Sax on the Web Forum banner

1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Ive always used a mike on a stand. But I would like to try one of the ones which clip to the bell.

Not worried about a radio mike, so am happy to use a conventional lead.
I like the look of those ones which kind or curl back and sit about 4 to 6 inches above the bell, rather than one which looks as if it is almost in the bell.

Sound quality is top priority, but within a budget of say £250 ish..

Any advice about what to check out.
 

·
Moderator
Grafton alto | Martin Comm III tenor
Joined
·
28,951 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
clip on mike needed.... advice please. ealize that most requir phantom power. I use a stand mic but attach it using this

Ive always used a mike on a stand. But I would like to try one of the ones which clip to the bell.

Not worried about a radio mike, so am happy to use a conventional lead.
I like the look of those ones which kind or curl back and sit about 4 to 6 inches above the bell, rather than one which looks as if it is almost in the bell.

Sound quality is top priority, but within a budget of say £250 ish..

Any advice about what to check out.
A dynamic mic seems to be the way to go as it does not require phantom like most bell mics. I attach mine with this guy. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MS5GL0C/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_zptYAb794K4F3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,040 Posts
I’ve used a Shute Beta 98 hard wired for years with no issues. Great sound, very adjustable, no key noise and lightweight. It needs phantom power but most sound boards have that. It’s proably around $200 USD now so that should be under your price point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
thanks for the input, guys..
I hadnt actually thought of using some kind of contraption to hold my current mike over the bell of the sax.

but i dont actually like the look of the one linked to by 3dogie . sorry.

Being held from something in the lyre hole, meaning the mike lead coming in to the mike from so high up puts me off .

But i do like the idea in general, and may look around for other alternative methods of holding a conventional mike.

thanks again
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
I use a wireless transmitter, no wires from the tenor. Wi Digital Wi AudioLink Pro Use it with my guitar and wind-controller also. Also have another one transmitting from the piasobarrel in the mouthpiece and that is transmitted to an audio interface to my Mac or Ipad Pro for conversion from audio to midi.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
28,511 Posts
I got a Pronomic IM-20 clip-on sax mic through Amazon here in Spain and am quite pleased with it. It has phantom power and a 3 meter cord which is long enough that I don't really need a wireless setup to be comfortable playing on the small stages that clubs here have. It cost all of 60 euros, so it won't break the bank and has made a really big difference in my live playing experience right from the get-go.


https://www.amazon.es/s/ref=nb_sb_n...earch-alias=aps&field-keywords=pronomic+IM-20
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,442 Posts
Re: clip on mike needed.... advice please. ealize that most requir phantom power. I use a stand mic but attach it using t

A dynamic mic seems to be the way to go as it does not require phantom like most bell mics. I attach mine with this guy. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01MS5GL0C/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_zptYAb794K4F3
Any and every mixing console on the planet will be able to supply 48v phantom power. And if you aren't using a mixing console (which you should), then you can buy a phantom powered battery back that uses a 9v battery or maybe even some rechargeable lithium type batteries to inject phantom power in line. Whether a mic uses phantom power or not, should not be a consideration. Budget, size, connection type, sound quality, ease of use of the mounting bracket, etc... are all WAY more important than the phantom power requirements.

And frankly, I would not want to lug around that giant death trap of a contraption on my saxophone while playing a show. This isn't 1967 any more.

Shure, Audix, Audio-Technica, DPA, AKG, and many others all produce quality mini condenser clip on mics that are lighter, smaller and sound better than mounting an SM58 in some monstrosity of a hanging bracket over your horn.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
Interesting thread, and a timely one for me, since I'm also considering a clip on mic. For me, the primary motivation is wanting to have a bit more control over the sound. I don't like feeling like I'm the mercy of whatever mic the sound man happens to have and whatever settings he feels like using. I'd like to know I have a decent sound mic, and ideally I'd like to have some independent control of gain and tone settings.

