The Results: DIY Ribbon Mic v/s AT 2050 Condenser

[Julibee]

Yay! Recorded some vocal samples today, using the new Austin Model 1 Ribbon mic that I made and posted about here...

You can read all about the results and testing methodology over at my blog...

Would love to know what you think!  

Overall, I'm pretty impressed that it works at ALL, much less that it sounds damn decent!  

EDIT:  I have fixed the embedded clips to Soundcloud Players.... Should be right as rain for everyone, now... in fact... if you don't want to read about what I did, here's a link to the Soundcloud Player.

[JoshuaPhilgarlic]

I see only "Whoops" when I click the play buttons :frown: .

[Julibee]

All of them? Danggit. That was only happening for me on tast two.

I had uploaded to Google Drive... Yet another black mark for Google stuff. MAN... I'll fix as soon as I can. Not at home at the moment...

[ScuzzyEye]

Yeah, I'm getting it too. But if you use the pop-out link on the right-hand side of the player, you get see that the Whoops page has a download link. I can play the downloaded file.

As for the sound, I can immediately hear a difference in the high-end. "Brittle" is an excellent word for how the condenser sounds. I probably would have not found anything wrong with that sound, but with the contrast of the ribbon, I definitely prefer the smoother highs.

An aside about recording in a small, reflective room like a bathroom. That's how "room" reverbs were originally made. A speaker and a mic were placed in a room. The dry track was played back through the speaker, and recorded on the mic. You could change the sound by moving the speaker and mic in relation to each other, and the walls. Since you like how the bathroom sounds, you should give it a shot sometime. Take a dry instrument in Reason and apply some bathroom reverb.

[EnochLight]

Wow - very cool comparison examples!  The players worked for me in Chrome, but were a little finicky to click the "play" button (had to try a few times to get it right).

Your experience seems to echo mine - the ribbon mic is definitely "smoother" on the highs.  Frankly, it works really well for your voice as you're much higher in range than I could ever possibly get.  De-essing seems to be a lot less of a problem when I use my ribbon mic, and I can immediately hear the result in yours as well.  I'm really digging mine, though I don't feel it's worth the cost of the investment I made.  That kit you bought and assembled yourself probably offers a similar sound as mine - at least difficult to tell the difference in a mix - but I ended up spending 3X as much money.   :frown:  That said, mine does have a Lundahl transformer, so that's pretty kewl.  I do love my ribbon mic!

Congrats girl - it sounds fantastic! 

[Julibee]

I've fixed it up a bit... uploaded to a new Soundcloud account and embedded players.  Of course, that means there's Soundcloud compression, but that's the best I can do to eliminate the hassle.  

[eusti]

Thanks for doing this and sharing the results!!!

D.

[Julibee]

An aside about recording in a small, reflective room like a bathroom. That's how "room" reverbs were originally made. A speaker and a mic were placed in a room. The dry track was played back through the speaker, and recorded on the mic. You could change the sound by moving the speaker and mic in relation to each other, and the walls. Since you like how the bathroom sounds, you should give it a shot sometime. Take a dry instrument in Reason and apply some bathroom reverb.

You know, I KNEW that... but it had never occurred to me to try such a thing... in fact, as I was making this mic, the workshop presenter and I had a conversation about this very idea... You can tell from the comparison audio that I have a very large front room with two story ceilings.  He suggested that I try mic'ing myself in the studio as I normally do, but also running a line into the front room and recording the resulting room ambiance at the same time... then I could mix it in to taste.  I thought that was brilliant.  I realize it's an old studio trick, but I'd never really thought about it.

[Julibee]

Wow - very cool comparison examples!  The players worked for me in Chrome, but were a little finicky to click the "play" button (had to try a few times to get it right).

Your experience seems to echo mine - the ribbon mic is definitely "smoother" on the highs.  Frankly, it works really well for your voice as you're much higher in range than I could ever possibly get.  De-essing seems to be a lot less of a problem when I use my ribbon mic, and I can immediately hear the result in yours as well.  I'm really digging mine, though I don't feel it's worth the cost of the investment I made.  That kit you bought and assembled yourself probably offers a similar sound as mine - at least difficult to tell the difference in a mix - but I ended up spending 3X as much money.   :frown:  That said, mine does have a Lundahl transformer, so that's pretty kewl.  I do love my ribbon mic!

Congrats girl - it sounds fantastic! 

yeah... mine isn't a Lundahl, but there is an Austin Kit that has it... DIY for $399. They also have a Cinemag, which runs at $315.  Mine's an OTA-1, which I understand is made specifically for Austin.  

And now I have transformer envy... WHO KNEW?!?!

I do want a Cloudlifter though.  I have to crank it to 10 on the Audio Interface input and probably could still throw on some more gain in the Mixer.
 

[ScuzzyEye]

Funny how ideas converge like that sometimes.

You'll have to build the stereo version of the mic, and get some stereo reverb too.

[selig]

Hi Julibee,

These sound like the classic ribbon vs LDC comparison's I've done previously.

