Re: [Harp-L] Re: Volume Control



You know lately I must be getting lazy because I'm leaving the mic on the stand even for the blues stuff.

The negative is that it is not as visual in performance. The positive is that I have many more possible sounds working with hands and distance from the mic.The distance component helps control volume too . Of course, I still have to cup with a GB.

So maybe the SM 57 on stand is the trick.

Gary Popenoe

On Feb 16, 2008, at 10:17 PM, "Bob Laughlin" <rlaughlin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The ergonomics of holding a mike means a lot to me. I've been an acoustic
player most of my life, and switching to amplified just in recent years,
I've noticed that the GB mikes are just a bit big for my hands, and heavier
than I'd really like, ideally. I have an SM 57 beta (the indestructible cage
type) that is a stick mike, but also a bit weighty, and the length of it
tends to pull me forward and down, into a downward-looking position. I don't
like that as much as standing straight up, or even leaning back a bit at
times. It's a "back" thing. leaning over can make my back hurt a bit.


I'd like one of those mikes that hides in your hand, on the ring, but I
tried one once, and it just wasn't "hot" enough for me. I was weak, and
sounded way clean for my taste.


I think that the thing about a VC affecting the tone must be due to the fact
that a mike "drives" the amp, if "hot" enough, and driving the amp harder
makes for a "dirtier" tone. Less drive, less "dirt". (That's "good dirt",,).
That's why, I suppose, the "cupping" of the mike is so important, so that
the vibrations go directly to the element, and don't escape out to the
surrounding air. But if you attenuate the mike with a VC, you lessen the
affect of "driving" the input stages of the amp.


Anyway,,I'm guessing. Just guessing. Not gussing, guessing.

But I'm still hoping that one day I might pick up a mike that 1) isn't as
weighty as the GB,,and 2) is small enough to fit nicely in my hand, while
holding the harp. Is that too much to ask?


I wonder how heavy those vintage 545's are. I know quite a few players that
seem to like them.


BL


----- Original Message ----- From: "G. E. Popenoe" <gpopenoe@xxxxxxxxx> To: <Mudharp@xxxxxxx> Cc: <harp-l@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 9:35 PM Subject: Re: [Harp-L] Re: Volume Control


I checked out the volume controls. Look pretty cool. Hey, man, for $50 to
$60 seems like it is worth it to check them out. Everyones gigging
situations, styles , etc. are different. It seems that I'm in a constant
state of experimentation with technology. You have to do what works for
you.


On Feb 16, 2008 12:42 PM, <Mudharp@xxxxxxx> wrote:


Garry Hodgson wrote:


<<i've heard the arguments, but i don't understand why i would *not*
want
volume control. anything that gives me more control is a good thing.>>

Well I guess that IS the question I was trying to ask. Why would you
_not_
want to use some kind of volume control? So I'm asking. Is there anyone
out
there who plays amplified harp in a band that chooses not to use a VC of
some
kind for their mic and why?


I use one most of the time and about half of my mics have them built in
but
I can't help feeling that it compromises my sound in some way. I just
recently
got a "BlowsMeAway" from Greg Heumann and I can't wait to try it in a
gig
situation.

t.a.





**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(


http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
_______________________________________________
Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l

_______________________________________________
Harp-L is sponsored by SPAH, http://www.spah.org
Harp-L@xxxxxxxxxx
http://harp-l.org/mailman/listinfo/harp-l





This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.