ProSoundWeb Community

Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => SR Forum Archives => Product Reviews: Sound Reinforcement FUD Forum Archive => Topic started by: Andy Peters on June 14, 2008, 12:56:08 am

Title: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on June 14, 2008, 12:56:08 am
A couple of PR22s and Heil's "Handi-Mics" showed up on my doorstop this afternoon (an early father's day gift!). Here are my "first impressions."

The PR22s come in a neat thick padded case, and as an added bonus, the package includes the gold and matte-black windscreens in addition to the standard silver screen.

Naturally, the first thing I wanted to do was compare it to the "obsolete industry-standard ball microphone." I do own one SM58, which I've had for years but it's been used very rarely. I never keep it in the mic box; it was in its pouch on a shelf, and as such it's "like new!"

My "test set-up" consists of a pair of Genelec 1031A studio monitors hooked up to a Rane MLM82a mic/line mixer. (The Rane mixer mic inputs are the same TI INA163s found on many mixing consoles. Its input impedance is 2.66k.) I just plugged the Heil into one channel and the Shure into another, turned on one speaker, talked into the two mics and matched levels.

I asked my wife to listen to both mics (not telling her which was which) and tell me which she thought sounded better. I spoke into both, back and forth, and at one point while speaking into the PR22, she said, "That sounds better." But her comment about the SM58 was telling: "That one sounds like you're talking into a microphone."

To my ears, the Heil sounded like my voice, which I suppose is the whole point. And it does so, regardless of the distance between the mic and my mouth, since the PR22 doesn't exhibit much proximity effect.  However, if you're working with a vocalist who expects same and knows how to "work the mic" you might want to look elsewhere. I suspect that most of us just roll up the channel-strip high-pass (or, better, use a multiband compressor). The thing is, while the PR22 has little proximity effect, its data sheet indicates its LF response is flat down to 50 Hz, an octave better than the SM58. So to me this indicates that you get useful, "unhyped" LF and simply speaking into the mic bears this out.

Also missing is the SM58's presence peak, which is a comparative icepick to the forehead. I suppose the presence peak is an example of a bug that got turned into a "feature," but to be honest, who the hell needs it? (An aside: the SM57 is the "standard" guitar-amp mic, but what guitar amp needs a presence peak?)

Another thing I noticed was that the SM58 sounded a bit distorted, even with just my speaking voice. I suspect that this is a function of the presence peak and the proximity effect.

(I've noticed this distortion on the voice of the singer I work for; he was using an SM58 and then a Beta57A and I noticed the same distortion. It was driving me nuts, as it was happening on different consoles on different systems, and I thought it might be an insert or whatever. I tried swapping Beta57As with no effect. Finally replacing the Beta57A with an EV757A solved the problem. Some old-timers may remember that one complaint about the original, non-A, Beta58 was that it overloaded easily.)

Handling noise, at least in my test set-up, was not a problem, certainly as good as the SM58. It remains to be heard how well it rejects LF crawling up a mic stand that's sitting on top of sub cabs built into a stage.

I compared the PR22 to my EV757A, but I'm not sure how fair a comparison this is, because the EV has been around the block a bit and that mic is no longer in production (it's been replaced by the 767A, which is noticeably better sounding). The PR22 is certainly clearer. With the 757's LF rolloff disengaged, its proximity effect (it's a supercardioid) is very obvious, resulting in very hyped low end on my voice (which, again, is typically rolled off on the channel strip). With the high-pass engaged, the 757 clears up but it then sounds thin.

So ... the first impression is that "it sounds like my voice," much more so than the SM58. The next step is to put it in front of a vocal wedge and see how loud it gets before it goes to shit.  Also, I want to hear how it works when the singer is 5' from a drum kit. Hopefully, I'll get to that next week.

-a

PS: I suppose it's worth mentioning that Shure obviously believes that the SM58 is not the be-all and end-all of handheld vocal mics. Otherwise, they wouldn't have bothered with the SM86, Beta87 or KSM9, all of which are much better mics than the SM58. And SM58-bashing is sorta like shooting fish in a barrel. But, then again, they market it as the "industry standard."

But really, but when you consider that Bob gives you a mic and two replacement windscreens for what you'd pay for an SM58 and two new windscreens, why bother with the obsolete ball microphone?
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 14, 2008, 08:26:11 am
Keep us up to date please Andy. I'll be curious to hear what you think once you adjust the channel strip EQ for the PR-22. What does Milo think?  Smile
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Jordan Wolf on June 14, 2008, 09:10:56 am
I've got a small concert with a gospel singer tomorrow and I'm planning to use my PR-22 so long as it suits her voice.  The only reason I might not is if she needs 2 mics (1 CS and 1 at the keyboard).  I'll let everyone know how it pans out.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on June 14, 2008, 03:00:25 pm
Jordan Wolf wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 09:10

I've got a small concert with a gospel singer tomorrow and I'm planning to use my PR-22 so long as it suits her voice.  The only reason I might not is if she needs 2 mics (1 CS and 1 at the keyboard).  I'll let everyone know how it pans out.


I had this with a keyboard player with 2 mics and he had a PR 22 and a Beta 58..interesting hearing the difference on the same singer/same stage/setup..etc.

John
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Jordan Wolf on June 14, 2008, 04:52:37 pm
John Chiara wrote on Sat, 14 June 2008 15:00

I had this with a keyboard player with 2 mics and he had a PR 22 and a Beta 58..interesting hearing the difference on the same singer/same stage/setup..etc.

John


Wow...that is the exact same setup I'll have tomorrow.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on June 15, 2008, 07:31:26 pm
Thanks for the review.
Is there a big difference between the PR22s and PR20?
How did the Hindi-Mic compare to the PR22?

Lastly who is your dealer? Link?

Looking for some mic's and hearing allot about these.

Thanks again.

Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Jordan Wolf on June 16, 2008, 01:09:51 am
Well, sadly, I decided not to use the PR-22 today.  The artist is a great singer and utilizes a mic technique that plays on the proximity effect...so, that left the PR-22 out of the equation this time.

Other than that, the little concert went fine.

To Douglas:
The PR-22 is a "fixed" version of the PR-20.  It was found out that the PR-20 had a very big handling noise issue, so Bob (Heil) came up with a fix and, thus, the PR-22.  
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 16, 2008, 05:51:45 pm
Jordan Wolf wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 01:09

Well, sadly, I decided not to use the PR-22 today.  The artist is a great singer and utilizes a mic technique that plays on the proximity effect...so, that left the PR-22 out of the equation this time.

Other than that, the little concert went fine.

To Douglas:
The PR-22 is a "fixed" version of the PR-20.  It was found out that the PR-20 had a very big handling noise issue, so Bob (Heil) came up with a fix and, thus, the PR-22.  


Jordan/douglas,
The PR-20 has what should be considered excessive handling noise when hand held. If the mike is used in a stand the handling noise is negligible. The PR-20 is an excellent mic where it is stand mounted such as when used as a drum overhead, guitar cabinets, etc.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on June 16, 2008, 07:47:50 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 14:51

Jordan Wolf wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 01:09

Well, sadly, I decided not to use the PR-22 today.  The artist is a great singer and utilizes a mic technique that plays on the proximity effect...so, that left the PR-22 out of the equation this time.

Other than that, the little concert went fine.

To Douglas:
The PR-22 is a "fixed" version of the PR-20.  It was found out that the PR-20 had a very big handling noise issue, so Bob (Heil) came up with a fix and, thus, the PR-22.  


