Podcast Recording Microphone Advice

[CurtisConway]

Does anyone have any advice on a podcasting microphone setup?

It'll be to record a discussion involving three people and will probably happen in a reasonably sized general purpose training room with the people sitting around a table.

The total budget is about £500 for an audio interface, mics and stands/cables. mic test

Would three close mics be best? Perhaps three standard dynamics on desktop stands, they would at least minimise the effect of the room (which we can't really do anything about). Or would cheap condensers be better?

Or would a single omni or some pair of condensors slightly further away be better?

Any thoughts would be appreciated!

[chris319]

You could use three mics but you'll need a mic mixer and someone to mix it. I don't know if that will fit your budget.

Alternatively, you could place a single omnidirectional mic in a location central to the participants. No mixer needed but you are at the mercy of the room acoustics.

Directional mics for three-mic setup: Shure SM57.

Omnidirectional mic: Shure SM63.

Mackie mixer:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/996857-REG/mackie_402_vlz4_402vlz4_4_channel_ul...oaAovcEALw_wcB

[Cornucopia]

Sm57s are poor for vocals (the 58 family is much more appropriate) and poorer still for recording (they were designed mainly for live sounds, or for instrument recording).

if your whole budget is $500 you are VERY constrained. I recommend 3x Blue Yetis (switched to cardioid), and then use a software mixer like VoiceMeeter Banana (you won't have enough $ left to get a good hardware mixer & good analog mikes and an A/D). And use acoustic dampening treatments in the room to further isolate each voice prior to mixing.


Scott

[chris319]

Sm57s are poor for vocals

- The SM57 is used for the U.S. President. Why would they use a "poor" microphone for POTUS?

- The SM57 and SM58 have the same capsule (unidyne iii).

poorer still for recording (they were designed mainly for live sounds, or for instrument recording).

What's the difference between "live" and "recorded" sounds from the standpoint of the microphone, particularly if they have the same capsule? They are essentially the same mic with the 58 adding a wire-mesh pop screen.

if your whole budget is $500

Reread the O.P.

[Cornucopia]

Why? Because they are near-indestructible.

57s and 58s have different electronics and a different housing. Those make a difference.

Right now 1£ = 1.39$, so not exact, but pretty close. If anything, it even further supports my suggestion.

57s and 58s are better suited for live sound. What's the difference you ask? NOISE & DISTORTION. Mikes designed for live sound (aka reinforcement) usually have a higher level of tolerance for inherent distortion & self-noise. It isn't as noticeable in the acoustic environment. Recording mikes REQUIRE tighter tolerances on those things because they will be listened to in different environments over and over more critically, and making them so usually makes them less rugged.
Most often, when the 57 is used in recording, it is used for instruments and to mike amps. This is because its coloration is quite conducive to the range of that instrument AND because it is particularly suited to handle the higher decibel level of those sources. And at such high levels, some added distortion is acceptable, perhaps expected, even wanted in some cases. Doesn't change the fact that it is normally NOT optimal for voice and NOT optimal for recording/streaming.

Scott