Welcome back to Scoring for Films, as usual, you often ask us to talk about specific topics... Hot topics! Through comments, emails, messenger, you use any type of social media to communicate with us, and we appreciate it, but remember the best way is right here in the comments. Today we have a guest, and we’ve shrunk a bit... The family has grown again, we really can’t manage to be alone, and this time we have Simone Coen with us. To talk about?

Microphones. Microphones, we’re talking about microphones, because the question we’re often asked is “What’s a microphone for?” A quick look at Wikipedia might help. But another question we’re often asked is: “What could I use to record, maybe at home, without having a fully equipped studio with expensive gear, but still get a decent and acceptable level?” Is it possible? Yes. I’ll keep it simple. And if he says so...

we can trust him. Why? Simone Coen is my sound engineer here in the studio. Simone has a strong background in microphone setup and in producing samples, including for important libraries such as Kontakt. Or – check out his site Chocolate Audio – a fantastic library that I always use in all my productions, for demos, where I need to insert a celesta, for example, the Celestial: it was recorded and sampled in this studio. Im aware many people want an easy solution.

That is: the right microphone is this one, good, done. Obviously, we need to make lots of distinctions, but let’s try to dive into the topic. Let's start with the general concept of microphone for those who don’t want to check Wikipedia. So, a microphone is a transducer, meaning a device that transforms, that interprets sound waves into an electrical signal; then the electrical signal enters the audio interface and gets converted into digital. Into 0s and 1s. The microphone is a transducer, so it captures sound waves.

And it's important, because the microphone can alter and change, by switching from one microphone to another, the very nature of the tone, of the sound you're recording, in a radical way. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be microphones that cost 70 euros and microphones that cost thousands, right? Yes, it would be nice if you could pick the ideal microphone but then there would only be three microphones on the market. Actually there are thousands of microphones on the market. There’s a bit of everything, both in terms of quality and especially technical characteristics. Let’s start by making a basic distinction: I often hear people talk about “professional” microphones, as if there’s a contrast between a professional and an amateur microphone.

Except for very rare cases—products you find online for 20 euros— in almost every other case, we’re still talking about professional products, and thanks to technology— compared to microphone designs that are now at least 50 years old— we’ve managed to lower costs and get good and sometimes even excellent results with very low-cost products. Let’s take an example. Three microphones that impressed you for their quality-price ratio. So, as an entry-level microphone, the classic large-diaphragm condenser, I personally find the Lewitt microphones to be very good in quality: LCT240, 440, 441 Flex; we’re under 500 euros. Brands like Lauten Audio At the entry level— say, around 100 euros— one of the best options remains the Rode NT1, which has been around for a long time. It’s a microphone I don’t particularly like— because it has a bit of a “plastic” effect on the mid-highs, which aren’t particularly detailed—but it gets the job done.

For small-diaphragm— the so-called “overhead” mics— I like the Lewitt LCT040, which costs around 100 euros and are really excellent microphones. Another great option is Lauten Audio and SE Electronics, particularly the SE8. These are around 300 euros. Why would you use this kind of microphone instead of a large-diaphragm one? Well, one reason is the look. There are many situations where making an impression is necessary.

There are lots of YouTubers who have giant microphones... There are a bunch of microphones that are widely used, others that are classic YouTuber or podcast microphones, etc. These are decent microphones, qualitatively speaking, but mainly they’re based on the look. We’ve removed them; actually, there are my GT Tube valve microphones here, because we love the warm sound. Of course, a big microphone looks more impressive, there's no doubt about it. There are some fairly well-known brands that have unjustifiably large microphones: you open them up, and there’s really not much inside.

That said, a small-diaphragm microphone compared to a large-diaphragm one got a better transient response. They tend to capture transients more faithfully. Not necessarily better, but more accurately. What a transient is? It’s the initial part of the sound envelope that any sound source generates after the vibration is activated. Let’s say a person follows the advice you gave them and buys one of these microphones.