Jordan/douglas,
The PR-20 has what should be considered excessive handling noise when hand held. If the mike is used in a stand the handling noise is negligible. The PR-20 is an excellent mic where it is stand mounted such as when used as a drum overhead, guitar cabinets, etc.


Stand mounting doesn't mitigate the problem of handling noise is fucked-up-yet-common situations like Club Congress here in Tucson. The subs are built into the stage in such a way that the whole downstage section (above the subs) resonates, and of course that's where the frontline vocal mics live. LF has a fun habit of traveling up the stand to the vocal mics.

(And that's not the worst thing about that install ...)

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 17, 2008, 08:58:36 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 19:47

Bob Leonard wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 14:51

Jordan Wolf wrote on Mon, 16 June 2008 01:09

Well, sadly, I decided not to use the PR-22 today.  The artist is a great singer and utilizes a mic technique that plays on the proximity effect...so, that left the PR-22 out of the equation this time.

Other than that, the little concert went fine.

To Douglas:
The PR-22 is a "fixed" version of the PR-20.  It was found out that the PR-20 had a very big handling noise issue, so Bob (Heil) came up with a fix and, thus, the PR-22.  


Jordan/douglas,
The PR-20 has what should be considered excessive handling noise when hand held. If the mike is used in a stand the handling noise is negligible. The PR-20 is an excellent mic where it is stand mounted such as when used as a drum overhead, guitar cabinets, etc.


Stand mounting doesn't mitigate the problem of handling noise is fucked-up-yet-common situations like Club Congress here in Tucson. The subs are built into the stage in such a way that the whole downstage section (above the subs) resonates, and of course that's where the frontline vocal mics live. LF has a fun habit of traveling up the stand to the vocal mics.

(And that's not the worst thing about that install ...)

-a


Andy,
I have to agree. Actually, it was a club with a high hollow stage that prompted me to call Bob Heil about the issue in the first place. But then again, everything we put on the stage that night gave up the same shit. We finally rolled in some carpet and that was that, but correct again. If it's there it's a problem.

I wish I could remember the model of the subs built into the stage at a club I worked in Somerville, MA. I built out the system with what they had, all EAW. The subs were horns built into the stage and I could literally crawl inside them. Opened for a name there one night and the names girlfriend sat on the edge of the stage all night. I asked her why and she told me she was into the vibration. Laughing

How's Milo??
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Douglas R. Allen on June 20, 2008, 06:04:00 pm
I called Sweetwater to order 3 of the PR-22's and they told me they ran into problems and would not be selling the entire line of Heil Mic's anymore. Problems?
Now I don't know if I should order any or not.
Any heads up?

Thanks
Douglas R. Allen
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 20, 2008, 10:07:57 pm
Douglas,
That's just wrong. I'll make it a point to call Bob Heil tomorrow and get an answer from him if he is available. If I can't get hold of him then I'll get back to this as soon as possible. I can tell you this much though. They finished a run of 1700 this week and Bob has not mentioned any problems to me at all. MF has them if you want them and they carry the full line.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on June 22, 2008, 05:39:51 pm
Douglas R. Allen wrote on Fri, 20 June 2008 15:04

I called Sweetwater to order 3 of the PR-22's and they told me they ran into problems and would not be selling the entire line of Heil Mic's anymore. Problems?
Now I don't know if I should order any or not.
Any heads up?


I rather suspect that the "problem" may be that Sweetwater and Heil could not come to an agreement over pricing or whatever. IOW, the problem is not with the product.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on June 22, 2008, 06:04:57 pm
OK, quickie review. I did a show last night with my regular guys and I used the PR-22 on the singer/keyboardist, Dan. The singing guitarist got his usual Beta57A, which works very well for his voice.

First things first: in addition to being a musician, Dan is also a sound guy (which is his day job), so he knows how to work a mic. He's real good at backing off when he's not singing lead.

Now with something like a Beta57A, when he was on the mic singing lead, the pronounced proximity effect was a problem ... too much "whoomph" in the voice, which I usually took out using the channel-strip high-pass. (Oh, to have a multiband comp!) Of course when he backed off, his already-reedy tenor got even thinner.

With the PR-22, none of this is a problem. Backups sounded like leads. Spoken stuff between songs also didn't suffer from the whoomphiness. Getting monitors to adequate levels was not a problem. The channel strip was flat (system is EAW MK-series top boxes) and his voice sounded like his voice. (And we figure that the distortion I always hear with him singing, regardless of mic, console or system, is actually his voice. In the studio, he doesn't push his voice like he does live.)

So after the set, I asked him what he thought. He said that it sounded good, but he was getting a lot of stage wash in his wedge. "Everything seemed loud." I suppose that's more a function of the cardioid pattern rather than the super-cardioid of the Beta57A or the EV 757A I'd used for him in the past. (After all, that's why we use super- and hyper-cardioid mics!)

Also, while Bob doesn't publish polar plots of the mic response, I suspect that the pattern is wider than the obsolete ball-mic cardioid. As we all know, omnis don't exhibit any proximity effect, and my guess is that whatever ameliorates that effect in the PR-22 also serves to widen the pattern. Of course a uniform pattern (in the mic as well as the wedge) goes a long way towards feedback mitigation, so while the pattern is wider, lack of presence peak and other odd bumps in the pattern make monitors easier.

I would imagine that the mic will work well for the big shows I have coming up at beginning of July, as the band's stage volume is quite reasonable and the drummer isn't a basher.

But what I really want is a supercardioid version of this thing. How's that for a design challenge?

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on June 23, 2008, 05:30:42 pm
Another observation. Mixed 8 bands in the last 48 hours. All Emo/rock acts..touring and local. The PR35/22 in the hands of a front person vocalist is great for one reason alone...when the stupid singers cup the mic..the sound only changes marginally..compared to a normal handheld..this alone is a blessing when trying to coax decent tone from some of these guys.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Brandon G Romanowski on June 23, 2008, 06:45:43 pm
Today I received a rider that spec'ed PR-20s for the vocals. Just thought I would mention that as it is the first time I have seen it.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Mark Hadman on June 23, 2008, 07:38:42 pm
Just received my PR-22 (first in the UK?). I think I'm going to put it through its paces at Glastonbury Fest at the weekend where the band I work with is doing a whopping 5 shows over 4 days.

It's unlikely I'm going to stick it on a frontline vocal, because the band has two lead vox plus BVs that move from mic to mic and I'd like to keep them on the same type (hehe, guess which type that'll be?).

So, I think my choices are:

Snare top or bottom
Drum overhead
Electric guitar (one of two)
Drum vox (Big boomy voice, we always have to cut loads of lows out of this one with an SM58)
Alto Sax
Trombone
Trumpet


All but the OH & Drum vox are generally spec'd as SM57 or similar. Which instrument is the PR-22 going to really shine on? If I use it on one of the three horns will it just not sit right with the others?

I guess half the fun is experimenting but I don't want to get too experimental in the already hectic Glasto environment.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Brandon G Romanowski on June 23, 2008, 07:50:26 pm
I use them for snare all the time.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Weogo Reed on June 23, 2008, 11:33:36 pm
Hi Mark,

I would use the PR22 on the Trombone.  

Good health,  Weogo
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 24, 2008, 11:24:24 pm
Mark,
Use the 22 on the snare.

