Every microphone design is a trade-off. This is often reflected in the requirement of the S/N ratio. The omnidirectional microphone of the small diaphragm should be the most accurate, but due to the miniaturization of the diaphragm size, the noise will increase. Although you don't have to think about the relationship between them like a rocket designer, the output of a small diaphragm microphone does not have a large diaphragm, so you have to increase the gain of the voice, so the noise is also increased. .
Condenser microphones work just fine on a given occasion, especially if you choose different directivity, but large diaphragm microphones have a different off-axis effect, which means it accepts each at the same time. The ability of the sound waves in the direction is different, which is why the large diaphragm microphone is most suitable for human voice. The human mouth is a point source and the background is always clean. If this is called a quiet source, a large diaphragm microphone is best for picking up such a source, which is a trade-off.
The small diaphragm microphone has a large receiving angle, which makes it more powerful when picking up large group sound sources (guitars, drum kits and choirs). In other words, the ability to accept sound waves from different directions is more prominent than that of a large diaphragm, but because the diaphragm is small, the sensitivity is weaker than that of the large diaphragm, which is a trade-off.
It seems that what is the best vocal microphone to answer? Professionals definitely prefer a large diaphragm, so what is the best microphone for recording a group of instruments? In my opinion, either you have a large diaphragm with a very good design, usually everyone will prefer a small diaphragm, unless you listen to the source of the sound, or you have no more signal-to-noise ratio. Claim.
The last thing to say is that the frequency response of most microphones is not a really flat straight line, but a combination of burrs and potholes. Usually you see that the frequency response graph is smoothed. However, burrs and potholes do not exist because of such treatment. And these peaks and valleys will not be exactly the same for the same model of the same brand of microphone.
The important point here is that when you sing or play a certain note, the note happens to fall on a corresponding peak and valley. The sound will tend to change. What does this mean? In short; a microphone is collecting a certain kind of sound, a certain guitar, or a keyboard sounds very ok, but with another piece of audio, another guitar or keyboard, it sounds very different. .
This is the crux of the problem. When you try to compare two different microphones, especially when you hear someone talking about it; this Chinese-made microphone sounds like U87, and my answer is slow! For the singer, that guitar, or that keyboard, he may be right. However, due to the fact that the different peaks and valleys of the frequency response of the two microphones exist, it is decided that in other cases, the difference between them may be enormous.
Another fact is that unless you have accumulated the above experience for a long time. Since your ears have not yet trained the ability to discern these differences, your basis will be biased towards loudness, brightness or more low frequencies, but it is easy to miss those tiny peaks and valleys. This skill comes from long-term listening practice. And ear training. When you are comparing microphones, if a microphone sounds "bright" or "more details", make sure you don't confuse the two concepts of the high frequency peak of the microphone and the high frequency boost of the circuit.
But these definitions are not on the nail. We suspect ourselves when we suspect a highly sensitive microphone (which usually means neglecting accuracy); where does this extra loudness come from? Remember that Yamato is synonymous here, but it also means poor precision. Poor precision may not necessarily be a bad thing, maybe even more like you like it, but you have to remember it anyway; precision is sacrificed.
There are always a lot of trade-offs when choosing a device, so that these trade-offs will accompany you for a long time, and he will be good for you when choosing a microphone.
Condenser microphones work just fine on a given occasion, especially if you choose different directivity, but large diaphragm microphones have a different off-axis effect, which means it accepts each at the same time. The ability of the sound waves in the direction is different, which is why the large diaphragm microphone is most suitable for human voice. The human mouth is a point source and the background is always clean. If this is called a quiet source, a large diaphragm microphone is best for picking up such a source, which is a trade-off.
The small diaphragm microphone has a large receiving angle, which makes it more powerful when picking up large group sound sources (guitars, drum kits and choirs). In other words, the ability to accept sound waves from different directions is more prominent than that of a large diaphragm, but because the diaphragm is small, the sensitivity is weaker than that of the large diaphragm, which is a trade-off.
It seems that what is the best vocal microphone to answer? Professionals definitely prefer a large diaphragm, so what is the best microphone for recording a group of instruments? In my opinion, either you have a large diaphragm with a very good design, usually everyone will prefer a small diaphragm, unless you listen to the source of the sound, or you have no more signal-to-noise ratio. Claim.
The last thing to say is that the frequency response of most microphones is not a really flat straight line, but a combination of burrs and potholes. Usually you see that the frequency response graph is smoothed. However, burrs and potholes do not exist because of such treatment. And these peaks and valleys will not be exactly the same for the same model of the same brand of microphone.
The important point here is that when you sing or play a certain note, the note happens to fall on a corresponding peak and valley. The sound will tend to change. What does this mean? In short; a microphone is collecting a certain kind of sound, a certain guitar, or a keyboard sounds very ok, but with another piece of audio, another guitar or keyboard, it sounds very different. .
This is the crux of the problem. When you try to compare two different microphones, especially when you hear someone talking about it; this Chinese-made microphone sounds like U87, and my answer is slow! For the singer, that guitar, or that keyboard, he may be right. However, due to the fact that the different peaks and valleys of the frequency response of the two microphones exist, it is decided that in other cases, the difference between them may be enormous.
Another fact is that unless you have accumulated the above experience for a long time. Since your ears have not yet trained the ability to discern these differences, your basis will be biased towards loudness, brightness or more low frequencies, but it is easy to miss those tiny peaks and valleys. This skill comes from long-term listening practice. And ear training. When you are comparing microphones, if a microphone sounds "bright" or "more details", make sure you don't confuse the two concepts of the high frequency peak of the microphone and the high frequency boost of the circuit.
But these definitions are not on the nail. We suspect ourselves when we suspect a highly sensitive microphone (which usually means neglecting accuracy); where does this extra loudness come from? Remember that Yamato is synonymous here, but it also means poor precision. Poor precision may not necessarily be a bad thing, maybe even more like you like it, but you have to remember it anyway; precision is sacrificed.
There are always a lot of trade-offs when choosing a device, so that these trade-offs will accompany you for a long time, and he will be good for you when choosing a microphone.
SHENZHEN CHONDEKUAI TECHNOLOGY CO.LTD , https://www.szfourinone.com