On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:29:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in
message
In article ,
Phil Allison wrote:
In NO WAY SHAPE or FORM is the NT-1 a vocal mic
!!!!

Pray tell what determines a vocal mic, oh potty mouthed
one?

Vocal mics are usually fairly narrow cardioids, supercardioids or
hypercardiods, balanced for close working and have a built-in pop filter.


Not vocal "studio" mics, which are what this thread is about. For
stage work, of course you are dead right.

I've used one of my NT-1as for a vocal mic with an external pop filter and
appropriate filtering. Because I had to add so much stuff to make it
effective, I would not call it a vocal mic. I would call it an all-purpose
mic.


Again, not in a studio. If the voice is good, this will capture it.
Obviously with any recording you will use eq to get the exact tone you
want, but starting from an inherently flat mic gives you a much better
route to that spot than starting from a hugely peaky stage vocal mic
(which has characteristics remarkably similar to those needed for a
railway station PA).

I have also used another general-purpose mic, a MXL 603s as a vocal mic with
an extenal pop filter. The external pop filter was not effective enough at
avoiding contamination of the diaphragm, and after a few years of regular
service it developed a number of problems that my attempt to simply clean
the built-up gunk off the diaphragm did not fully alleviate.


If the vocalist doesn't get too close (which he shouldn't in a studio
setup), then gunk won't be a problem.

d