Also, I spoke to Bob Heil and Andy is correct. Sweetwater not carrying the Heil line is nothing more than a business decision. Quality is not an issue.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Jordan Wolf on June 25, 2008, 01:44:25 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Tue, 24 June 2008 23:24

Also, I spoke to Bob Heil and Andy is correct. Sweetwater not carrying the Heil line is nothing more than a business decision. Quality is not an issue.


I never doubted it...I was surprised when I heard my voice through the PR-22 just using it as a talkback!    Razz
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on June 25, 2008, 01:46:13 pm
going back to what andy said about them making a super-cardioid version of the pr-22. isnt the pr-35 a super? im a bit confused because it says its a cardioid on its site page but then says its a super in the instruction manual?



also im liking the fact that everyone keeps describing the heil mics as very clear and articulate because most flatter freq. response dynamics ive come across, the more muddier they are. the heils are sounding more and more appealing.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 26, 2008, 09:45:36 am
Yesterday I received the last four of my PR-20s back from Bob Heil, retrofitted with the new PR-22 element. After listening to the 20 for as long as I have it seems to me the 22 is actually more articule than before, and of course all the handling noise is gone. Life is good. I replaced a 57 on a Vibrolux with on of the retrofits. It's night and day, and sounds like a whole new amp. So my lineup right now is PR-22s for backup vocals, PR-35 for lead vocals, PR-30, 40 and 22 for guitar cabinets. For other bands and guests, drums (22 and 30), bass (30 or 40), guitar (22, 30, 40). Like I said, life is simple and life is good.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Dave Dermont on June 26, 2008, 03:29:20 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 09:45

I replaced a 57 on a Vibrolux with on of the retrofits. It's night and day, and sounds like a whole new amp.


Geeze, with your head so far up Bob Heil's ass, it's a wonder you can still hear ANYTHING.  Rolling Eyes

Bob, you know I say that with love.

...but seriously folks (for you youngsters, this is a Joe Walsh reference)

It pretty amazing how fast the Heil folks have responded to the marketplace.

DD
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 26, 2008, 04:10:13 pm
Dave Dermont wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 15:29

Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 09:45

I replaced a 57 on a Vibrolux with on of the retrofits. It's night and day, and sounds like a whole new amp.


Geeze, with your head so far up Bob Heil's ass, it's a wonder you can still hear ANYTHING.  Rolling Eyes

Bob, you know I say that with love.

...but seriously folks (for you youngsters, this is a Joe Walsh reference)

It pretty amazing how fast the Heil folks have responded to the marketplace.

DD


("Popping sound") What was that???  Laughing

I still have other mics I use Dave, just not anywhere near as much as I use these. I guess I've gotten lazy in my old age. Not as many decisions to make with the Heils. Very Happy

Re-inserting now, give me a tug if you need me.  Laughing
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Brandon G Romanowski on July 01, 2008, 08:44:31 pm
Hey Andy,
  I wonder if you would do a review of the handi mic?   I would be interested to hear your take on them.

Regards
     Brandon
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 :(
Post by: Andy Peters on July 02, 2008, 12:33:57 pm
Well, now the bad news ...

I am convinced that the PR-22 pattern is wider than a standard cardioid.

And that may be fine on non-box-like stages, but at Maxwell's (where the legend is bigger than the room) and with singers who are not all that strong (and depending on the song, intentionally so), there's just not enough side rejection (even if that side and back sound is "nice") to get adequate monitor levels. And this particular venue has the boxes rather close to the stage so there is some significant backwash off of the box' sides (JBL SR things), leading to a low-level low-mid "hummmmm."

Now since I am not pig-headed enough to stick with something that is clearly not working, I grabbed a pair of the industry-standard obsolete ball microphones out of the club's kit, put 'em up, and fuck me up a rope: there was a marked improvement in GBF. Shure (that's a pun, folks), the tone from the mic wasn't as "good" but a few twiddles of Carey D's EQ knobs and I was able to get the singer to sound like, well, the singer. He was happy, I was happy, and probably most important, the 250 people who waited 17 years to see this band again were happy.

So I will stick with the SM58 for tonight, mainly because it's working, and I'll try out the PR-22s again on Friday outdoors on a big stage, where I expect they'll do well. But for smaller stages where things tend to be loud, a mic with a tighter pattern is necessary. Besides, you paid for the channel-strip tone controls and there's no shame in, you know, actually using them.

Bob, if you're reading this: gimme a PR-25 with a supercardioid pattern.

-a

PS: I have audio files of the singer's voice through the PR-22 and through the SM58, and once I sort it all out, I'll post snippets.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 :(
Post by: Bob Leonard on July 02, 2008, 10:35:52 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Wed, 02 July 2008 12:33

Well, now the bad news ...

I am convinced that the PR-22 pattern is wider than a standard cardioid.

And that may be fine on non-box-like stages, but at Maxwell's (where the legend is bigger than the room) and with singers who are not all that strong (and depending on the song, intentionally so), there's just not enough side rejection (even if that side and back sound is "nice") to get adequate monitor levels. And this particular venue has the boxes rather close to the stage so there is some significant backwash off of the box' sides (JBL SR things), leading to a low-level low-mid "hummmmm."

Now since I am not pig-headed enough to stick with something that is clearly not working, I grabbed a pair of the industry-standard obsolete ball microphones out of the club's kit, put 'em up, and fuck me up a rope: there was a marked improvement in GBF. Shure (that's a pun, folks), the tone from the mic wasn't as "good" but a few twiddles of Carey D's EQ knobs and I was able to get the singer to sound like, well, the singer. He was happy, I was happy, and probably most important, the 250 people who waited 17 years to see this band again were happy.

So I will stick with the SM58 for tonight, mainly because it's working, and I'll try out the PR-22s again on Friday outdoors on a big stage, where I expect they'll do well. But for smaller stages where things tend to be loud, a mic with a tighter pattern is necessary. Besides, you paid for the channel-strip tone controls and there's no shame in, you know, actually using them.

Bob, if you're reading this: gimme a PR-25 with a supercardioid pattern.

-a

PS: I have audio files of the singer's voice through the PR-22 and through the SM58, and once I sort it all out, I'll post snippets.


Holy shit Batmandy, your experiencing just the opposite of what I experienced. I've had much better results on tight stages with the 20/22s and wash hasn't been a problem. Stupid monitors! I'll put in the request with the powers that be. And thank's for the honest review. If all we needed were one mic than my case would be much smaller than it is.

How's the little guy doing. Is he strong enough to push a fader yet??
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on August 17, 2008, 06:49:34 pm
OK, so more on the PR22.

Last week, I used them with good results on a local band with two lead singers, a guy with a serious Tom Waits thing (baritone voice and the hat) and a girl with strong pipes. I used one on the singer for the support act too. In both cases, the stage volume was quite reasonable and the singers were strong.

We had Xiu Xiu and Carla Bozulich's Evangelista in last night.

Now, if you don't know, Xiu Xiu are at the intersection of 80's English synth-pop/rock (New Order, Yaz, Erasure) and ambient experimental percussion (bells, glock, xylophone) plus a harmonium (which is an accordion that lives on a stand; IOW, the tool of a truly lazy devil). So backline is a drum kit, various percussion, a drum machine that makes weird noises, a sampler that makes weird noises and a synth that makes weird noises plus bass notes, and finally an electric guitar.

I put up the 22s for synthist Caralee and guitarist Jamie, and they did a couple of songs during soundcheck. Jamie's voice is sonorous yet not exactly strong. By the very rough indicator of such things, the input trim was up higher than usual. I cued up the channel in the cans and it turned out that I was getting as much of his guitar amp in his vocal mic as his voice. (And that guitar amp sounded great, even though it was six feet away from the mic.) Clearly not good. So once again, the obsolete 40-year-old ball microphone comes to the rescue and I get enough rejection to have his voice stand out from the din.