I appreciate the info people have contributed so far, and I hope we get some more posts and recommendations. I would also be interested in what people think about whether wireless is necessary, and if not, what's the minimum cord length you'd go for? I'm not planning on dancing around like Grace Kelly, but it'd be good to have some freedom and movement. Then again, cordless seems to be more expensive.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2013
Joined
·
7,356 Posts
Interesting thread, and a timely one for me, since I'm also considering a clip on mic. For me, the primary motivation is wanting to have a bit more control over the sound. I don't like feeling like I'm the mercy of whatever mic the sound man happens to have and whatever settings he feels like using. I'd like to know I have a decent sound mic, and ideally I'd like to have some independent control of gain and tone settings.

I appreciate the info people have contributed so far, and I hope we get some more posts and recommendations. I would also be interested in what people think about whether wireless is necessary, and if not, what's the minimum cord length you'd go for? I'm not planning on dancing around like Grace Kelly, but it'd be good to have some freedom and movement. Then again, cordless seems to be more expensive.
There's very few options for mics that have these settings. All in all you could run through a small mixer (there's your phantom power) and then out to the main board. But your signal is going to be processed by whoever is doing sound in the end. And generally the only thing you really have to worry about when EQ'ing a tenor or an alto is the low end being a little blatty.
 

·
Moderator
Grafton alto | Martin Comm III tenor
Joined
·
28,951 Posts
I'd like to know I have a decent sound mic, and ideally I'd like to have some independent control of gain and tone settings.
If that is the case, why would there be any need for a "sound man"

That just isn't going to work as a decent sound engineer works with what the musician gives them. The gain control a saxophone player has is basically how loud they play their saxophone. The tone settings the saxophone player has is how they control their sound.

After that it is the job of the sound engineer to reinforce and balance the band. If a musician is attempting to do the same thing (e.g. by having control over the gain at the mic preamp) then it's a recipe for disaster.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
If that is the case, why would there be any need for a "sound man"

That just isn't going to work as a decent sound engineer works with what the musician gives them. The gain control a saxophone player has is basically how loud they play their saxophone. The tone settings the saxophone player has is how they control their sound.

After that it is the job of the sound engineer to reinforce and balance the band. If a musician is attempting to do the same thing (e.g. by having control over the gain at the mic preamp) then it's a recipe for disaster.
I'm not trying to affect the balance that the sound man is getting for the whole band. I'm just trying to give him a signal that best represents the sound I want to have. Part of the reason I'm interested in exploring this is that sometimes I've had problems with sound men setting the gain too high, so the signal is too "hot" and my tone sounds harsher than it should. (Then you ask him to turn it down, and suddenly you can't hear yourself at all.) Or maybe I'll ask for a little reverb, and suddenly it sounds like I'm playing underwater. It seems like one potential solution would be to have my own mic and preamp to feed into mixer so I can do those settings myself.

Is that so wrong? Seems to me that's what the guitarist, keyboard, and bass are doing with their amps and pedals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,611 Posts
There's very few options for mics that have these settings. All in all you could run through a small mixer (there's your phantom power) and then out to the main board. But your signal is going to be processed by whoever is doing sound in the end. And generally the only thing you really have to worry about when EQ'ing a tenor or an alto is the low end being a little blatty.
Yes, I was assuming I would run it through a small mixer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,442 Posts
Is that so wrong? Seems to me that's what the guitarist, keyboard, and bass are doing with their amps and pedals.
Umm..no.

There is a fundamental difference between gain and volume. What you guys are all talking about is volume. And gain structure is one of the hardest pieces of sound engineering to understand and get right for the novice tech. I wish I had a quick easy analogy to describe it. But gain is all about the input side of the signal chain. How much sound is hitting the mic preamplifier (quick point: you can never change how much sound is hitting the microphone, unless you move it further away from the source or turn the source down...mics always hear everything, all the time, even when not plugged in). The more gain you use the closer you get to distortion and the higher the noise floor gets (i.e. it lets in more extraneous sound). Volume is the final output, the channel fader or master fader on a console. And you can usually run those pretty damn high without distorting or increasing the noise floor of the input.

