, and be completely airtight to completely block loud noise anyway.

One potential problem with one-room recording is ambient noise, usually caused by a computer or fans in musical equipment. If you have this problem in your studio, a PVB placed properly between the musician and the noise source can reduce the noise that gets into the microphone. Top
So in nearly all cases, we recommend that most small studio owners not build a vocal booth, and instead track overdubs in the control room or the one-room studio. This is simply a better way to track vocals, that also leaves the room in better acoustic shape for mixing.

AKG 702 Headphones Review

AKG 702 Headphones Review

The K702 is a new addition to the Austrian manufacturers’ Pro line, though it is basically an improved version of the much-loved K701, the main purpose of which seems to have been to change the color so it shows less studio dirt. In the high-quality headphone market, the K702 claims uniqueness in its use of flat wire technology along with a patented Varimotion 2-layer diaphragm driven by neodymium magnets. In keeping with modern marketing practice little suggestion is made by AKG about how these things might impact the sound delivered by the K702s, other than to make a nod to accuracy, agility and spaciousness. One understandable feature is the easily removable cable, allowing upgrades or length changes as needed. The K702 also has several features aimed at ensuring comfort, an area where technology often offers more hope than reality–but which work in this case, as we shall see.

Like many other headphones, the K702 is an open back design - a feature that clearly makes them less suitable for use on airplane or in an office. Some listeners, however, insist that open-back headphones are consistently more natural sounding.

AKG 702

The K702 offers a sound that manages to seem almost faultless to the casual listener. This is an important achievement, and one that bespeaks smart design choices that may work well for many listeners. Like every headphone we’ve heard, the K702 has its limits, but first let’s catalog some of its superb performance attributes.

The core strength of the K702 is the artful frequency balance that AKG’s engineers have delivered. The K702 sounds very flat from about 150hz up to around 10khz, which means that instruments in a band or orchestra are consistently reproduced in proper relationship to each other. Not only that, but also most instruments sound natural on an individual basis.

Just as important, the K702 seems to roll off the upper treble very slightly. This characteristic might at first glance seem a drawback, but in practice it may in fact be a blessing in disguise. Let’s face it; a lot of music signals are a bit distorted or noisy in the treble region, so that it is not necessarily a bad thing for a headphone to de-emphasize those flaws. AKG’s choice fits well with the realities and quality limitations both of modern recordings and of some D/A converters. In short, the K702s reproduce treble problems in music or associated equipment, but without rubbing your face in them.
In addition to their slightly warm upper frequency balance, the K702s sound very well controlled and damped on transients. Cymbals or guitars rarely sound ragged or splashy, while vocals sound unfailingly smooth. This could be characterized as low distortion (that's certainly how it sounds), an important quality made even more important because it yields excellent instrumental separation. That sounds kind of analytical and geeky, but it means complex music doesn't get all congested and muddled.

At the same time, this smooth, well-controlled transient behavior also points, at least indirectly, toward two limitations of the K702. First, micro-dynamics, while not exactly MIA, are less vividly reproduced than they are with some competing headphones, such as the similarly priced Grado 325is or more expensive Sennheiser HD800s. The result is that the sense of the acoustic space in which the instrument or band is playing can get lost, as can the small but significant sonic details that give music its character and life-like feel. It is tough to say whether this loss, or the gain from the sense of low distortion is more important. Ideally one would like both, though over the long haul - assuming one has to choose -- the AKG approach makes sense.

Next, when we come to macro-dynamics, we’re also in an area where the K702s are good but not great. On drums, power guitar and vocal swells, the K702 sound reasonably lively judged against reproduced music we often hear, but they don’t quite capture the punch of the real thing (and there are other headphones that get closer). The 702s can sound reticent in the bass, which may be the reason for these observations.

These limitations are mainly subtractive, so without direct comparison to other headphones you might not notice them. That’s because the even tonal balance and smoothness of the K702 sounds realistic, and the K702s lack the obvious distortions that shout, “This isn’t real music.” Given that many headphones do have additive or distracting distortions, this fact alone might make the K702 a top choice for many listeners.

Another example of information loss comes on the Brandi Carlile track “Turpentine” [Brandi Carlile – The Story, Columbia], which opens with an acoustic guitar (a Collings 01SB) that is rendered clearly but with the emphasis mostly on string sound. In short, the AKGs give you less body sound than you would hear from a real guitar, meaning you miss out on some of the resonance and the ringing sound of the top of the instrument. Later in that song a cello enters and once again we hear more string, with fewer low-level body and overtone components than you’d hear with live sound (or than you can hear on this recording through some other headphones).

Competitive Comparison

Assuming you are looking at the K702 as a reference headphone, my comments, below, may help to place the AKGs in context with respect to higher, lower, and similarly priced headphones:

• The Shure SRH840 is less expensive, and offers a similar sound (in terms of basic smoothness and level of information retreival) . The K702 is a bit more evenly balanced, but slightly less dynamic.
• The Grado 325is is similarly priced (on the street), but sounds rather different. The 325is has a mid-range emphasis that means it is less evenly balanced than the K702, but offers more micro-dynamic detail and macro-dynamic punch.
• The Sennheiser HD800 is substantially more expensive. It offers more micro-dynamic detail, deeper bass and similar smoothness. But the HD800 can sound a little uneven in the treble.
• The K702s are very comfortable. The ear cups are big and the clamping force is low. The headband adjusts the earcups automatically to fit your head - a feature that worked well in our tests.
• The K702s come with a ten foot cord and a phone plug/mini-plug.

Note: The K702s are relatively inefficient. This is a headphone that simply must be used with a high-quality amplifier to get the best results.

Bottom Line:

AKG’s K702 is a very well balanced headphone that delivers admirable smoothness and warmth without obvious artifacts.
Specs & Pricing
AKG K702 Headphones
Accessories: mini-plug to phone plug adapter (screw on)

Weight: 8.3 oz.

Sensitivity: 105dB@1V

Impedance: 62 ohms

AKG 701 Headphones Review

Was I ever excited when I heard rumors of the existence of AKG's K 701! If you're among the audiophiles who sneer at those of us who like headphones, you're probably rolling your eyes and thinking I must lack a rich inner life.

But hold on there, Skippy - some of us use those cans in our prosumer studios, in recording sessions, and even in barn-burning late-night critical listening sessions where we employ ancillary equipment that would beggar your jaded high-end sensibilities. We're not talking about the three-buck, upchuck disposable 'phones your friendly flight attendant flogs before your in-flight main feature. We're talking about serious tools that can reveal a flea fart in a cathedral.

AKG 701

Well, some of us are. Me, I'm just a headphone geek, so news that AKG was going to launch a flagship dynamic headphone had me all aquiver with anticipation. After all, the company's last major assault on the state of the headphone art was the K 1000, which AKG called an "earspeaker," mostly because they resembled speakers in many ways - they sat off to the front of the ears and beamed music back into the pinnae, rather than pumping it more or less straight into the ear canal, as most phones do. They were also brutes to drive. John Marks was a big fan, and John's got great taste in gear - but I admired the K 1000s more than I loved 'em, mostly because I found them incredibly fiddly. I was never convinced that I'd angled both earspeakers equally, so I was always trying to get them in better balance. As Bob Reina once opined about electrostatic speakers: great for a desert-island system, where you'd be desperate for something to do, but for regular listening, not so much. Besides, the K 1000s cost nearly a grand by the time AKG discontinued them last year.

Rumor had it that the K701 would come in closer to $400, which they did - $500 and frequently discounted. And by the time Head-Fi had its regional NY Meet in November 2005, word had gone around the Internet that the K 701s would be there, which they were - just barely. AKG's US distributor had sent out two pairs prior to the meet, one to HeadRoom's Tyll Hertsens and another to a hard-core headphoner. Neither pair had logged more than a few hours of music-playing, and while they sounded intriguing, they had a hardness that didn't make me ready to trade in my reference Sennheiser HD-650s. But they were extremely comfortable, and their wire frames, leather headband, and white porcelain-like rims and motor housing made a dashing retro-futuristic fashion statement. They were also quiet - not a shred of hiss or hum.