Can they record everything with these microphones? Drums, guitar, string quartet?... It depends... Generally, yes; as a rule, I suggest to my students a minimal set of microphones: a large diaphragm condenser microphone, a small diaphragm condenser microphone, a dynamic microphone and a ribbon microphone: these are the major types into which microphones can be categorized. A large diaphragm condenser microphone will have a good output level. It doesn’t have an excellent transient response, but it sounds more euphonically; it tends to mask more unpleasant details (if it’s not a high-quality microphone); it has the significant advantage of having a very low intrinsic noise, meaning it produces little noise.

And that is a very important thing, On the other hand, small diaphragm microphones have a better transient response, but since the diaphragm is small, they have a worse signal-to-noise ratio; they have more intrinsic noise. They are often used for orchestral recordings, to capture from a distance, despite being a bit noisier. Then we have dynamic microphones. These microphones do not require power, because condenser microphones require Phantom power. The condenser has plates and needs to be charged; to be electrically charged it needs a power source. The dynamic microphone is a passive microphone that includes an electrical coil that is excited by a membrane - which moves with the vibration of the air - and generates an electrical signal.

The characteristics of dynamic microphones generally are: they have a slightly more limited frequency response but starting from the 1960s limited to 15-16 KHz, so for general usage it is more than sufficient. Then they have a somewhat limited frequency response; they have on the other hand a greater resistance. The system itself is more robust and is widely used live because it withstands bumps, drops, temperature changes, humidity, etc. better than a condenser microphone, which is instead more sensitive. The dynamic microphone - besides being used for vocals and live - can be found, for example, on the snare drum. Because you are particularly skilled at recording drums.

So they say... Let's set up for the drum recording. We start with 3 or 4 microphones: an overhead, a microphone that captures the entire kit from above, another microphone for the bass drum, which is not well recorded from above because the bass drum emits sound frontally. And I would say at least one microphone to reinforce the snare. In this case, I would say: a small diaphragm condenser as the overhead, a dynamic microphone on the snare, and another dynamic on the bass drum. In particular, on the snare, you can also successfully use condensers.

Even though historically - for a series of reasons - the dynamic has been preferred. Because it’s more resistant... For the drummer who plays like a madman... The real reason is that when they started miking, they were miking from a distance and they used one microphone for everything... And who are you to have four microphones?!? One is more than enough.

In the 1950s, microphones slowly got closer to the instruments. And at some point, they got so close that the drummer, when playing... if he misses the aim, he hits the microphone. Now, it’s obvious that if they hit a microphone worth 100 euros, I can afford to throw it away... But if we put a condenser there... it’s true that today there are condensers around the same price, but back then it wasn’t the case.

So of course, before placing a microphone in that spot and the drummer comes in and... Oops... I hit it! I don’t want to suggest what everyone would suggest for the snare, namely the SM57. Okay, exactly. It’s a microphone that I don’t particularly love for a series of reasons, especially on the snare; For example, there’s - at double the price - a beautiful microphone from Beyerdynamic called the M201, which is an excellent microphone.

If we want to stay around the same price as the SM57, there’s an excellent microphone that I really like, which is an SE Electronics called V7 which is a great microphone, that works really well on the snare. Another alternative is the Audix I5 which was specifically designed as a substitute for the SM57 and I think it’s an excellent microphone. You often do Masterclasses, workshops, focused on recording: "Rec like a pro". Well, I hold masterclasses and paid courses, but periodically I hold free workshops, which are introductory to the topic. So perfect for beginners. They’re perfect for beginners but also good for those beyond the beginner stage, because the content is wide-ranging; I’ve had professionals and colleagues among my students.

Well, for today, I’d say we’ve already covered a lot of information, but it’s not over. Simone will be back next episode to continue the discussion; today we cut it a bit with the hatchet, but in the next episode, we’ll have a lot more to say. So thank you, Simone, for now; we’ll see you in the next episode, don’t miss it. Bye.