Re: [Harp-L] Questions about Audix Fireball / Audix Fireball V
- To: harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Questions about Audix Fireball / Audix Fireball V
- From: Richard Hunter <turtlehill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 08:08:19 -0400 (GMT-04:00)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=A5f9k5hT7duWFmJ2u2+x63ACo+c8kBBhuY8yRXXOA8iyq+egO6lVPo8547QDHnP2; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
- Reply-to: Richard Hunter <turtlehill@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The element in the original Fireball lacked bass response. The V element has much stronger bass response, and in general it's a better sounding mic.
I have no idea why anyone would say that the original Fireball is better for studio work. It isn't.
I also disagree that the Fireball is simply another vocal mic. The Fireball has a much flatter frequency response in the 8-10 kHz range than a typical vocal mic. This is very important for harmonica, because harmonicas put out a lot of energy in that range. Add all that high-end energy to a typical vocal mic and you get lots of feedback, not to mention an unhappy audience. The Fireball's high end is very smooth, and much less prone to feedback.
Regards, Richard Hunter
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.