Two days later, I got an e-mail from Hertsens: "I've now logged over 100 hours of music playing on the 701s and I have a new reference. You didn't hear half of what they could do." You better believe that the five months I waited to receive a review sample seemed like a long time. Why so long? AKG had a hit on its hands. They couldn't make 'em fast enough to cover demand.

If you haven't been paying attention to high-end headphones, $500 probably sounds like a lot of dough—and it is. You could be forgiven for thinking, What are those things made of, gold? Actually, nothing in the K 701s is all that rare, unless you count as rare the kind of engineering that sweats all the small details.

Take the cabling, for example. AKG's German-to-English translation machine calls it "true bi-wiring" in some publications and "balanced" in others. What they mean by that is that the 701s use separate grounds for each motor assembly rather than a common ground (although the ¼" jack does feature a common ground, of course). That's probably one reason I was struck by how silent the 701s were the first time I heard them - and all the times after that.

AKG uses 99.99% pure OFC, which may not be "six nines" (99.9% pure) copper, but it isn't what most headphones use, either. The voice-coils use flat wire, which is common enough in high-end loudspeakers and microphones, but again is less than common in cans. Flat-wire windings are said to better concentrate the magnetic field within the voice-coil, thus exerting superior control over the diaphragm's movement.

AKG 701

The 701s also boast AKG's Varimotion transducer. The diaphragm is contoured to be thicker at the center than at the periphery. The stiffer center acts as the tweeter, while the more pliant boundaries produce the low frequencies. AKG cuts runnels into the stiffer portion in order to tweak the diaphragm's mechanical impedance - or, as AKG puts it, "the diaphragm has been optimized to prevent unwanted vibration modes." The point is to keep the center of the diaphragm acting as pistonically as possible and thus keep the voice-coil centered in the magnetic field. This, AKG says, "results in lower harmonic distortion, extended bass response, and higher maximum loudness."

As I mentioned earlier, the 701s are extremely comfortable. Their huge, ear-enveloping foam pads, clad in some kind of velveteen, sat on my head for hours without seeming warm or tight. AKG says it uses "3-D foam," which I take to mean foams of different densities. They also claim the shape of the earpads allows the drivers to be aimed at the ears "at the proper angle." I can't prove that they were, but the sonic results were hard to argue with. The leather hammock-style sling that runs under the springy-wire connecting rails to cradle the listener's head also contributes to the luxe fit. Any way you slice it, the 701s coddle your head and ears.

Because the K 701 is aimed not at the iPod generation but at AKG's studio market, the phones are terminated with a ¼" jack plug. Still, a substantial machined-metal ¼"-to-1/8" converter is included in case you need to use 'em with a source equipped only with a mini jack. AKG also includes a 'docking cradle' - essentially a pedestal with a foam cutout that lets you perch the 701s atop your recording console or desktop. At first I thought this the dumbest gimme I'd ever seen, but I ended up using it a lot. Actually having a place to put something makes it more likely that I'll find it again in the chaos that is my office. Oh, who am I kidding - in the chaos that is my life.

So where would you use the K 701s? Monitoring recording sessions, obviously, as well as any place you need high-quality listening tools, which in my house means anywhere I have a headphone amp set up: office, living room, and laundry room (strange, I know, but my wife is devious about finding ways to get me to do chores).

Why use a headphone amp? Well, the K 701s aren't exceedingly hard to drive, but the flea wattage of the average portable (or even the ¼" jack present on most separates) tends to accentuate that initial edginess I alluded to in my first experience with the 701s in much the way listening to a pair of speakers near an amplifier's maximum output accentuates the amp's inadequacies. The 701s aren't unique in this regard; most ambitious headphone designs benefit tremendously from a well-designed headphone amp. Fortunately, I had a ton of such amps around the house: several generations of HeadRoom, Channel Island Audio's VHP-1, and Ray Samuels Audio's SR-71 and Hornet. All of them let the K 701s' tonal balance and authority blossom.

When I first received the AKG K 701s, I listened to them briefly to confirm my initial impression of an aggressive assertiveness I wouldn't cotton to. Forewarned by Tyll Hertsens' assertion that they needed to be run in, I set them up in an unused room, connected to a Channel Islands Audio VHP-1 and Musical Fidelity X-RayV3 CD player set to repeat. I didn't listen to them again for a few hundred hours, so no, I wasn't being broken in - they were.

About a week later, I checked in on the K 701s and that edginess was gone, replaced by balanced sound with a natural top-end sparkle and a ridiculously robust bottom end. What causes such a change? Some folks speculate that the diaphragm becomes more supple with play, or that the motor mechanism wears in. I don't pretend to know what goes on, only that a few hundred hours of vigorous play transformed the K 701s.

I'd intended to follow the text and home in on some of the flubs and mistakes Emerick enumerates in his saga, but that dog just plain wouldn't hunt. Oh, I heard 'em, but I was more captivated by the musical gestalt than by the details. McCartney's deliciously fat bass sound on "Here, There and Everywhere" just burbled along too delightfully for me to care about catching the lads out on any mistakes. And while I appreciated knowing that it was McCartney playing the guitar solo on "Taxman," I can't say I enjoyed the song any more for learning that.

It was the same story when I moved the K 701s into my home office and tried to get some work done while listening to some "background" music. With the 701s, there was no background music. Music was alive, compelling, demanding.

Is that too abstract? Should I break down the sound into bass, midrange, and high frequencies? Okay, the K 701s possessed some of the deepest bass I've ever heard from a pair of headphones. The bass was scary good, although it lacked some of the physical impact that speaker listening can convey on, say, a live jazz recording such as Bill Evans' Sunday at the Vanguard  (CD, Riverside 9376), where you not only hear Paul Motian's kickdrum flex the Vanguard's wooden floor, you feel it in your gut as well. On the AKGs, I heard it, but not in my gut.

Midrange? Oy! Such a midrange they have! On "Willy O'Win
bury," from Pentangle's Solomon's Seal (CD, Castle 555), the AKGs captured perfectly the slight catch in Jacqui McShee's voice as she delivers the king's line "If I were a woman as I am a man." I must have swooned over this song hundreds of times over the years, but I've almost never heard it as fully embodied as through the K 701s. They can teach old songs new tricks.

As for the K 701s' HF performance, I found myself listening to an enormous amount of acoustic string music for the very simple reason that the AKGs delivered the snap, bloom, and harmonic overtones of plucked strings with unbelievable clarity. David Russell's latest CD, Renaissance Favorites (Telarc CD-70659), spent a lot of time in the sundry listening stations around the house. Francesco Canova da Milano's Fantasia XIII, with its flurry of staccato runs and long tolling tones, was a particular favorite, especially for the way the decay of the notes sketched out the acoustic in which the piece was performed.

Of course, just 'cause I dug da Milano didn't mean I couldn't hear how great Bill Monroe's classic Decca sides were as well. Even though those recordings are almost half a century old, they still sound crisp and clear in Bluegrass: 1950–58 (4 CDs, Bear Family 15423). Although I'd listened to the Bear Family discs many times before auditioning the K 701s, I must have been listening with blinkers on (earplugs in?)—it had never penetrated my thick skull that Monroe didn't tune his mandolin the way other mortals did. Listening to "Sally Jo," I heard string sonorities that didn't match the classic octave pairings most players use, so I turned my office right-side up (it usually is upside down) looking for the CD booklet, which, sure enough, explained that "It was while at Decca that [Monroe] introduced and recorded his original and trademark mandolin tuning - where instead of four pairs of strings tuned to the same pitches as a violin, he tuned several pairs of strings to two different notes that added the otherworldly timbres to his 'high lonesome' sound."

Yeah, I'm probably an idiot not to have ever noticed that before, but dang, it had never been so baldly in my face -er , ears - before.