Evangelista was a different story ... the songs are tone poems supporting Carla's tales. She has a strong, resonant voice and she knows how to use it.  With the PR22, the input trim was way down, and with low backline levels, I wasn't getting a lot of leakage. She sounded great.

All of this of course jibes with my previous observations: if you are working with a strong vocalist in front of a quiet band (or one on IEMs), then the mic truly shines. The wide pattern in this environment isn't a liability. I suspect this mic will be great on the singer-songwriter type.

If you are working with a band in the usual rock idiom where the singer isn't really strong, look elsewhere. The PR22 just doesn't work here. I can use EQ and compression to deal with proximity effect and the presence peak and such. But electronics can't mitigate leakage due to a wide pattern.

Again, a supercardioid version of this mic would be great.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Mark Hadman on August 18, 2008, 04:11:16 pm
Jah Wobble's Chinese Dub project was in town recently. As H.E. I had my new PR-22 with me, and the B.E. was happy to give it a spin because he'd heard good things.

For sound check we set up the PR-22 and a Beta 57a at the center vocal position and let vocalist Claire have the option of using either one. After switching back and forth a few times, the B.E. and I agreed that the 22 had the edge in terms of clarity, but Claire thought that the B57a sounded clearer through the monitors and so we moved the 22 aside for Jah Wobble to use. In the 22's defence, the monitors were more or less EQ'd to sound good with a Shure, and Claire, like most singers, has been using Shures for years.

Later on in the same sound check it became apparent that the 22 was amplifying large amounts of rumble from people moving around on the stage, and since dancing was a central part of the show we reluctantly swapped the 22 out for another B57a. Having briefly A/B'd the two mics myself at home I have to say that the 22 does seem to have quite a lot of handling noise compared to a B57a. I intend to make a more scientific comparison next time I have a mixer and recorder set up and a spare half hour.

On a more positive note, as a B.E. myself I've taken to using the 22 as a backing vocal mic for our drummer*. With an SM58 or similar his voice requires a deep cut at 200Hz (he always asks for that cut in his monitors too), but I can run the 22 more or less flat, with maybe a little cut at 5K so as to not stand out too much from the front-line SM58s! This is a guy who's so sociable that he's generally lost most of his voice by the second day of a festival weekend, so having that clarity is important. The next step may be to try pointing the 22 somewhat downwards, allowing it double up as the drum overhead mic.

More to follow.


* Re my previous post - we've also tried it on snare top as suggested and it was fine and snappy, although for that particular gig I was mixing from backstage (yep you heard right) so didn't get much chance to appreciate the finer details.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Lee Brenkman on August 18, 2008, 08:04:43 pm
Mark Hadman wrote on Mon, 18 August 2008 13:11

Jah Wobble's Chinese Dub project was in town recently. As H.E. I had my new PR-22 with me, and the B.E. was happy to give it a spin because he'd heard good things.

For sound check we set up the PR-22 and a Beta 57a at the center vocal position and let vocalist Claire have the option of using either one. After switching back and forth a few times, the B.E. and I agreed that the 22 had the edge in terms of clarity, but Claire thought that the B57a sounded clearer through the monitors and so we moved the 22 aside for Jah Wobble to use. In the 22's defence, the monitors were more or less EQ'd to sound good with a Shure, and Claire, like most singers, has been using Shures for years.

Later on in the same sound check it became apparent that the 22 was amplifying large amounts of rumble from people moving around on the stage, and since dancing was a central part of the show we reluctantly swapped the 22 out for another B57a. Having briefly A/B'd the two mics myself at home I have to say that the 22 does seem to have quite a lot of handling noise compared to a B57a. I intend to make a more scientific comparison next time I have a mixer and recorder set up and a spare half hour.

On a more positive note, as a B.E. myself I've taken to using the 22 as a backing vocal mic for our drummer*. With an SM58 or similar his voice requires a deep cut at 200Hz (he always asks for that cut in his monitors too), but I can run the 22 more or less flat, with maybe a little cut at 5K so as to not stand out too much from the front-line SM58s! This is a guy who's so sociable that he's generally lost most of his voice by the second day of a festival weekend, so having that clarity is important. The next step may be to try pointing the 22 somewhat downwards, allowing it double up as the drum overhead mic.

More to follow.


* Re my previous post - we've also tried it on snare top as suggested and it was fine and snappy, although for that particular gig I was mixing from backstage (yep you heard right) so didn't get much chance to appreciate the finer details.


Ah yes, Jah Wobble, the only bassist in my experience to vibrate the screws that hold the XLR connector COMPLETELY out of the box from the "vibes:" on top of his amp.   I put the box on the floor the next set.

Your idea of using the drummer's vocal mic as an "alternative" overhead is a sound one.  I've done it on more than one occasion and I'll bet the Heil sounds better for it than a Shure due to that same off axis pickup pattern that makes it a problem elsewhere on stage.

And my sympathies for having to mix from behind the stage.  Been there, done that, and it always sucks.   It sucked even more at the venue where the only way to go out front to check the mix was to walk ACROSS the stage and into the audience.  

Cheers,
Lee
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Tim Padrick on August 18, 2008, 11:46:42 pm
Mark Hadman wrote on Mon, 18 August 2008 15:11

......This is a guy who's so sociable that he's generally lost most of his voice by the second day of a festival weekend, so having that clarity is important.


Sounds like the boy needs to keep a case of Entertainer's Secret on the bus.  http://www.entertainerssecret.com/  (It's also great for those who suffer from post-nasal drip - a couple snorts of it and after 15 very fluid minutes my throat is clear for hours.)
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 21, 2008, 12:10:10 am
Dave Dermont wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 15:29

Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 09:45

I replaced a 57 on a Vibrolux with on of the retrofits. It's night and day, and sounds like a whole new amp.


Geeze, with your head so far up Bob Heil's ass, it's a wonder you can still hear ANYTHING.  Rolling Eyes

Bob, you know I say that with love.

...but seriously folks (for you youngsters, this is a Joe Walsh reference)

It pretty amazing how fast the Heil folks have responded to the marketplace.

DD


Dave / Andy,
I have been keeping Bob up to date with the concerns of the masses, and I can assure you he listens to what you have to say. Oh, by the way, if there's anything else on the wish list let me know before Friday. He's meeting me for dinner Friday night, so I'll pass it along then. Laughing


Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Lee Brenkman on August 21, 2008, 01:53:12 am
Just tell him that it would be nice if the clips for the 35 held the microphones a little tighter.

Andy reports that the Handi-Mic clips are on the loose side as well.


Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on August 21, 2008, 02:08:02 am
Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 21 August 2008 00:10

Dave Dermont wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 15:29

Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 26 June 2008 09:45

I replaced a 57 on a Vibrolux with on of the retrofits. It's night and day, and sounds like a whole new amp.


Geeze, with your head so far up Bob Heil's ass, it's a wonder you can still hear ANYTHING.  Rolling Eyes

Bob, you know I say that with love.

...but seriously folks (for you youngsters, this is a Joe Walsh reference)

It pretty amazing how fast the Heil folks have responded to the marketplace.

