Re: question for recording buffs

[PL500@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 4/26/04 2:07:16 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
mbrogers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
My band is doing some recording withour 16 track Fostex VF 160 recorder.  I 
got a great harp tone using a Shure 58 in front of my amp.  we then switched to 
a condendensor mic, and a SM 57, and could'nt recapture the sound.  I'm going 
back to the 58, but am not sure if it was a fluke.  we also have a Shure kick 
drum mic to try.  Any thoughts?  The tone I got was almost like a muted 
trumpet tone.  Great for swing tunes.  the other tunes don't have that bite.  You 
can write me off line, as not to waste other's time.  thanks.  bullfrog
Bullfrog, 

This deserves to be on-list, so I am posting it here. a good rule in the 
studio is if it sounds good, don't mess with it. The Shure 58 is fine microphone 
for recording and if it is capturing the sound you want demand it be put in 
front of your amp. I always hear lots of griping from people about microphones 
and how all the high-end microphones are way out fo reach for the common 
recording enthusiast, but I have to say that much of that is crap. Entire albums have 
been recorded with just the Shure 57, and much of the mixes of those came out 
fine. Like George Martin said "All you need is ears." Stick with the Shure 58 
and you will do fine. 

Andrew