Over the last decade, my go-to headphones have been the Sennheiser HD-600s and the Sennheiser HD-650s. In my review of the HD-650s, I said, "When I listened to the Fab Four, for example, all I could hear were the punch-ins (the mid-strum appearance of a distorted guitar five seconds into 'Money'), dropouts (the lead guitar disappears from the right channel almost two minutes into 'Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds'), and jokes ('Ahhhh, Paul,' sings John under Paul's lead 20 seconds into 'Lovely Rita')."

This actually proves two things: 1) I apparently don't have many original ideas, and 2) while I could hear all that stuff with the AKG 701s, it didn't really seem like that big a deal. Maybe I just don't like playing "gotcha!" as much as I used to, but I think it has more to do with my chief niggle regarding the HD-650s, which was that they could be, shall we say, overly analytical - that I could all too easily focus on the musical trees (or even branches) rather than the forest.

Comparing the AKG K 701s to the Sennheiser HD-650s with, oh, let's take David Russell's da Milano track (any of the others would do just as well), it was easy to hear why that was. Russell's guitar sounded rounder and warmer through the Sennheisers. Too warm and round, in fact. The AKGs matched the HD-650s for a full bottom end and pleasing tonality through the midrange, but the 701s had sparkle and life in the high frequencies and harmonics that the '650s simply didn't match.
Mind you, one of the glories of the HD-600s and HD-650s - to my ears, at least - had always been how unetched and natural their top ends sounded. Contrasted with cheap headphones, or even fairly pricey headphones with a reputation for "exciting" sound, what I love about the Sennheiser sound was the evidence that the designers had apparently taken an oath to first do no harm. However, with track after track, it became apparent to me that with the K 701s, AKG has developed headphones that not only did no harm to the top end, but also told the truth about what was going on up there.
The AKG K 701s have raised the bar for natural-sounding headphones.

Throughout the High End, the level of the good has gotten so darn good that honesty usually compels me to waffle a bit in the conclusion of a review. You pay a hefty price to go from pretty good to a wop bop a loobop a lop bam boom!  As a result, we reviewers have to qualify everything. At $450, AKG's K 701 isn't cheap, although it's far from the most expensive set of headphones available. It's not for you if you want to jog or commute with your iPod. You should use it with a headphone amp. And it's even possible that neutrality isn't what you want from a headphone - after all, you're the boss of you.

Still: the AKG K 701s are the best-sounding headphones I've heard - and not for the money, and not for picking apart a recording or playing gotcha! with recording engineers. The K 701s just flat-out sound more like music as I hear it than any other headphones I've ever heard. I love 'em and I won't be sending 'em back.

Behringer HPX6000 Phones Review

Behringer HPX6000

Introduction

 

Behringer has been a name that didn’t always instill deep feelings of confidence. But that’s all changing with their recent NAMM announcement of a full 3 year’s warranty on everything – even on normally abused headphones. But having played with these new Behringer HPX6000 cans for a while, I’d say they have a fair chance of seeing off that warranty.

In The Box: Pretty standard stuff – cans, a soft case, a coiled rubberised cable and the regulation gold adaptor. You get what you need and nothing more.

 

Looks: Behringer has clearly employed some rather more image conscious designers. Gone are the jarring splashes of cheap plastic chrome, and in are the rubberised matt special ops stylings of AIAIAI’s TMA-1 offerings. There is a silvery flash of the new Behringer logo on the earpiece, but that can be covered up with Styleflip custom covers if you want that extra level of personalisation. Or a Sharpie will do it too.

 

Build Quality: I’ve actually been pleasantly surprised in this respect. Despite the complete plastic construction, and more traditional hinged/screwed design, they’ve held up rather well. I always worry when I do my somewhat excessive stress tests, but these have remained totally creak-free. The top headband part is actually a separate and more flexible piece, which flexes and takes the strain away from the cups and hinges a little.

 

Replaceable ear pads are very welcome, as is the equally replaceable and locking coiled cable. This cable, due to its harder rubbery material is particularly tangle resistant.

 

Sound Quality: We’re talking DJ rather than studio headphones, so linear responses and focussing on numbers is less important. To me, these 50mm drivers sound bright enough at the top and especially bassy – just how we DJs like them. Compared to my Sennheisers and Pioneers, these are a good 10-15% louder too, which is always welcome, and even when pushed, they don’t distort.

Isolation: The closed backs help, but the pads aren’t the deepest in the world. Thus the seal around your ear isn’t as great as it could be. If there was one blot on the copybook, it’s in this section. It’s good, but not great.

 

Comfort and Stability: These aren’t the lightest of headphones, thus if you’re an energetic DJ, despite the tight grip on your head, these will move around a little. But they are very comfortable on your ear, especially with the smooth padded earpiece cover. The cups hinge and rotate 30° forward and 90° back – enough to find a comfortable fit anyone’s head. Speaking of which, the headband has a wide adjustment that should fit the smallest or biggest heads.

Compactness: Behringer wouldn’t supply a pouch it the HPX6000 cans didn’t fit in it, which thanks to the hinges and headbands, they do, very neatly.

 

Value for money: Retailing at $79.99, and given the overall across board thumbs up, the value for money is high. Back this up with the 3 year warranty, and that’s a cent shy of 70 bucks very well spent.

Summary

 

On the face of it, these Behringer HPX6000 headphones aren’t especially different to a lot of the standard fodder on the DJ headphone market. They bear much of the same features, construction and overall specification. But for me, Behringer has gone that step further to make a budget pair of headphones on a par with some costing twice as much. They look, feel and sound really good, leave money in your wallet and are backed up by a 3 year warranty. If this an indication of new Behringer, I cannot wait to see what else is coming. Good work.

Hype: Just about everything, especially the warranty
Gripe: The isolation could be a little better.


Shure SM57 Microphone Review

The legendary, yet inexpensive Studio Mic of all time.

If you ask nearly anyone who runs a professional recording studio, "Do you have a Shure SM57?"  they might look at you and ask, "are you are serious?" Of course they do. Every studio needs at least one, and possibly a half dozen. The reason is they not only sound good, but they can record practically anything. The SM57 is one of the most universal mics in the world.  It will record vocals, drums (particularly!), guitar cabs, bass cabs, acoustic guitars, brass, and stuff that is really loud.   While no one will claim it is the "best" mic for vocals or for delicate acoustic instruments, it will work, and with great predictability as to the sonic outcome. For people starting their home studios that don't have a lot of cash, this one is the mic to get.

The SM57 is a dynamic microphone with a cardioid, directional pattern.  Dynamic mics sound different than condenser mics, which are better for capturing hi and low frequencies. A dynamic mic like the SM57 does not need phantom power, which makes it more adaptable to mixers and recorders that don't have this feature. It records what it points to and rejects stuff from the side and from behind it. That makes it great for drums and good for the stage. It can also take very loud sounds without breaking up. Many drummers use it on the kick and snare drum because the sm57 can handle it, without a pad, where a condenser mic's sound would break up with distortion. Because of the tight directional pattern, it rejects bleed from other drums better than other mics.

You can scream into the sm57 and the mic will not shatter (unless you are practically jamming it down your throat). If you have a screamer in the studio and hear that awful distortion coming from your premium condenser, its time to pack it up and break out the good 'ol 57. For vocals the SM57 has a rich proximity effect. If you get within a few inches you'll get a bass boost, which is quite predictable, so it is often used as an effect by spoken word, comedians and in rap. Shure claims the SM57 has been used by thirty US Presidents as their mic of choice for speeches. It's easy to see why. The Mic has the classic presence boost in the vocal range which provides for intelligibility, yet it resists feedback.

The SM57 was introduced way back in 1965. That it is still a popular mic says a lot right there. It is impervious to going out of style despite it's funky, vintage appearance. Go look at the big pic below. The longer you look at it the more alien the mic looks. Its a workhorse - tough, durable, made to last a long time, with care a lifetime. It's heavy and feels cool and good in the hand, unlike cheap plastic mics. You might wonder that the "LC" stands for when you read about the SM57LC. It simply means "less cable". They used to sell them with an XLR cabled bundled (SM57CN), which is now discontinued. That is the difference.