DD


Dave / Andy,
I have been keeping Bob up to date with the concerns of the masses, and I can assure you he listens to what you have to say. Oh, by the way, if there's anything else on the wish list let me know before Friday. He's meeting me for dinner Friday night, so I'll pass it along then. Laughing




He called me today..just to check in..pretty cool.
JOhn
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on August 21, 2008, 03:00:54 am
Bob Leonard wrote on Wed, 20 August 2008 21:10

Oh, by the way, if there's anything else on the wish list let me know before Friday. He's meeting me for dinner Friday night, so I'll pass it along then. Laughing


Supercardioid PR-25.

Supercardioid PR-25.

And a Supercardioid PR-25.

Oh, yeah, while the leather cases that the PR-22 shipped in are really nice, they're sitting on a shelf and the mics live in the mic box with their EV, Audix and Shure brethren. I'd rather not spend the extra ten or fifteen bucks on the leather.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Tim McCulloch on August 21, 2008, 10:06:58 am
Not pay extra for leather?  What if there were a Telefunken U-47 involved? Laughing

Tim Mc
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on August 22, 2008, 02:22:52 am
Well, tonight was enlightening. Louder band from Australia..quieter EMO singer..PR 35 on the center vocal..PR22's on SL and SR. The 35 turned into basically a ride cymbal mic..sooo much drum bleed it was not good. Wish I had put up a B57 or OM5 or something else to try it. For quieter stages the mics are really stellar..but as others have said...the wash tonight was unusable.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 22, 2008, 06:02:38 pm
Just a quick point. There are 50 touring acts using the Heils now representing all types of genre, from Joan Baez to the Eagles. There aren't any complaints about wash, or if there are I have not heard about them yet. I wonder what they're using as a formula for success..... Guess I'll have to find out tonight.

My first thought, having tested most of the mics mentioned against the Heils, proved to me the Heils are more sensitive, more articulate, and have a much wider frequency response than the mics mentioned. You're definitely going to hear sound you have not heard in the past.

Have you thought to stop and ask yourself why the GBF of the Heils is greater than other mics, then looked at how much hotter the input of the Heils can get vs. the input of those other mics? Increase the sensitivity and you hear more surrounding sound. Decrease the channel strip gain just a bit, to where the other mics start to feed back, and most the wash goes away. You can then increase the channel output and still outperform the other mics.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on August 22, 2008, 06:49:05 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 22 August 2008 15:02

Just a quick point. There are 50 touring acts using the Heils now representing all types of genre, from Joan Baez to the Eagles. There aren't any complaints about wash, or if there are I have not heard about them yet. I wonder what they're using as a formula for success..... Guess I'll have to find out tonight.


Umm, well, for starters ... could the formula simply be that lots of these bands are on IEMs, or have plexi shields in front of the drums, or the amps are "far enough" from the vocal position to not be a problem? IOW, strictly-controlled stage volume? I don't expect Joan Baez to have rock-n-roll stage volumes.

Quote:

My first thought, having tested most of the mics mentioned against the Heils, proved to me the Heils are more sensitive, more articulate, and have a much wider frequency response than the mics mentioned. You're definitely going to hear sound you have not heard in the past.


And all of that is true ... re-read my initia post in this thread where I mention that my wife said "that one (PR22) sounds like you, and the other one (SM58) sounds like you're speaking through a microphone."

Quote:

Have you thought to stop and ask yourself why the GBF of the Heils is greater than other mics,


IT IS NOT.

NO EFFIN' WAY.

Let me clarify: I can get usable GBF.  But GBF is a separate issue from stage wash. So when a musician tells me, "I'm getting a lot of stage sound in my wedge and it just sounds loud up here," that's a problem. And when I push up a vocal in the house and get lots of guitar amp as a bonus, that's a problem.

So I'd rather deal with the "sonic imperfections" of a supercardioid mic.

-a

(edit: clarification.)
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 22, 2008, 10:32:18 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Fri, 22 August 2008 18:49

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 22 August 2008 15:02

Just a quick point. There are 50 touring acts using the Heils now representing all types of genre, from Joan Baez to the Eagles. There aren't any complaints about wash, or if there are I have not heard about them yet. I wonder what they're using as a formula for success..... Guess I'll have to find out tonight.


Umm, well, for starters ... could the formula simply be that lots of these bands are on IEMs, or have plexi shields in front of the drums, or the amps are "far enough" from the vocal position to not be a problem? IOW, strictly-controlled stage volume? I don't expect Joan Baez to have rock-n-roll stage volumes.

Quote:

My first thought, having tested most of the mics mentioned against the Heils, proved to me the Heils are more sensitive, more articulate, and have a much wider frequency response than the mics mentioned. You're definitely going to hear sound you have not heard in the past.


And all of that is true ... re-read my initia post in this thread where I mention that my wife said "that one (PR22) sounds like you, and the other one (SM58) sounds like you're speaking through a microphone."

Quote:

Have you thought to stop and ask yourself why the GBF of the Heils is greater than other mics,


IT IS NOT.

NO EFFIN' WAY.

Let me clarify: I can get usable GBF.  But GBF is a separate issue from stage wash. So when a musician tells me, "I'm getting a lot of stage sound in my wedge and it just sounds loud up here," that's a problem. And when I push up a vocal in the house and get lots of guitar amp as a bonus, that's a problem.

So I'd rather deal with the "sonic imperfections" of a supercardioid mic.

-a

(edit: clarification.)


Andy,
You're one of the few people I know whose opinion I will not question. You are correct in all that you have stated, and I thank you for pointing out again that the sound quality of the Heils is superior to most/many.

I will however question the GBF vs. 90% of the mics I have tested the Heils against. I am constantly able to acheive higher levels of GBF with the Heils with all things equal. Enough of that though because we're both smart enough and experienced enough to know there will never be one mic that can do everything.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Tim McCulloch on August 23, 2008, 12:29:16 am
Fine and dandy, Bob... but is there any word about a super-cardioid in the 20 or 30 series?

Tim Mc
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Tim Padrick on August 23, 2008, 02:02:30 am
Gain before feedback is dandy, but it does one little good if the vocalist has company in the microphone.  The problem that I had was actually a gain before feedback issue - the wash from the  room was making the mic unstable, and it took a lot of (cheapo, admittedly) EQ to make it work marginally well (which of course did not do the sound any favors).  When I stuck a 58 in the PR22s place, it sounded a lot worse, but I no longer had to constantly finesse the fader to keep the vocal on top and stable on the louder songs.  A friend loves the sound of the PR22, but often cannot use it - not for GBF per say, but owing to hearing the room in the mic with the vocalist (he uses much better wedges than I was using).
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on August 23, 2008, 04:38:55 pm
Hey Bob, my setup the other night was telling..the opening band..which I mixed and used a 35 and 2 22's for..used all the same gear in the same place as the headliner..which used a B57 and 58's...there was way less wash through the vocal mics..and the lead singer was off the mic alot but I didn't hear the drums and stuff I heard during the first band.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: bo putnam on August 27, 2008, 08:47:17 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 22 August 2008 15:02

Andy, ...  You are correct in all that you have stated...


Yup.  I too have these experiences with PR22's, and have compared notes with Andy.  

Like others here, we've had issues when we take the stage and I slip in a few PR22's on vocals.  With the PR22's I pretty much have bliss at FOH, but the monitorguy suddenly develops new sweat beads - GBF is a bit trickier than with the conventional SM58's.  My lead vocal/guitar likes a really hot mix, which exacerbates the problem, and with the PR22 4kHz (and its harmonics to a lesser degree) typically presents a problem.  When I'm working foldback I prepare for it, but this invariably catches the festival guys - takes a bit more attention to get right.  At some events, if time is slipping I just skip using any of my mics, even tho' I'd prefer to be working the PR22's.  

