miking live.. e609 vs.e906 senhiser

jeff reynolds · Post by **jeff reynolds** » 17 May 2005 8:10 pm

I'd like some feedback from others on mic choices.
I like the idea of being able to hang the flat faced type over the amp. whats the pros and cons. Ive been using a sure sm57 with a Zbar for years now is that my best choice?

waiting yall's replies.

------------------
Dekley S12U 7X5 / Gibson Flying V, ES335, G&L ASAT Z3,Fender Vibrosonic, Fender Quad Rev. , Twin Rev. , Deluxe Rev. ProFex II
www.theearthangels.net

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 17 May 2005 10:31 pm

The 609 is the successor to the hallowed MD409, reengineered for economy of manufacture in the new century.

The SM57 remains the Great American Microphone. It may not have the sparkle or the sex appeal of the others mentioned but it's one of very few mics that will always produce a decent sound with pretty much ANY instrument. It's also the most inexpensive truly professional mic ever sold!

I'd probably buy a pair of 609's if I had the extra dollars to throw. Fortunately I already have a handful of good mics to play with so I'll just pay the mortgage instead.

------------------
<img align=right src="http://www.pdxaudio.com/dgsept03.jpg" width="114 height="114">Dave Grafe - email: dg@pdxaudio.com
Production
Pickin', etc.

1978 ShoBud Pro I E9, Randall Steel Man 500, 1963 Precision Bass, 1954 Gibson LGO, 1897 Washburn Hawaiian Steel Conversion

[This message was edited by Dave Grafe on 17 May 2005 at 11:33 PM.]

John Daugherty · Post by **John Daugherty** » 18 May 2005 4:35 am

Help me out here. Why would you need such a mic to capture the frequency range of the guitar and amp? I can see using a quality mic for acoustic instruments. I have been satisfied with using the preamp output on the amp for recording and running through PA systems. The EQ controls can be used to get a decent sound in my opinion.

Gene Wilcox · Post by **Gene Wilcox** » 18 May 2005 8:01 am

There are circumstances that one may need to mic up amps. One instance, if the muso(s) are using "In Ears", basically have to mic everything up so they can hear what's going on. Some guys use little amps, or (thankfully) have a fairly low stage volume, you need to get that in the mix. The speaker contributes alot to the desired sound a muso may be after, hence, Mic 'er up.
The 609's big advantage is the orientation of the diaphram, one can employ the "Tape and Drape" or loop the cable through the carry handle. Elimininates stage clutter.
The 409's are vastly superior sounding over the 609's, but with the value of the 409's, pretty much they stay home. e609 vs. SM57? Fairly close performance wise, and in terms of cost, a push. The SM57 is always going to be my "Desert Island" choice.. but where is the power? Hahah

HTH

Dave Grafe · Post by **Dave Grafe** » 18 May 2005 8:56 am

The primary advantage of the better mics is that they pick up more detail. Some of the time the difference is notable, in other cases it can't really be heard in the mix.

In any case, it's not so much the frequency response of the mic as the "transparency" of the response in general.[This message was edited by Dave Grafe on 18 May 2005 at 09:57 AM.]