Shure SM57 Mic

Difference between the SM57 and 58

People sometimes wonder about the difference between the SM57 and the SM58. Internally, they are identical mics, yet the SM58 has the "round ball" on top and an internal windscreen. Because the ball forces one to be a greater distance from the mic's diaphragm, the proximity effect is lessened and the windscreen can also dampen the hi frequency response as it cuts wind noise. The SM57, with its shorter grille design, allows you to get closer to the source and therefore has a greater proximity effect and will be more susceptible to wind noise. Hence vocalists on stage tend to prefer the sm58 while those in the studio might prefer an sm57 with a pop filter in front of it. The SM series is getting a little more popularity among hip hop artists these days. Both the '57 and '58 take well to spoken word. Shure recommends that the SM58 is their ideal mic for hip hop (much to my disbelief, I thought the SM7B was better). 

The SM57 is great for guitar amp cabinets. You stick it right up to the speaker cone, about an inch or two away, and should experiment with moving towards the edge of the cone. You can also angle it away slightly to bring in more of the room ambience. Many people like this sound better than the current run of amp modelers. Sometimes we want the real thing. I use it that way with great results.

The Bad and the Good

There are some drawbacks to consider about the SM57. While it does not need phantom power, it does need a lot of gain at the preamp when recording softer sounds. That can bring in more noise from the preamp (the Mic itself is generally quiet). The SM57, as mentioned before, does not capture the very low or very high frequencies as well as condensers. You can use EQ to bring up these frequencies if you need to and for vocals and guitar I recommend that if its the only mic you own. If you use it outdoors on gigs make sure to bring along a windscreen.

A big positive about the SM57 is that it will continue to be useful even after you upgrade to high end preamps. The amazing thing about the SM57 is that it sounds different through a high end preamp.  When I first plugged the SM57 into a Great River ME1-NV I could not believe it was my SM57. The sound was open, clean, and had much more transparency. No wonder professionals like it. The under $100 SM57 hold up just as well as any professional mic, including those that cost ten times as much.  Its just a matter of finding the mic that is most appropriate to the sound being recorded, and if there are snares, kicks, brass and amps around, chances are good the SM57 will be deployed.

The Bottom Line for 1st timers

Should you get an SM57 or an inexpensive condenser mic?  This is a tough question as there are condenser mics at attractive prices now. And of course it depends what you are recording. If you are doing strictly vocals and acoustic guitar for example, and can only get one mic, I would suggest a large condenser, assuming you have phantom power, like the Rode NT1a which will cost twice as much.

Also, if you are using a gain-compromised preamp as is found on the budget audio interfaces, it makes sense to get a condenser. Why? The condenser does not need as much gain. However, it will pick up more of the room and is not good with amps and bad if you get too close to snares. So remember the advantages of dynamic mics are that they only pick up stuff at close range and you can subject them to a lot of loudness. There are some condensers in the same $100 price range as the SM57 like an AKG Perception 120 or a Studio Projects B1.

If you are tempted to go for a $50 mic I recommend holding off and getting the sm57. Eventually you will tire of the $50 mic and replace it with a better one, but you will always keep your SM57 and you'll always have a use for it. And there is something to be said for having a truly legendary mic in your studio. If this mic cost $250 Shure could still sell them and studios would still buy them. That you can buy these for under $100 makes it a no-brainer.

Sony MDR-V150 Series Headphones

Bandwidth response-20Hz to 20,000Hz
Impedance-32ohms
The technical specs for MDR-V150s:
Bandwidth response-18Hz to 22000Hz
Impedance-24ohms

SONY MDR-V150

For those of you who don't understand the numbers, it means that the MDR-V150s have a broader range of sound, but the iPod earbuds pack a bigger sound. This is precisely why you think something is missing.

If you listen to iPod earbuds over a long time, your ears become accustomed to really loud, albeit a small range, sound. This is also why iPod earbuds are known for causing serious harm to your ears over prolonged periods of use. For it to sound right, you have to use the full amount of power, which the earbuds provide. Your close-range hearing becomes damaged over time and you can't hear subtle sounds or details, but you can still detect low volume. The earbuds won't sound deafening because you can still hear outside noise.
The MDR-V150s have a larger range of sound and lower impedance. That means there is a much richer sound. You don't need to jack up the volume to get a good listen (but you do need your hearing intact). You also may not be used to the larger range of sound so the range of sound you're used to will sound drowned out at close range. Many of the comments complaining about this transition from earbuds are noting that staples of their music listening sound strangely undetailed on the MDR-V150s.

High levels of bass have a way of "drowning" out treble sounds if you're not used to listening to music with ample bass at close range.
Another major difference is that since these are "on-ear" headphones instead of "in-ear" buds, you have much less outside noise interfering with listening. It's like the difference between listening to a car stereo with the windows up or the windows down. You have to listen to things louder if there's more outside noise and you can't notice as many details either. There is a reason cellphone handsets for the car use earbuds instead of headphones, and that's so you can still hear the road. Why would you want to use earbuds that are intentionally designed so you can still hear your surroundings but compensate for it by deafening you?
I work a lot with sound whether it's production, music, or art and I use these as portable stereo phones because of their quality and sound range. I use them with my iPod with the long cord tucked into my case's belt clip. They are incredibly affordable for their quality. Most comparable headphones cost at least $30. I have been using these headphones since freshman year of college when I was first exposed to them in my school's sound lab.
My opinion aside, the manufacturer specs speak for themselves and it's hard to imagine that iPod earbud fans really believe that these provide less sound when physically they have a much broader range of sound and do not permanently damage your ears.
As for the tightness, it's good. It'll keep the phones pressed against your ears. The padding coupled with the tightness is what keeps as much outside noise sealed out. The more noise cancellation you can get, the better the sound.
And for the hair complaint: you could always tie up your hair or give up on headphones with plastic size adjusters. The plastic size adjusters were just designed to snag hair, so it seems.

But then, what else do you expect from Sony? I don't claim to be an audiophile, but I have nothing but love for these headphones after using them for perhaps a year now. I used to go through headphones every couple of months; something or other would break and I would have to go back and look for another pair. The MDR-V150 stopped that revolving door. The sound is excellent, and the headphones feel light on the head even after hours of use. The best feature here is the way the earphones plug into the headband; if you ever jerk on the cord too hard (like I always accidentally do when I put a foot on it while I stand up) the earphone pieces detach from the headband, rather than snapping the plastic bits like many other headphones in this price range will. You snap the earphones back into the headband and you're back in business.
I use these headphones every day, and while I'm sure most true audiogeeks would be better suited by a pair of Seinnheisers or another high-end brand, this pair is perfect for me. Heck, I'm on my fourth different CD player since buying them; how's that for longevity? Highly recommended if you're in the market for headphones near the 20 dollar price point.

I work in an office job where I'm allowed to wear headphones while I work. For the past two years, I've been searching for the right pair - I had no idea it would be this difficult!
Every pair that I've purchased have had some problem or another. The ear bud ones are always too big and hurt my ears (and besides, they get pretty gross). The standard walkman-type headphones are comfortable but the music is pretty audible to people nearby when you play it even at a normal level.
Basically, I was searching for a pair of headphones for $35 or less that would hold sound in reasonably well (everyone always advertises noise-cancelling - I wanted noise-containing!), but didn't look like they should be worn by an air traffic controller!

I've been exceedingly pleased with these headphones for the week that I've had them. Yes, they are a bit bulkier than some of the more trendy headphones that are out there but they are much better quality. I can't blast my music but I can listen to it somewhat loudly without being audible to anyone around me. The ears are really soft and comfortable, although I will say that I've encountered the same issue with the headset getting a bit uncomfortably tight after wearing it for several hours - especially when I'm wearing my glasses. I expect that will get better as I wear them in. I haven't had any problems with my hair getting stuck in them, as another reviewer mentioned (my hair is several inches past my shoulders).