I have noticed stage wash too, although my hassle with it seems dependent on ceiling height.  And, my guitar player is so loud, any mic gets washed pretty bad.

All-in-all, I really like the PR22's and use them whenever I can.  They are different than SM58's, but we should expect that.   Smile
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 28, 2008, 12:02:31 pm
bo putnam wrote on Wed, 27 August 2008 20:47

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 22 August 2008 15:02

Andy, ...  You are correct in all that you have stated...


Yup.  I too have these experiences with PR22's, and have compared notes with Andy.  

Like others here, we've had issues when we take the stage and I slip in a few PR22's on vocals.  With the PR22's I pretty much have bliss at FOH, but the monitorguy suddenly develops new sweat beads - GBF is a bit trickier than with the conventional SM58's.  My lead vocal/guitar likes a really hot mix, which exacerbates the problem, and with the PR22 4kHz (and its harmonics to a lesser degree) typically presents a problem.  When I'm working foldback I prepare for it, but this invariably catches the festival guys - takes a bit more attention to get right.  At some events, if time is slipping I just skip using any of my mics, even tho' I'd prefer to be working the PR22's.  

I have noticed stage wash too, although my hassle with it seems dependent on ceiling height.  And, my guitar player is so loud, any mic gets washed pretty bad.

All-in-all, I really like the PR22's and use them whenever I can.  They are different than SM58's, but we should expect that.   Smile



Bo,
I worked a stage the other day that was 35'x20' deep. It was like playing in a box. The wash problem reared it's ugly head, but due to the reflected sound from the hard plaster walls and hard plaster ceiling surrounding us. Keep in mind that we had 9 Heils open on stage, and that theory dictates a 3db loss for each additional open mic. The cure for us was to actually move the vocal line back, and the backline up. Shocked  WTF? Well it worked almost as if the reflected sound hit the wall and bounced back after getting past the vocal line, which by the way was 3ea. PR-22s and a PR-35 on the money channel. I think as time goes by most of us will adjust to the Heil line will have to be treated much differently than those ball mics we're all used to. I think a lot of that is understanding the Heils don't suffer from a loss in response at any specific frequency and that everything presented to the mic will be picked up and replicated. Just my thought. Smile
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Dick Rees on August 28, 2008, 12:57:38 pm
While I have not yet had the opportunity to use the Heil mics in a live sound application I did take the time to go to the nearest GC and A/B them with some "industry standard" mics which I have used.  All I could do was listen to the various mics soloed into headphones.  The "reach" of the Heil dynamics was much more akin to that of a condenser in that I could hear clearly WAY into the remote recesses of the store....with incredible fidelity.

This leads me to expect to need to address some of the issues raised here regarding stage wash and GBF.  That is, when I finally get them in the budget....which I intend to do.  I expect the same adjustments that I've had to make in using the AT Artist Elite series premium vocal mics.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Winston Gamble on August 29, 2008, 02:21:35 pm
Dick Rees wrote on Thu, 28 August 2008 17:57

While I have not yet had the opportunity to use the Heil mics in a live sound application I did take the time to go to the nearest GC and A/B them with some "industry standard" mics which I have used.  All I could do was listen to the various mics soloed into headphones.  The "reach" of the Heil dynamics was much more akin to that of a condenser in that I could hear clearly WAY into the remote recesses of the store....with incredible fidelity.

This leads me to expect to need to address some of the issues raised here regarding stage wash and GBF.  That is, when I finally get them in the budget....which I intend to do.  I expect the same adjustments that I've had to make in using the AT Artist Elite series premium vocal mics.


We have a couple of different AE series mics on our front line. I don't find myself making many adjustments, what is it you're finding you need to change? Just curious.
I picked up a PR22 for our lead singer/rhythm guitar/harmonica player for use on her harmonica. The main driver was for its lack of proximity effect. I too have noticed a wider pattern on it, but for our application that is working mostly to my advantage. I will echo the comment that the mic sounds the most like the actual voice of whoever gets on it. When our other lead singer first tried it out we all commented on how much it sounded like her. Which was exactly what she didn't like about it. She prefers the thicker or smoky sound of her voice with her AT AE series mic.

Winston.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 29, 2008, 02:38:18 pm
Winston Gamble wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 14:21

Dick Rees wrote on Thu, 28 August 2008 17:57

While I have not yet had the opportunity to use the Heil mics in a live sound application I did take the time to go to the nearest GC and A/B them with some "industry standard" mics which I have used.  All I could do was listen to the various mics soloed into headphones.  The "reach" of the Heil dynamics was much more akin to that of a condenser in that I could hear clearly WAY into the remote recesses of the store....with incredible fidelity.

This leads me to expect to need to address some of the issues raised here regarding stage wash and GBF.  That is, when I finally get them in the budget....which I intend to do.  I expect the same adjustments that I've had to make in using the AT Artist Elite series premium vocal mics.


We have a couple of different AE series mics on our front line. I don't find myself making many adjustments, what is it you're finding you need to change? Just curious.
I picked up a PR22 for our lead singer/rhythm guitar/harmonica player for use on her harmonica. The main driver was for its lack of proximity effect. I too have noticed a wider pattern on it, but for our application that is working mostly to my advantage. I will echo the comment that the mic sounds the most like the actual voice of whoever gets on it. When our other lead singer first tried it out we all commented on how much it sounded like her. Which was exactly what she didn't like about it. She prefers the thicker or smoky sound of her voice with her AT AE series mic.

Winston.


What she likes is the proximity effect of the mic as EQ'd. If you want her to have good thick vocals put her behind a PR-35.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Dick Rees on August 29, 2008, 04:32:43 pm
Winston....

In re adjustments for AT AE series mics it's pretty much what has been mentioned in other posts:

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

a little more work on EQ'ing at the monitor desk.

As usual the mic technique of the vocalist figures heavily into the equation.  I don't do that much straight out rock, so the premium vox mics get used for jazz vocalists and world music bands.  Most often they are hand held, not stand mounted and properly worked.

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on August 29, 2008, 04:54:07 pm
Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 13:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit


ummmm,

no.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Dick Rees on August 29, 2008, 05:14:51 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 15:54

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 13:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit


ummmm,

no.

-a


Not really expecting the pattern to change, Andy.  Just attempting to focus on the sound near the mic and reduce the stage sound a bit.  Unfortunate terminology.  Sorry.
Title: Huh?
Post by: Mac Kerr on August 29, 2008, 05:18:21 pm
Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 16:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

Andy beat me to it, but, HUH? How does level effect the pattern?

Mac
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 29, 2008, 06:27:27 pm
Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 17:18

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 16:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

Andy beat me to it, but, HUH? How does level effect the pattern?

