Re: [Harp-L] Re: Volume Control

["Bob Laughlin" <rlaughlin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

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