If you're looking for the same things that I was, I would strongly recommend these headphones! I would have paid double and still been very happy with them.

AKG D7 Mic Review

The D8000M Dynamic Vocal Microphone is a handheld microphone that is ideal for lead vocals. A supercardioid polar pattern guarantees the utmost gain before feedback at a extremely high sound pressure level (SPL), and helps vocals cut through the mix more easily. The D8000m is equipped with an indestructible metal casing, rugged spring steel grill, and a scratch-resistant black finish.

AKG D7 Mic

FEATURES

• Supercardioid polar pattern
• Rugged wire mesh cap with internal protective wiremesh cap
• Die-cast metal body

Generally speaking, this microphone is clearer sounding then SM58, less mud, more depth and more highs. However, this doesn't always means that it's better in the mix for vocals. It's excels as an instrument microphone.
I used it in untreated venues, doing mostly jazz, vocal, acoustic, fusion and some rock.
Grand piano - if feedback is a problem, this is a great mic to use if you want the natural sound of the open lid. I can put these not so far from the lid's edge (a bit inside the piano and below) and get reasonable feedback rejection (=reasonable EQ compensation) in dense rock mixes. Just use another mic below the piano for monitoring. I like the tone, not too dark, not too bright.
Makes a Steinway sound a bit more nasal, perhaps aggressive- then it actually is, but that's sometime what's needed.
I appreciate a dynamic microphone that is able to pick the sound of a grand from that distance. With a sm58, I have to use more EQ to get proper sound (but hardly the same results) and more EQ for feedback compensation.
Electric guitar - clear, deep tone, cuts through better, not harsh. Not a new league above shure but preferable.
Vibraphone - this is a great mic for this application, because the miking for this instrument needs to be set up quite high above it, to get all the sounds in a balanced, natural way. I put two D7 about 50cm above the vibraphone as a spaced pair and get usable (but not really loud) monitor levels. Just low cut and add a bit of high mid to cut through the mix. Easy.
Kajon - this mic is great inside of the kajon, a poor man's Beta-91a. Gets both the lows reasonably well (it's no bassdrum mic) and the highs without much box resonance.
Vocals - on some vocals, the highs are not easily treated by EQ. It sounds bigger and better then sm58 when I tune the loudspeakers, and leads to less GEQ cuts.. But it's is less versatile, so it didn't establish itself as my "to go" mic. The fullness of tone does not always work for my style of mixing. The sm58 is a more "laid back" microphone and thus blends more easily into my mix. On cheaper speakers with more limited frequency range, like vocal amps, the D7 will be preferable just for its clarity.
Overheads - Like with the piano, it's able to pick up depth of tone from afar. The sound is quite usable for rock, but still don't get the highs right - quantity or quality. You can't EQ that too much either. The toms do sound killer. If I can describe the sound of this mic as overhead, I would say "hard". Really different then the condenser "airy" sound. The sm58 sounds dull and useless in this application.
Hi Hat - this is a GREAT hi hat microphone, and my favourite. All it needs is HPF set quite high (but I do it with all mics) and some eq only if the hat has some annoying resonance. If positioned correctly, it rejects other drums much better then a condenser, and can be compressed to even out. Not looking back!

The AKG Acoustics D 7 is AKG’s current high end entry into the world of hand held vocal microphones. This particular microphone shares many of the same qualities with its more ubiquitous friend the D 5, however, there are certain key differences that must be noted, that account for the almost doubling of the price. The AKG D 7 is a dynamic microphone designed for hand held vocal use, and it was designed with an incredible focus on well balanced sound. The first thing to note about the D 7 is its Laminated Varimotion diaphragm, which means that the diaphragm of the D 7 has a thickness that varies across it. It is not a new idea, but AKG has implemented it at such a low cost that it is worth mentioning. This is apparently meant to enhance clarity. The D 7 has a supercardioid pickup pattern, which allows it to reject other things and reduce bleed. This was a very deliberate choice by AKG to not use a cardioid pattern microphone. At any rate, this, along with its built in high pass filter which rolls off the low end underneath about 80 Hz, allows the AKG D 7 to be an idea vocal microphone with a built in cleanliness to it. The AKG D 7 has a frequency response that begins at 70 Hz and continues up to 20,000 Hz, although starting around 15,000 Hz, there is a very aggressive roll off. There are a couple of peaks, notably in the low end and in the early mids, and a bit of a shelf boost around 5,000 Hz with a bit of a dip.

AKG's new reference dynamic microphone delivers high end performance and noble sound in every studio and on every stage. The D7 creates that subtle and opened sound in all frequency ranges condenser mics are famous for, but it also has the powerful resonance of a dynamic microphone.

"Before hooking up the mic to a PA system, I checked it by doing some voice recording in the studio, just to see what its real tonality and susceptibility to popping was like. I was recorded flat with no additional low-cut filters and managed a pretty natural sound with an open, but not aggressive high end and a surprisingly good resistance to popping. The sound warms up if you get right on the mic grille, due to the proximity effect, but not excessively so. Predictably, the high end wasn't as 'airy' as with a capacitor model, but for a dynamic mic it actually performed rather well, so I was keen to try it in a live situation".

"We often have problems with getting adequate level without feedback, and when we use a system with subs, popping is sometimes a significant issue with our existing mics. Fortunately, the D7 behaved well in both respects, delivering an adequate level of clear and well-balanced sound with no significant popping problems. If used hand-held, the handling noise is also adequately low...We'll definitely be buying this one for the band!"

The mic’s capsule is shockmounted to reduce handling noise. Also, a high-pass filter, which rolls off low-end sound below 80Hz, is built into the output circuit.
D7 Varimotion CapsuleThe capsule design is called “Varimotion;” it employs a diaphragm of variable thickness. The use of varying thicknesses is not new or original nor, as far as we can tell, covered by AKG’s patent on this capsule. Rather, the patent covers the manufacturing process that yields a varying-thickness membrane at low cost.

OVERALL OPINION

The AKG D 7 is a fantastic microphone, I have found, and it did produce a rather clear, neutral sound. It is nothing spectacular or revolutionary, but the microphone is certainly a fantastically viable choice for many singers who want to confidently assert themselves with style.

AKG K702 Headphones Review

AKG is the first manufacturer in the world to use revolutionary flat-wire technology in headphones, namely, the K 701. The result is a truly dramatic sound that places every musician at their correct location with pinpoint accuracy. This kind of agility, spaciousness, brilliant highs, and velvety, punchy bass is simply miraculous.
•  Revolutionary flat-wire voice coil technology for extremely accurate sound and transient response
•  Patented Varimotion diaphragm for sparkling highs and accurate bass response
•  Two-layer diaphragm for wide dynamic range and superior clarity
•  High-performance neodymium magnet system for minimum distortion
•  True bi-wiring
•  High-performance, 99.99% oxygen-free cable
•  Professional 1/4" jack plug
•  Comfortable, specially shaped "3D-Form" ear pads for perfect fit
•  Padded, genuine leather headband
•  Complete with stylish storage cradle
•  Individually tested and numbered

AKG 702

Headphone listening is, by its very nature, vastly different than speaker-based listening. On the plus side, room interactions are negated, very little amplifier power is needed for satisfactory levels, other people are not disturbed by your music, and the price-performance ratio is unparalleled. On the negative side, with the vast majority recordings having been optimized for listening over speakers, headphone soundstaging and imaging is not as convincing.

Also, the visceral impact of bass transients is not as fully realized. However, I've come to the conclusion that preference for speakers over headphones does not invalidate the other, and vice-versa.
After conducting some research on all the developments I've missed in the world of headphones over the past eight years, I decided to begin my journey with the AKG K702 headphones. AKG was founded in Vienna, Austria in 1947. In the years since its inception, AKG has become a key player in the realm of professional audio, with its headphones and microphones found in major studios around the world. With the discontinuation of the K1000 a few years ago, the K702 represents AKG's flagship headphone.