Mac


I think, but could be wrong, that what Dick was trying to convey, is that less channel gain can and usually does eliminate a certain amount of wash, but only because of reduced sensitivity. The pattern, cardioid (as in heart shaped) remains the same but the size (effective area) is reduced. What I found strange, and if I get some time I'll run some plots, is that the PR-20 has slightly better off axis (45 degree) rejection than the PR-22. Both have equal and excellent rear rejection characteristics. Maybe an effect of tuning the mic to reduce handling noise as both appear to have the same GBF all conditions equal. But like I said, I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Dick Rees on August 29, 2008, 06:39:28 pm
Guys.  It looks like simultaneous posting again.  I already tried to explain in a reply to Andy that I did not expect the pattern to change.  And Bob is correct.  What I was trying to do by running the mic less sensitive was to tone down the wash.  It seems to me to be of benefit, so I do it.  Again let me state that I'm doing styles of music that are probably more dynamic and less in your face than straight out rock, so I may notice the small differences more.  If I want a different pattern, I use a different mic.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.....the PR22.
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Mac Kerr on August 29, 2008, 06:49:16 pm
Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 18:39

Guys.  It looks like simultaneous posting again.  I already tried to explain in a reply to Andy that I did not expect the pattern to change.  And Bob is correct.  What I was trying to do by running the mic less sensitive was to tone down the wash.  It seems to me to be of benefit, so I do it.  Again let me state that I'm doing styles of music that are probably more dynamic and less in your face than straight out rock, so I may notice the small differences more.  If I want a different pattern, I use a different mic.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.....the PR22.

It doesn't matter what type of music it is. Reducing the level reduces the leakage the same amount it reduces the sound you are trying to reproduce. There is no change in the relationship of unwanted wash to wanted direct sound. What changes the ratio is singing louder into the mic, or singing closer to the mic.

Mac
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Dick Rees on August 29, 2008, 09:05:05 pm
Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 17:49

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 18:39

Guys.  It looks like simultaneous posting again.  I already tried to explain in a reply to Andy that I did not expect the pattern to change.  And Bob is correct.  What I was trying to do by running the mic less sensitive was to tone down the wash.  It seems to me to be of benefit, so I do it.  Again let me state that I'm doing styles of music that are probably more dynamic and less in your face than straight out rock, so I may notice the small differences more.  If I want a different pattern, I use a different mic.

Now back to your regularly scheduled program.....the PR22.

It doesn't matter what type of music it is. Reducing the level reduces the leakage the same amount it reduces the sound you are trying to reproduce. There is no change in the relationship of unwanted wash to wanted direct sound. What changes the ratio is singing louder into the mic, or singing closer to the mic.

Mac


Of course you are correct.  The relationship between wash and desired sound would not actually change.  Neither would the pattern.  It's most likely a perception (or misperception) on my part.  That's just how I think of it and yet it seems to me to make a small difference in the mix.  Call it superstition, I guess.  I was just answering Caleb's question about how I approached it differently from, say, an SM58.  It's what I do....right or wrong.  He asked, I replied.  It's sort of my own "vertical frequency split", I guess.
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Caleb Dick on August 29, 2008, 10:04:02 pm
Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 18:39



Of course you are correct.  The relationship between wash and desired sound would not actually change.  Neither would the pattern.  It's most likely a perception (or misperception) on my part.  That's just how I think of it and yet it seems to me to make a small difference in the mix.  Call it superstition, I guess.  I was just answering Caleb's question about how I approached it differently from, say, an SM58.  It's what I do....right or wrong.  He asked, I replied.  It's sort of my own "vertical frequency split", I guess.



I PM'ed Dick about his PR22 vs other A-T AE mic experiences.  

To me, the PR20 sounded flat (good) but didn't seem to have condenser transient response.  For the PR20/22, I'll pass but not write them off completely; chalk it up to personal preference if you wish.  

Caleb
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 found in the wild...
Post by: Tim McCulloch on August 30, 2008, 02:25:35 am
Tonight's show was with 38 Special.  All the vocal mics except Donny Van Zant's were PR-22s.  Plainly audible difference in vocal clarity... band is on IEMs, guitars are iso'd.

Cymbals bleed wasn't a deal breaker.

Donny's wireless sounded "covered" and indistinct in comparison.  Could be an old capsule...

But I know know which sound I liked best.  Wether or not the PR-22 is appropriate for another band or situation will have to be left to the mixerperson and artist to decide.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Andy Peters on August 30, 2008, 02:25:18 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 15:27

Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 17:18

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 16:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

Andy beat me to it, but, HUH? How does level effect the pattern?

Mac


I think, but could be wrong, that what Dick was trying to convey, is that less channel gain can and usually does eliminate a certain amount of wash, but only because of reduced sensitivity. The pattern, cardioid (as in heart shaped) remains the same but the size (effective area) is reduced.


EXCEPT THAT ...

Gain is gain.

If you have an output SPL requirement of x dB, it doesn't matter whether you run the preamp cold and push the faders up, or whether you run the preamp hot and turn the faders down to get to that level ... you have the same electrical gain, and the same pattern.

EXACTLY the same.

The amount of wash is NOT reduced by operating as Dick advocates.

I don't know how these foggy notions get started.

(One could argue, and I will, that running the input cold and getting gain in the faders or somewhere else later in the signal chain degrades S/N.)

Quote:

What I found strange, and if I get some time I'll run some plots, is that the PR-20 has slightly better off axis (45 degree) rejection than the PR-22.


I'd like to see those plots, and do a plot of an SM58 while you're at it.

-a
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Bob Leonard on August 30, 2008, 11:23:17 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Sat, 30 August 2008 14:25

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 15:27

Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 17:18

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 16:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

Andy beat me to it, but, HUH? How does level effect the pattern?

Mac


I think, but could be wrong, that what Dick was trying to convey, is that less channel gain can and usually does eliminate a certain amount of wash, but only because of reduced sensitivity. The pattern, cardioid (as in heart shaped) remains the same but the size (effective area) is reduced.


EXCEPT THAT ...

Gain is gain.

If you have an output SPL requirement of x dB, it doesn't matter whether you run the preamp cold and push the faders up, or whether you run the preamp hot and turn the faders down to get to that level ... you have the same electrical gain, and the same pattern.

EXACTLY the same.

The amount of wash is NOT reduced by operating as Dick advocates.

I don't know how these foggy notions get started.

(One could argue, and I will, that running the input cold and getting gain in the faders or somewhere else later in the signal chain degrades S/N.)

Quote:

What I found strange, and if I get some time I'll run some plots, is that the PR-20 has slightly better off axis (45 degree) rejection than the PR-22.


I'd like to see those plots, and do a plot of an SM58 while you're at it.

-a


Andy,
So I am not misunderstood;

If all things are equal I have found I can achieve higher gain levels with the Heil mics. With the PR20/22 I find that level to be from +3db or sometimes higher than an SM-58. 3db gain is 3db gain for everything the mic picks up. If I drop the gain on the channel strip DOWN 3db, then I have also decreased the level of the wash by 3db as well, and the mic still has as much GBF as the SM-58.

I know this is over simplified, but if the 22 picks up everything very well within a 15' radius and you reduce the incoming gain by 3db you have reduced that radius to about 8-10' effectively. And that's something you can do with any mic IMO.  
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 (Ignore post)
Post by: Tim Padrick on September 01, 2008, 02:30:51 am
.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on September 02, 2008, 06:40:45 pm
On a side note..did a scratch recording with click track of a young girl singer/songwriter I am attempting to groom... Twisted Evil

DI's guitar and a PR 22 on her voice..MixWiz for both channels...no compression or processing..I was really surprised how clean and realistic the 22 sounded..I will try and post a decent MP3 later tonight.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on September 21, 2008, 06:14:44 pm
i know the AT artist elite mics have been mentioned but has anyone used the AE6100 ? i have tested many dynamics (unfortunately not the heils yet) and i have to say i was astounded by the clarity and true reproduction of my voice through AE6100(using it up close for maximum prox effect). the clarity and reproduction was particulary noticable when listening to the mic throgh headphones or a recorded vocal track .plus being a hypercardiod it has decent GBF/rejction. i did have one problem with the mic but this may be something to do with a defect in the one i had which i´ll enquire about later.

would be interesting to hear a A/B between the AE6100 and the heils
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: SteveKirby on November 01, 2008, 02:37:39 am
Andy Peters wrote on Sat, 30 August 2008 13:25

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 15:27

Mac Kerr wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 17:18

Dick Rees wrote on Fri, 29 August 2008 16:32

Running them a little cool on the input so as to try to tighten up the pattern a bit and:

Andy beat me to it, but, HUH? How does level effect the pattern?

