Re: Shaker Dynamic mic

["G." <gigs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

/ Hi Stephen,
/ my responses are sprinkled in below.

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 08:51:13 EDT
From: Spschndr@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Shaker Dynamic mic

I don't really understand why the Shaker Dynamic is described as "can be
used either High-Z or Low-Z",I don't think there is a switch on the Dynamic
that one can choose between High-Z or Low-Z?
So far as I can tell, no switch is necessary for a very simple reason: the
Shaker Dynamic is actually a low-impedance element wired in high-impedance
fashion but without an impedance transformer.

/ Yes, but then again the SM58 works just as happily with high impedance
gear without a convertor - in fact it sounds better than the Shakers to my
ears.
/ Impedance alone doesn't tell the whole story - the microphone's output
level measured in dB is important - all the Shaker mics seem to have a
relatively low output level.  I haven't found any technical stats on them so
I can't compare - but its pretty obvious when you plug it into high
impedance device.
/ What I noticed with both my Shaker Dynamic and Shaker MadCat plugged into
a guitar amp, apart from being relatively weak in tone, is they had a nasty
metalic edge ... I was trying out various amps using these mics at a second
hand guitar shop and pointed this out to the owner, who told me the problem
was the mic was "being overdriven by the amp" - and the solution to this was
to use a preamp.  I don't know if his description was accurate, or even
true - but ha leant me a bARCUS-bERRY standard preamp (Treble, Bass, Volume
and Sensitivity controls) - he said the Sensitivity control was an important
aspect when dealing with mics - preamps without them don't let you cut out
unwanted noise - the less sensitivity, the less signal from the mic gets
passed on.

/ Whatever the reality behind the cause of tonal problems - using the preamp
completely transformed both Shaker mic's behaviour and tone.  And it also
had a big effect on the modern Shure 520DX (which I don't like even when
used this way).

/ I was about to go and check out a Fender Super 60 private sale, and he
leant me the preamp... if I hadn't taken that preamp, I wouldn't have bought
the amp since the only mics I had were the Shakers and the 520DX - and
plugged straight in it sounded pissy weak - but with the preamp it clinched
the deal and I bought it without hesitation.

/ All that aside - I've since tried the SM58 straight into tube amps - and
yes it has a much quieter signal, but you can crank up the volume and it
sounds good - it doesn't have that nasty metalic edge like the Shakers, etc.

It has just enough output in this mode to be usable with high-gain modern
guitar amps, but its sensitivity in this  mode is so low as to resist
feedback very well.  Apparently there are a few mic elements that will do
this (such as some vintage Shure controlled reluctance ones).

/ I'm not sure what you're refering to.  I have here Shure CR element, two
high impedance USA CM elements, low impedance Mexican  CM element, and a
high impedance Mexican CM element.   One of the USA CM elements has a more
powerful output than the other.   The Lo-Z Mexican element is much weaker,
even with a decent impedance convertor.

/ The Hi-Z Shure CR, CM elements, and the astatic MC127 ceramic elements all
work really well plugged straight into a guitar amp - no problems.  And when
I got my first one after messing around with the Shakers and 520DX I finally
realised what I'd been missing out on, and promptly set about selling the
Shakers and 520DX element to afford more of the original elements.

I realized this the first time I played a 1/4" Shaker Dynamic into a PA that
happened to have a Lo-Z 1/4" input--there was an amazing difference in the
output and fullness of tone.  (Mark Korpi said it sounded good, if you want
independent evaluation.)

/ Set up properly the Shakers have a nice warm tone.

When you plug that mic into a guitar amp, the amp has to
do the work; the mic requires a lot of gain from the amp due to its weak
signal, as I said, and that's the reason why Shaker Dynamics tend not to
work well  with real harp amps--too little gain in the amp circuit, maybe
too much input  impedance too.  Plug a Dynamic directly into a solid-state
PA and it will be  quite happy and sound like a different mic, because even
the Hi-Z inputs on  most modern PAs are not that high an impedance.

I believe G. experienced a version of this several years back when he
managed  to get an inline impedance transformer hooked up to his Shaker
Dynamic; I'm  fuzzy on the details, but I think he said the output became
much more robust  when he did that, though he didn't keep the mic.

/ Yeah.  I had a Shaker Dynamic with a 1/4" jack as well as the MadCat.   I
got a music shop tech to wire up a 1/4" plug to an XLR jack on a short lead,
and bought a cheap impedance convertor - this worked a lot better with
guitar amplifiers.  It didn't make much difference with the MadCat or Shure
520DX - but the preamp improved those two out of sight.
/ I've kept that connector and preamp but haven't had a need for either
since... using HCs, and no need for the 1/4" jack to XLR plug.

/ It was a pain dealing with either the impedance convertor or the preamp
with the Shakers - Once I got my first bullet with original Shure & Astatic
elements, I lost interest in the Shakers and dealing with them.

I've always used the 1/4" "Hi-Z" Shakers because I use them in the two
situations described above: to tame unruly contemporary guitar amps or to go
straight into a 1/4" jack on a PA.  It strikes me now that getting an XLR
jack model  would simplify using an inline transformer if you wanted to try
that sometime.

/ absolutely.  If anyone is thinking about getting a Shaker Dynamic or
Crystal I'd recommend the XLR version simply because its easier to connect
to an impedance convertor - even though its not balanced, it will work.
It'd pay to get a short 10' XLR cable remembering that the mic's signal
isn't balanced and will collect noise, and/or XLR to 1/4" cable up to 20'
long.

 It also strikes me that I have managed to complicate your choices rather
than clarify them ;-).  But I hope the above is informative.
/ Audio gear isn't cut and dry.

<quote>
Once again, this individual message is being purged of HTML by hitting Edit:
Select All, then right-clicking on Text: Normal and sending it without
further changes.
Stephen Schneider
</quote>

Well, whatever you did, the Harp-L digest faithfully reproduced your post in
glorious html technicolor... which I've stripped from my reply.  :)

- -- G.