The K702 utilizes a dynamic transducer, but employs two novel technologies. The first is the unique and patented Varimotion dual-layer diaphragm. The Varimotion diaphragm varies in thickness, progressively becoming thinner out towards the perimeter. This is said to imbue the driver with better control and high-frequency reproduction at the center and greater elasticity and excursion for bass transients at the edge. The second is the flat-wire voice coil, which AKG also employs in its microphones. Utilizing flat wire instead of the more commonly-used round wire enables AKG to build very rigid voice coils with minimal weight, which is said to result in an increased magnetic field and improved pulse response.
The K702 closely resembles AKG's K701 headphone, the differences being a different color aesthetic and the provision on the K702 of a detachable headphone cable. The AKG 702 is open-backed, and boasts a frequency range of 10 to 39,800Hz (no tolerances specified). Sensitivity is given as 105dB at an input of 1 volt, with an impedance of 62 ohms. Maximum input power is said to be 200 mW. The headphone comes with a three-meter 99.9% OFC cable, connected to the left earpiece, with gold-plated 1/4" and 1/8" connectors. The K702's color scheme is stylish, done up in silver and black, with velour earpads and leather headband. Packaging and instructions included are adequate, if not quite in the same league as some of its more expensive competition. AKG's warranty for all its headphone products is two years.

The AKG K 702 is a substantial headphone, being circumaural in nature with large earcups, but is not as heavy as expected due to its reliance on lightweight plastics in its construction. Weighing in at 235 grams without its cable, the K 702 disperses its mass evenly across the listener's head. I found the K 702 to be very comfortable for long listening sessions, but occasionally, I noted some pressure on my scalp from the ridges present on the underside of the headband. As mentioned, the circumaural earcups are large and deep, leaving my ears unencumbered. The height adjustment is done via elastic straps and has more than enough range for my medium-small head.

Once break in was completed, I was surprised at how much better the AKG sounded. Now I was hearing a transducer of remarkable neutrality and subtlety. This neutrality, especially in the all-important midrange, was the one consistent sonic trait I discerned throughout the review period. Voices and other midrange instruments sounded very lifelike, with no driver or mechanical resonances to color the purity of reproduction. Listening to Even in the Quietest Moments (A&M Records 069 493 348-2) by Supertramp, I was quite taken with the natural reproduction of Rick Davies' vocal on "Lover Boy." Likewise, his piano playing on "From Now On" sounded full and rich, without any undue coloration. And hearing Paul Desmond's alto saxophone on Dave Brubeck's classic Time Out (Columbia/Legacy CK 65122) was a revelation, with the K702 rendering his playing with the requisite bite and dynamic shading.

The K702's treble performance was also superb from the upper midrange to the mid-treble, with a purity and airiness that was beguiling on percussion instuments. Talking Heads released their final album as a group, Naked, in 1989. A myriad of international influences informed David Byrne's songwriting and the band's playing, including American jazz and Caribbean Zouk, and these influences can be heard on the record, with multiple percussionists assisting the core group's efforts on many of the tracks. Listening to the CD (Sire 25654-2) over the K702, I could clearly hear and delineate Manolo Badrena's shakers and triangles playing alongside Chris Frantz's cymbal brush work on songs like "Mr. Jones" and "Mommy Daddy You and I." However, I did occasionally note some truncation in the highest treble, which could lead to a touch of dryness, most notably on the Time Out CD noted above.
The AKG K702 is a truly outstanding headphone, possessing remarkable levels of neutrality and openness. Its airiness and large soundstage combine to convincing effect in ameliorating the typical in-your-head claustrophobia of headphone listening. While not the last word in bass extension and impact, listeners who don't need to plumb the depths while enjoying their dub reggae will find much to love in the K702's presentation. And, I've saved the best for last—with easy-to-find discounting on its retail price, the K702 is an unparalleled bargain, providing high-end sonics at entry-level prices.

Alesis MultiMix 8 USB FX Review

Alesis MultiMix 8 USB FX

Alesis’ new USB mixing desk and audio interface offers a lot of essential features for the small project studio – at a small project studio-friendly price! The key feature of this most recent addition to the MultiMix range is the onboard digital FX buss, which makes it far more useful in the gigging arena as well as giving the studio user another sound-processing option.

As with all things modest in size, there’s not enough room in the casing for a transformer, so the supplied separate transformer is connected to the back via a three-pin connector secured by a locking ring. The only other items around the back are a switch each for the main power and phantom power, plus a USB socket.

Alesis MultiMix 8 USB FX Mixer

The housing is made of sturdy sheet metal and has solid plastic end cheeks, which can be removed if you wanted to sit the mixer in a more confined space. Despite the diminutive size, however, Alesis has managed to spread the knobs out to give you a little more room for your digits than did previous models in the series.

The four mono channels – each with XLR, 1/4-inch jack sockets and a low-cut filter set at 80Hz – occupy the left-hand half of the desk. Channel 1 boasts an insert socket for using an external device in the signal path – if, for instance, you want to run a vocal through a hardware compressor to tame it. It’s a shame that only one channel has this option, though, as this makes processing stereo signals impossible without sending them out through the aux buss on playback, which is much further down the signal path than a conventional insert point.

Channel 2 has the option of recording passive instruments directly, using a Guitar button that acts as a DI switch, but again, there’s only one of these, so no recording bass and guitar together without some kind of preamp. The first two channels do have a parametric mid as well as sweepable hi and lo EQ pots. All channels have FX post and aux pre sends, pan, volume and an LED peak indicator.
Channels 3 and 4 have three sweepable EQs with the mid set at 1kHz, while the two stereo channels – served by pairs of 1/4-inch jacks – just have hi and lo pots. Although rather limited, the EQ still retains a musical quality and does offer good value for money. It’s easy to bemoan the lack of this or that feature, but you have to bear in mind that this phantom-powered mixing desk and A-D/D-A convertor only costs around over 100£!

The mic pres are clean and capable of delivering a healthy signal; although the signal-to-noise ratio is probably quieter on more expensive desks, the MultiMix’s is still perfectly acceptable. The two outputs (Monitor and Main) are also connected via 1/4-inch jacks, as are the auxiliary buss and the headphone output. The FX, aux and headphones all have their own level control.

The FX buss has a good spread of the usual effects, which can be bypassed using the footswitch socket on the main panel. As well as flange, chorus and rotary, there are a couple of delays – one that acts as an ADT unit and another that’s probably only really useful in a dub scenario, as there’s no feedback control. The three types of reverb – room, plate and hall – each have three variations, with Room 3 sounding very transparent. All of the effects are very usable, with the shorter reverb times being easier to sit in a mix.

The beauty of this mini mixing marvel is in its plug and-play USB functionality – there’s no need to install any drivers for either Mac or PC. This makes the MultiMix 8 USB FX ideal as a first-time purchase for the budding producer, as it will provide them with a soundcard with 16-bit, 44.1/48kHz conversion and a mixer in one box. Sure, there’s no main output insert point (as well as the other omissions listed above), but the latest MultiMix still represents excellent value for money and is well worth checking out if you’re looking for a versatile, entry-level mixer with USB audio functionality.

Shure MV5 Digital Condenser microphone for iOS and Mac

As someone keen on recording voiceovers and podcasts from an iPad, I needed a Lightning-enabled microphone that could handle such a task. While it’s true that Apple’s Lightning to USB 3 Camera Adapter allows iOS to interface with a variety of microphones that it wasn’t able to before, I like the idea of keeping my setup as minimal and as dongle-free as possible.

Enter the Shure MV5 Digital Condenser Microphone. This is a MFi-certified Lightning-enabled microphone that works with the iPad or iPhone using a single microUSB to Lightning cable. By switching out the Lightning cable for a traditional USB cable, you can use the same microphone with your Mac or PC.

Shure MV5

This microphone is a digital condenser that can be powered via Lightning or USB. It doesn’t require any special adapters or power supplies to work, just plug it in, launch an app, and start recording.