I DO hear quite a bit of consistent low end "disturbance" on the ribbon, even with the pop filter. I would definitely filter it to remove this as it's fairly constant and not always directly related to a plosive as far as I can tell on my initial listen. You weren't standing near an A/C vent blowing air (however gently) were you? Could also be coming up from the ground if you don't have a shock mount on the ribbon.

You may also find it better to stand back a bit more from a ribbon, and I often have the vocalist sing "past" the microphone rather than directly into it - it's still aimed directly at the mouth, but positioned about 30° (the angle of your typical monitor speaker) off axis so all plosives go right past the mic instead of directly into it. Obviously placement is an issue with a ribbon, specifically being aware of what is behind the mic (unlike with any other polarity pattern).

Ribbons and preamps…
Most of the time when I use a ribbon mic I use a preamp not only with tons of gain but also with an impedance selector. Can make a huge difference in my experience. You should be able to boost some nice smooth top end on the ribbon without bringing up too much noise - this is where having enough clean gain and the correct impedance really helps.

When you add just the right amount of top boost (and low filtering!) a ribbon can often out-perform the large diaphragm condensers. This is the same as for a dynamic microphone such as an SM7 or RE-20  - the top end on those types of mics is quite smooth and just needs a little boosting to match what we are used to getting from condensers. The main difference will be in the "smoothness" of the top end with the ribbon/dynamic (guess I've run out of words to describe that quality!). 


Interesting to hear you naturally sing small room vocal so much quieter than when in the large room… 

[Ecopro]

So here's some feedback for what is worth:

It seems the Ribbon mic controls the plosives and Sss much better than the Condenser. The breaths do sound more natural with the Ribbon. There's a bit more air with the Condenser, making things a bit more clear, but it comes with the added slight sibilance. Nothing the good 'ol Selig De-esser can't take care of though. While the Ribbon provides more control on sibilance and such, there's some subtle bottom end that might need to be rolled-off with an HP filter. Of course, what may seem like issues, can easily be resolved with some EQ.

So it would ultimately be your choice, although it seems like it would be another option or tool to choose from when the situation calls for it. It's win/win for you, since you put it together yourself. Just the experience of building something with your own hands is worth all of your time; not to mention the added future rewards. 

[Julibee]

Hi Julibee,

These sound like the classic ribbon vs LDC comparison's I've done previously.

I DO hear quite a bit of consistent low end "disturbance" on the ribbon, even with the pop filter. I would definitely filter it to remove this as it's fairly constant and not always directly related to a plosive as far as I can tell on my initial listen. You weren't standing near an A/C vent blowing air (however gently) were you? Could also be coming up from the ground if you don't have a shock mount on the ribbon.

Thanks for pointing that out, Selig - I hadn't noticed.  Will definitely make sure I fix that in "real" recordings.  I wasn't under a vent in the Cathedral Ceiling'd room (and I am using a shock mount), but it is possible that the AC came on when I was in the small room.  I always have to remember to check because it's such a "normal" sound of my house.

Also... there were contractors next door doing all sorts of things in the back yard.  Hmm.  But, likely, a shortcoming of the ribbon (or even more likely, Builder inexperience.... LOL).

Hi Julibee,
You may also find it better to stand back a bit more from a ribbon, and I often have the vocalist sing "past" the microphone rather than directly into it - it's still aimed directly at the mouth, but positioned about 30° (the angle of your typical monitor speaker) off axis so all plosives go right past the mic instead of directly into it. Obviously placement is an issue with a ribbon, specifically being aware of what is behind the mic (unlike with any other polarity pattern).

Ribbons and preamps…
Most of the time when I use a ribbon mic I use a preamp not only with tons of gain but also with an impedance selector. Can make a huge difference in my experience. You should be able to boost some nice smooth top end on the ribbon without bringing up too much noise - this is where having enough clean gain and the correct impedance really helps. 

Yes I really need a Cloudlifter or something - I really did have the Focusrite Scarlett cranked to 10 on input.  

Good notes about the angling.  

Hi Julibee,
Interesting to hear you naturally sing small room vocal so much quieter than when in the large room… 

SO. Observant!!!  You're amazing.  Thanks so much for taking the time!  

[Julibee]

So here's some feedback for what is worth:

It seems the Ribbon mic controls the plosives and Sss much better than the Condenser. The breaths do sound more natural with the Ribbon. There's a bit more air with the Condenser, making things a bit more clear, but it comes with the added slight sibilance. Nothing the good 'ol Selig De-esser can't take care of though. While the Ribbon provides more control on sibilance and such, there's some subtle bottom end that might need to be rolled-off with an HP filter. Of course, what may seem like issues, can easily be resolved with some EQ.

So it would ultimately be your choice, although it seems like it would be another option or tool to choose from when the situation calls for it. It's win/win for you, since you put it together yourself. Just the experience of building something with your own hands is worth all of your time; not to mention the added future rewards. 

That's two votes for the rumbly bottom end... I'd better take heed, huh?

I was SORELY tempted to run it all through Leveler and De-esser... but I didn't.  

And, exactly -- I see it as just another tool to add a certain feel, and I don't intend to use it constantly.  But there are times that call for it, so I know I'll use it. 