When a guitar player cranks up the "gain" on his amp, he's doing it to achieve distortion, to make the sound wave in the equipment clip, or change shape, or distort, which is where we get the term "distortion" from. We've come to accept and even enjoy the sound of distorted guitars. But you can have a distorted guitar that is also very quiet, which has a low volume because the master output has been turned down. Or one that is very loud (and not distorted) if it's turned all the way up on the amp. (Yes, some amps have distortion built in as an effect or use tube amplifiers that distort more easily, but that's another discussion).

When you guys say that you want to "increase the gain" of your saxophone playing, do you really want to get closer to the distortion level? Because that's what you are doing. Guitar and bass players and to a lesser degree keyboard players (usually synth players) are adjusting the gain to create a specific tonal color, to get something that is more or less distorted. In all but a very few places, we don't generally like the sound of distorted saxophones (high baffle, giant tip opening, metal mouthpieces notwithstanding). (Although, really, that is a form of "gain increase" also, just that it is physical gain instead of electrical gain).

If you really want to get get "your sound" out to the audience as transparently as possible, spend as much on your microphone as you did on your saxophone. Go buy a Neumann TLM 170 or Ui89. Those mics have very flat frequency responses with no color in their sound: what goes in, comes out. Although, you might end up being surprised to hear what you really sound like through one of those mics. I've used high end condenser mics on for saxophones on symphonies and in musical theatre and jazz big bands. If the player is good and has a good solid, well centered tone, they sound great. If their tone is lacking, those mics will just expose that for everyone to hear.

All of the cheapo $100-150 mics that are always recommended here (even by me) don't have the clear and transparent sound that a very high end large diaphragm condenser mic has. Additionally, in theatre, we use very small lavaliere condenser microphones for voice. They have to sound absolutely transparent because they have to be mixed with the acoustic sound coming from the actor as well as through the PA system. If there is a difference in the sound quality, you will hear it through the PA system. In general, my rule is that if a mic is good enough for the human voice, then is should sound great for saxophone.

Unfortunately, there's nothing that I can do to help you with the unskilled and unqualified sound techs at your shows. I suspect that they are working at the bottom end of the industry for a reason. The best thing you can do is advance your show with the engineer and tell him what mic you are bringing or want to use, and what you want your saxophone to sound like. Communication is key in the production business. And for God's sake, keep the SM58/57 away from your saxophone at all costs. :sick:
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2013
Joined
·
7,356 Posts
Great post above. Although I don't know the practicality of buying a high end Large Diaphragm mic for most playing situations. My guess is these would be running a cardiod pattern for using live. But even some of the best large diaphragms with the gain set properly are going to be a lot more inclined to feedback and ambient noise pick up in a lot of live situations.

I love my Beta 98 wireless. It records real nice too plugged into a nice preamp.

In the studio I would totally agree. But it's also a ton of bread to shell out that doesn't necessarily need to happen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,442 Posts
But even some of the best large diaphragms with the gain set properly are going to be a lot more inclined to feedback and ambient noise pick up in a lot of live situations.

I love my Beta 98 wireless. It records real nice too plugged into a nice preamp.
Depends on how the gain is set on the console or preamp. Yes, the high end LDC mics are much more sensitive, and need less gain on the preamp (because they output a higher gain from the mic), so you need less gain on the preamp than you would for an SM58. (See how gain works? It's a balancing act).

The Beta 98 is a good choice in a mini condenser mic. Well worth the money. And probably a good compromise on price:sound quality:size.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2017
Joined
·
6,086 Posts
The Beta 98 is a good choice. I have used one for years as well. It will be within your budget.

You can also control FX from stage and the signal you send the FOH a number of ways. I sometimes use a small PA / amp with FX as a stage monitor, and then send that signal to the board.

For example: The Roland AC60 has two mic inputs, phantom power, EQ, rudimentary effects, and an XLR out for the board. It's also lightweight so one trip from the car gets all your kit inside.
 

·
Distinguished SOTW Member, Forum Contributor 2017
Joined
·
6,086 Posts
At the risk of "sounding stupid", why keep away from SM58/57?
Great mics - especially for live work - in part because every engineer has experience using them. Live there are so many factors affecting your sound that anything that reduces your variables is a good thing. I use them in the studio too - usually mixed in with a signal from some other mic...
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
Top