Since I planned on using this microphone for podcasting on the go using Ferrite, it had to meet a few of my requirements. Most importantly, I needed something that was small and easy to travel with. At only 5.5-inches tall when mounted to the included stand, the Shure MV5 easily meets my needs in that area.

Build quality-wise, the Shure MV5 is a mixed bag. It does feature an all aluminum stand, but the stand is so lightweight that the setup is top-heavy when the microphone is mounted on the stand. The thread mount screw hole on the stand is wide, allowing you to move the position of the microphone forward or backward to achieve different firing angles.

The microphone itself is almost all plastic, and features a red windscreen underneath its plastic grill. I’ve dropped the MV5 several times off my desk, thanks to how lightweight the stand is. Even with those drops, the plastic didn’t crack, chip, or dent in any way.
Shure offers the MV5 in two flavors — a black version with a red windscreen, and a more understated grey version with a black windscreen — both for $99. I personally opted for the black+red combo, as it lends the microphone its own unique personality.

Mounting the microphone

Although the Shure MV5 comes with an aluminum stand that allows the position of the microphone to be slightly adjusted, as mentioned, I find that the stand is too light, making it easy for the microphone to tip over if you’re not careful. The good news is that the thread mount found on the bottom of the MV5 is a standard 1/4″ camera tripod thread, allowing it to connect to a variety of stands, booms, etc.

Headphone monitoring

Headphone monitoring is super-important for recording, since it allows users to monitor their sound input and gauge whether they’re speaking to loud or too soft. Thankfully, the Shure MV5 features a 3.5mm headphone output to tap into, allowing me to use my Audio-Technica ATH-M50x cans for monitoring.
The microphone also features a headphone monitor volume adjustment that can help users to acquire just the right amount of volume in their headphones.

Mute switch

Mute switches seem to be hard to come by on microphones, which is one reason why the best-selling Blue Yeti has always been a favorite of mine. That microphone features an easy to access mute switch that makes it simple to suppress coughs and other inevitable background noise that you encounter when podcasting or doing vocals.

The Shure MV5 features a mute switch, although it’s not in the most ideal area. The mute switch for the MV5 is found on the back of the microphone, right below the DSP button that lets you change the microphone’s recording modes. To be fair, Shure seems to have opted for the best spot available, it’s just that real estate is hard to come by on a microphone this small.

Shure BETA 87A Review

The Beta 87A is a premium quality, hand-held condenser vocal microphone from Shure. It is designed for professional lead or backing vocalists on stage and offers a smooth frequency response and high sound pressure level capabilities. It has a tight supercardioid pattern to provide excellent isolation from other instruments as well as helping to minimise feedback from stage monitors. It comes with a storage bag and stand adaptor and, like most condenser microphones, it operates on phantom power (between 12-52v).

The Beta 87A is designed with a low-frequency roll-off that helps to compensate for the microphone’s proximity effect (the boomy sound often associated with singing close to the mic). It has a tailored frequency response that features a presence rise that brightens the upper midrange and helps the vocals cut through the mix. Like the dynamic mics from Shure, the mic has a robust capsule suspension system to minimise handling noise. When comparing to similar dynamic microphones, the Beta 87A produces a similar punchy sound in the mid-range, but with the added warmth and open top-end that you would expect from a condenser microphone.

Although feedback rejection is good, if you accidently cup your hands over the grille at a gig it becomes quite prone to feeding back on stage. Also, although ideal for live vocals, its close pickup pattern reduces its usefulness as a microphone for other instruments such as acoustic guitar (like you might expect from a studio condenser mic).

Shure BETA 87A

Overall the Shure Beta 87A is an excellent vocal microphone that is well worth the investment if you are looking for top audio quality on stage. It produces a much more full and studio-like sound than dynamic microphones such as an SM58 and remains clear and undistorted. Saying this, its crystal clear sound may not make it the first choice for heavy rock singers, and rappers who like to cup their hands over the mic’s grille should probably look elsewhere too. At this level there is plenty of competition from other manufactures, however the Beta 87A holds its own against similarly priced alternatives such as the Audix VX-5 and Rode S1, as well as competing favourably against more expensive competition such as the Neumann KMS 105 and Sennheiser E965. If you are looking at upgrading your microphone; the Shure Beta 87A is definitely worth checking out.

In my home studio I have several condenser mics (Rode NT1,AKG and Audio Technica. The sound of a good condenser on vocals is a must for pro sounding recordings. Shure has managed to bring that sound to the stage for use in live performance. I have a decent Mackie based PA system (Mackie mixer and Mackie active speakers) and I must say that every positive reveiw is true. This is the best live vocal microphone I have ever used. For the past 25 years I have been faithful to Shure SM58 mics for vocals but now I am hooked on the Beta 87A. Yes they are expensive but if you can afford it they are worth it. Borrow one if you can and you'll see what I mean. If you have a high quality PA system you should have a high quality microphone and this is it.

Warning: The Shure Beta 87A (87 and 87C) along with the Shure Beta 58 are heavily counterfeited and sold on sites like Ebay and Craig's list. They look almost perect and come in perfectly duplicated Shure boxes with warrenty cards, mic pouches and mic collars. The first thing to check for if you get one is to see if it is actually a condenser mic. Most of the counterfeits out there are poor sounding dynamic mic capsules. Turn off your mixers phantom power and if the mic still works it's a dynamic fake not a real Shure condenser. Do a Google search for more ways to spot the fakes.

If you sing for a living, you deserve a Beta 87. It captures every nuance, rasp and grain of your voice in live performance, on par with many studio mics costing as much or more. You don't have to baby it, it's built like a tank and performs flawlessly in any weather.

A built-in electronic bass roll-off circuit lets you set the EQ on your mixer once and forget it. The clarity and quality of your voice remain basically the same. No Bruce Banner when it's far away, no Incredible Hulk when it's close, it's always balanced, warm and clean.
To guarantee break-proof operation, Shure offers no switches of any kind on its wired mic line. So you should choose the pattern or circuitry you want by the model.

Shure PG27USB Condenser Microphone Review

Shure PG27USB Condenser Microphone Review

Shure's PG27 microphone represents the new breed of USB-based active mics, drawing both power and connectivity from a built-in USB interface.

Cardioid Condenser Microphone

The PG27-USB is a large-diaphragm condenser microphone with an onboard 16-bit, 48 kHz ADC and USB audio output. It is the USB version of Shure’s PG27, and shares most of its components and circuitry with that microphone.
The 35mm capsule has a diaphragm diameter of 27mm.
The mic has a switchable -20dB pad and three rotary controls:
◾Mic gain
◾headphone volume
◾monitor mix
An onboard 1/8-inch audio jack allows “zero-latency” monitoring of live audio. Its output volume, and its mix relative to a prerecorded track can be adjusted via two thumbwheels indicated above.
A three-color LED (located near the gain control, on the side of the microphone) can be used to monitor the signal level:
◾Off: -30dB FS
◾Green: -30dB–-12dB FS
◾Yellow: -12–0dB FS
◾Red: above 0dB FS (clipping)
A second LED, immediately below the Shure logo, lights up green to indicate the presence of appropriate USB bus power.
The PG27USB includes a 3m USB cable, a metal “ring mount” mic clip, and a zippered storage pouch.
The mic is compatible with the 'ShureLock' A27SM elastic shockmount and A32WS windscreen (available separately).
Many of the functions of the mixing console have been transferred onto the microphone itself – you'll find volume and gain controls, a -20db cut for noisy sources and, most importantly, on-mic live monitoring, which cuts out the usual latency that software monitoring suffers.
Monitoring is important when using condenser mics that have a limited range of perfect reception, so plugging in headphones helps you make sure you hit the spot.
Getting it set up is easy, and its monitoring circuit shows up as an additional output, meaning you can route your Mac's playback straight to the PG27's headphone jack to save switching your headphones over.