Also, one of the main reasons that I wanted to build it was so that I can FIX it if anything ever happens.  I have extra ribbons already crimped and stored away... 

Thanks, ecopro!  

[MarkTarlton]

this is rad! thanks for posting your experiments julibee!

to my ears it sounds like when you are singing the lower stuff especially on the f's, is when you hear what selig is talking about...there is some wind plosives making the ribbon sweat a little bit...you could try placing the mic a little off axis at an angle so your mouth isn't straight into the ribbon, or simply move it back more which will require more gain so your pre is probably not up to the challenge unless you have like 70-80db of gain or a cloud lifter thingy. I also noticed that the ribbon has more room in it probably becuase they are bi-directional mics most likely..the bigger room sounded better on the laptop speakers fyi

cool stuff! congrats on your build! you must be proud when you are setting in your studio admiring your new mic

[Concep]

Very cool!  I like how the ribbon sounds smoother, darker, and almost compressed.  It was had a vintage tape feel to it.

[Julibee]

Thanks, Mark - Yeah, I often do tilt the condenser... don't know why I didn't do the same for the ribbon.  But, I love that you guys are all coming to the same conclusions.  Yeah, I need the Cloudlifter.  

Thanks, Concep!

[selig]

Thanks, Mark - Yeah, I often do tilt the condenser... don't know why I didn't do the same for the ribbon.  But, I love that you guys are all coming to the same conclusions.  Yeah, I need the Cloudlifter.  

Thanks, Concep!

The cloud lifter will only address level, not impedance - but that's half your issue solved at least!

As for the low end stuff, the ideal situation would be a simple HPF built into the mic with a switch (like so many out there). Otherwise, a preamp with a low filter will do just fine.

Here's what it looks like -most of what is below 160 Hz (on this track at least) can be discarded IMO - the low end crap is fairly constant, not just on plosives:
 

[Kazz]

As for the low end stuff, the ideal situation would be a simple HPF built into the mic with a switch (like so many out there). Otherwise, a preamp with a low filter will do just fine.

Is there a good reason to do it at the mic or preamp stage instead of just EQing it out after recording?

I know you do some things a certain way just because that's what you've been doing for a long time so you're comfortable with it, and you've had access to hardware to do it with, but it's not always easy to tell when something is personal preference and when there is a real technical benefit to doing it a certain way.

The only thing I can think of right now is that if you have a lot of loud low end junk you might end up lowering the level of what you actually want to capture by turning the input down to avoid clipping when all that was clipping was the noise.

I'm guessing there are other technical issues I'm not thinking of?  Or is it just your preference?

[selig]

As for the low end stuff, the ideal situation would be a simple HPF built into the mic with a switch (like so many out there). Otherwise, a preamp with a low filter will do just fine.

Is there a good reason to do it at the mic or preamp stage instead of just EQing it out after recording?

I know you do some things a certain way just because that's what you've been doing for a long time so you're comfortable with it, and you've had access to hardware to do it with, but it's not always easy to tell when something is personal preference and when there is a real technical benefit to doing it a certain way.

The only thing I can think of right now is that if you have a lot of loud low end junk you might end up lowering the level of what you actually want to capture by turning the input down to avoid clipping when all that was clipping was the noise.

I'm guessing there are other technical issues I'm not thinking of?  Or is it just your preference?

Generally speaking, I say to get the sound right at the source. When you can't do it at the source, do it next at the microphone (use a different mic, move it to a different position, use it's built in HPF, etc.). You are correct that a loud plosive could push the overall level higher. But thought it's uncommon, there are some cases where the microphone itself could be overloaded, and that's the ultimate situation where you'd want to use the built in filter. Also, if you are compressing when recording, you'll almost always want to filter BEFORE the compressor so the compressor won't grab the stuff you don't want grabbed, like those afore mentioned plosives.  Once it's compressed by a plosive, filtering won't help since the gain reduction caused by the plosive won't be eliminated even if you filter since it's no longer purely a subsonic event.

That being said, the types of filters built into mics don't have much control, so if you need more control you'll have to go to the mic preamp/EQ etc. 

[Kazz]

Generally speaking, I say to get the sound right at the source. When you can't do it at the source, do it next at the microphone (use a different mic, move it to a different position, use it's built in HPF, etc.). You are correct that a loud plosive could push the overall level higher. But thought it's uncommon, there are some cases where the microphone itself could be overloaded, and that's the ultimate situation where you'd want to use the built in filter. Also, if you are compressing when recording, you'll almost always want to filter BEFORE the compressor so the compressor won't grab the stuff you don't want grabbed, like those afore mentioned plosives.  Once it's compressed by a plosive, filtering won't help since the gain reduction caused by the plosive won't be eliminated even if you filter since it's no longer purely a subsonic event.

That being said, the types of filters built into mics don't have much control, so if you need more control you'll have to go to the mic preamp/EQ etc. 

Good points.  So far I don't use compressors or anything before the interface when recording from a mic, so I hadn't thought about that.

What happens if you overload the mic though?  I guess it's just circuits *after* where the HP would be that might get overloaded?