It's arguable how practical the PG27 would be for portable use given that you need a mic stand to go with it, but it does cut out the need for a mixing console, so you can record in the field with no external power.
It is also a shame that using multiple simultaneous sound sources is difficult in OS X – this is only a solution if you just use one microphone at a time. And if you do, we can't recommend it enough.
Officially, the Shure PG27USB works under both Windows and Mac operating systems and requires no drivers. But as it's simply a standard USB audio device, it also worked on Ubuntu 9.04 'Jaunty' with no configuration required either.

Using the Open Source 'Audacity', I simply selected the Shure microphone as my input and output devices and I was ready to go. I didn't have to fiddle around in any sound recorder settings as all of this is taken care of before the signal is digitised.
The microphone itself offers much more than meets the eye - it's really a microphone, preamp and monitor all in one. Adjusting the gain is done by a fairly standard roller dial and there is a -20db pad which reduces the gain if you happen to be in a really noisy room or in close proximity to an instrument - for example, a French horn.

There is an LED indicator, too, that has three colours: green so you know it's picking you up, yellow to show its near its peak and red if you're clipping. During recording, you want it to be green when there is sound, with the occasional yellow during the loudest parts. So for initial setup, all you have to do is run a few simple test sounds while adjusting the gain to find the perfect level - you don't even have to be recording at this stage.

You'll also notice a headphone jack built into the microphone. This is for zero latency monitoring. When using the sound card on the computer for monitoring, there can be a delay as the sound is processed before it's sent to the headphones. In this case, it comes directly from the preamp allowing you to monitor the recording in real time.

As well as providing an input to the computer, it also provides an output. So while recording, if you're playing the tracks you are layering over, these will be sent to the microphone to be mixed into the monitor for playback through your headphones.
There are two more roller dials on the microphone - one for adjusting the volume of playback through the headphones, and another to adjust the volume of the monitor (i.e what's coming through the microphone). This allows you to decide what you want to hear more of - the backing track, or yourself.

The outcome of this is, is that you can get almost everything setup without even having to turn your computer on. All of your settings will be completely independent to the machine too, so you could move between several machines and have consistent levels.
Being a unidirectional cardioid microphone, it also did a pretty good job of cutting out other background noises too.

How to Set Up a Mixer for Podcasting

One of the many benefits of podcasting is that you can get started without breaking the bank.
There are, of course, a few necessities, but some - if not all - are typically hardware or software that come already built-in to your laptop or desktop computer. If you’re just starting out, then these options will definitely get you headed down the right path.
However, I do want to provide you with a few different options, including a low cost, a mid-cost and the higher-end so that you know what to keep your eye out for as you progress as a podcaster.
Don’t worry: whether you’re a PC person or a MAC lover, you’re in luck. Both systems run smoothly with the options I’m going to talk about in this post.
Let’s take a look at the hardware and software required to record, edit and publish a podcast, and then also review some of the other options if you’re in a position to make an investment upfront.
Later in this post, I’ll also talk about other recommendations for podcasters that’ll cost you, but that will enhance the quality and start to give your audience a real idea of your brand is all about.
Let’s get to it!

Podcasting Studio Mixer Setup

Podcasting hardware

What’s a podcast without sound? The only piece of required hardware to start a podcast is, of course, a microphone.
Whatever laptop or desktop you’re working from most likely has a built-in microphone, whether you know it or not.
While using your built-in microphone is very cost effective and definitely do-able, it’s really not the best option.
Why? Because your audio quality will suffer.

Audio quality is a very important component of a podcast for obvious reasons. The medium you’re using to produce content is audible, and if the quality of your audio isn’t that great, then your audience will recognize that and it could mean the difference between someone listening and someone not listening.
When you’re just starting out – especially if you’re just trying to get a feel for recording an episode and doing some practice runs – using your built-in microphone is definitely okay.
Moving forward, I would recommend this piece of the puzzle be your first investment, as it is your sound that makes your podcast.
A major difference between this microphone and the other options I’ve mentioned thus far is that the HeilPR-40 does not plug into your computers USB port, rather it uses an XLR connection. This means you will need to purchase a mixer to plug the microphone into should you decide to go this route.
I’ll dive into the optional goodies for podcasters, like mixers, in just a minute; first, let’s take a look at the software required to start a podcast:

Podcasting software

The one and only piece of software that is required to start a podcast is recording software.
Recording software is the program that allows your voice to actually be recorded, then edited and finally
converted into an MP3 file that can be uploaded to your media host.
If you’ll be doing an interview-based podcast, then you’ll also need to use calling software, and I highly recommend using Skype for this. Skype can be downloaded and installed on a MAC or a PC and is a great way to connect with your guests.
Every one of my interviews is conducted via Skype because it is far better and much clearer to record VOIP (voice over Internet protocol) versus trying to do an interview with someone who is on a cell phone.
Recording via Skype gives both you and your guest the option to be hardwired in (highly recommended) so you don’t have to worry about connection issues like you would on a cell phone. The reception is simply better, resulting in better audio quality.
Even if your guest is only using their built-in microphone on their computer, this is a far better option than the quality you would get from a cell phone recording.
With the help of programs like eCamm Call Recorder (for MAC) and Pamela (for PC), you can easily record both voice and video, and then upload the recording to your software program of choice.
Another option for recording if you’ll be doing video interviews is Google+ Hangouts on Air (G+ HOA).
G+ HOA not only records your video chat, it also automatically streams it to your YouTube channel live – a great way to be on several platforms without a ton of work. This would also give you the option to embed the video interview on your website for people to watch live, or as a replay.
I put together a step-by-step guide of how to set up and record your live, G+ HOA, and it’s linked at the end of this post. Here’s a quick look

How To Start

If you will not be doing an interview-based podcast, then you can skip Skype, and just record directly into your
software program. Here are the no-cost options available:
No cost for both MAC and PC users:
Audacity is a great, no-cost option to record and edit your podcast. It doesn’t give you anywhere near the same capabilities as Adobe Audition, but it definitely gets the job done.
No cost for MAC users:
GarageBand: For a free piece of software, GarageBand is a great option. Again, I prefer Audition over GarageBand, but if you’re not looking to spend money on a program just yet, then GarageBand will definitely get the job done.
Cost option for both MAC and PC users:
Adobe Audition. I use the Adobe Audition Cloud software, which I can record directly into while using Skype as my “calling system” and my PreSonus Firetudio mixer. I’ll talk more about mixers in just a bit, though.
The Adobe Audition Cloud software can be purchased for a low monthly cost of $19.99 on its own, or, if you use other Adobe products you can purchase the Adobe Cloud Package for $49.99/month.
Alright, now that you have an idea of the software required to start recording, editing and uploading your podcast, let’s talk about those goodies!

Other recommended goodies for podcasters

Something that I don’t know if I could live without is my mixer.
What exactly is a mixer, and what does it do?
Great question. It’s an electronic device for combining and changing the level, timbre and dynamics of different types of audio signals. If you end up purchasing the same microphone that I have, which is the Heil PR-30, then the XLR connection will require a mixer.
Again, the mixer is definitely not a necessity, but it does allow you to do some pretty cool stuff with your voice levels, and it has definitely saved the day on a couple of occasions when my guest’s sound wasn’t all that great.
I use the Presonus Firestudio Project, which will set you off $400. It’s not a cheap purchase, but it will
drastically improve the quality of your audio and the ease with which you’re able to edit your podcast.
If you do not plan on doing any of the editing, or you’re not too concerned with being able to record on two separate tracks, then this is probably $400 you could spend on something else. Here’s why I can’t live without it:

as previously discussed, the mixer is also what allows me to record directly into Adobe Audition on two separate tracks (one track is my voice, the other track is my guest’s voice). Among a lot of other benefits, recording on two separate tracks makes editing a lot easier, including the ability to silence out background noise and also cut out entire parts of the audio clip if and when you and your guest talk over one another.

Well, there you have it! A quick look at all the podcast software and hardware required to start your own podcast.