Mac


I think, but could be wrong, that what Dick was trying to convey, is that less channel gain can and usually does eliminate a certain amount of wash, but only because of reduced sensitivity. The pattern, cardioid (as in heart shaped) remains the same but the size (effective area) is reduced.


EXCEPT THAT ...

Gain is gain.

If you have an output SPL requirement of x dB, it doesn't matter whether you run the preamp cold and push the faders up, or whether you run the preamp hot and turn the faders down to get to that level ... you have the same electrical gain, and the same pattern.

EXACTLY the same.

The amount of wash is NOT reduced by operating as Dick advocates.

I don't know how these foggy notions get started.

(One could argue, and I will, that running the input cold and getting gain in the faders or somewhere else later in the signal chain degrades S/N.)-a

Thank you Andy.  I've been wondering about some of the conventional wisdom thrown around regarding input gain settings.  The other day, the HE in this club was telling one of our female singers that the Sennheiser mic I'd suggested to her (she wanted a $99 budget mic that fit her voice for small jazz things she does and I suggested a 935) would fit but that it needed the input gain on the board really cranked to "open up" it's sound and be at it's best.  Now she doesn't belt all that hard and I tend to run her mic's input gain a bit above the other two (male with a huge voice that overloads anything, and female with a really sharp penetrating voice that sounds shrill with the Sennheiser or anything with a sharp presence peak.  Actually both of the these folks are good candidates for PR22s)

I just stood there not wanting to argue with the guy (I have before) in front of our singer, but couldn't help wonder WTF he was talking about.  I've always considered level as level.  The rest of it is just gain structure for s/n optimization.

Somehow, I think the term gain is being misunderstood.  Maybe it comes from the amplification gain factor.  The actual gains of different amplifiers, not the settings of the input level controls.

I tried the Heil mics at AES where he had them and a B58 hooked up to a pair of headphones.  I really liked the sound of the PR22.  Reading this is making me think it would be good for our male singer who has a huge baritone and when he goes for it, will clip about any input pad.  I've given him other mics to try but he's addicted to what he perceives as the "clarity" or presence of the B58.  Somehow the PR22 sounded more clear and even present without the colored sound of the Shure.  It almost made the Shure sound boxy as well as having that sibilant peak.  But it wouldn't be good for the lady jazz singer in our corporate band setting as we are often tightly packed on stage and she isn't the loudest singer on the block.  

I thought the peak of the 935 would help her voice cut over piano and drums in small venues and the standard cardioid pattern would let her work the mic more.  I've had her use my 935 wireless a couple of times and it sounded good with her voice in spite of the wireless losses.  Maybe in a very quiet setting the PR20 would sound good.  Next time she does Yoshi's (which has a very dead stage) I'll suggest she try asking for one at soundcheck.
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Tim Padrick on November 01, 2008, 06:28:13 pm
SteveKirby wrote on Sat, 01 November 2008 01:37

 Maybe in a very quiet setting the PR20 would sound good.  Next time she does Yoshi's (which has a very dead stage) I'll suggest she try asking for one at soundcheck.


Soundcheck overly loudly.  When I used a PR22 on a quiet (but otherwise superb) fem, soundcheck went well and the first set started ok, but by the end of the set, the band and crowd were rockin' enough that I had to crank her up, and I no longer had the stability I needed.  I had to switch mics.  (The same thing happened when I used a VX10 and a Beta 87.)
Title: Re: Huh?
Post by: Robert Alan on November 23, 2008, 05:37:26 pm


Mac[/quote]



 I've given him other mics to try but he's addicted to what he perceives as the "clarity" or presence of the B58.  Somehow the PR22 sounded more clear and even present without the colored sound of the Shure.  It almost made the Shure sound boxy as well as having that sibilant peak.  [/quote]

yes you might be surprised. hyped presence peaks doenst always translate as clarity, sure it does help cut through the mix but i dont think that is the same thing as clarity per se.its a question i enquired about in a thread i started called ´´what exactly makes a good dynamic vocal mic`` (or something along those lines lol) if you listen to a playback of just a recorded vocal the B58 does sound both VERY boxy and VERY overly coloured with presence. i imagine they have their place but to me they just sound awful compared to just about any newer dynamic such as the sennheiser e935 or e945, audio technica AE6100 ect ect when listening to a vocal playback. even some of the slightly older models like the EV 767a sound miles better. i think if i had to use a B58 on someone i would give the audix OM5 a try because it seems to have similar characteristics (crisp and present)but sounds a step higher in audio quality

as for the heils they sound great but im just not gonna take the risk that they may not work for my situation- loud rock/metal, small stage  or rehearsal room.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on November 29, 2008, 11:12:47 pm
Tonight at the ol' Gallery we had something other than the usual two-gtrs/bass/drums rock: My Brightest Diamond and Clare and the Reasons. Ah, quiet stuff, no backline noise ... let's try the PR-22 here on vox.

Now both Shara (MBD) and Clare brought Beta58As but agreed to try the PR-22. Shara has an amazing voice and the mic worked well enough for her.

Clare, however, sings so quietly that I offered her five bucks to sing louder. (She said she needed at least $7.) And I had the gain cranked and was not getting enough voice before various feedback birdies appeared. Clearly the PR-22 was not working so we put up the Beta58A and voila ... we are good to go.

Now of course the Beta58A is not a fair comparison with the PR-22, as it's a supercardioid. But that's exactly what I needed ... more rejection, more front-to-back gain. And I really didn't need LF response down to DC, anyways.

I'm sure that I could've hacked the EQ to make the PR-22 work but I thought the whole point was to avoid doing that. The mic swap was the right thing to do.

Again: a supercardioid version of this mic would probably be great.

PR-22 is a cracking good snare drum mic, though.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Karl Bader on January 02, 2009, 10:57:50 am
http://www.proaudioreview.com/article/16734

Is the review I did for Pro Audio Review magazine...

As you can see, I liked it!

Thanks,

Karl

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on January 02, 2009, 03:23:01 pm
"Krazy" Karl Bader wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 10:57

http://www.proaudioreview.com/article/16734

Is the review I did for Pro Audio Review magazine...

As you can see, I liked it!

Thanks,

Karl



Karl,
That's a good and fair review, and I especially note the need for a learning curve (not your words) when moving to mics of this type. The durability test left me somewhat puzzled. I understand your comment concerning the grip, as I too feel it can be slippery feeling at times.

I would only like to point out that I've been with Bob Heil when he has held his seminars, and he has literally tried over and over to destroy a 22 using it as a hammer, but has been unsuccessful in doing so.

I have also compared the 22 to an RE-20 and found the RE-20 to sound muddy by comparison.

Nice review.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Karl Bader on January 02, 2009, 03:27:36 pm
Bob,

What may I ask made you feel puzzled? Maybe I can clarify, and plus I would always like to do some self improvement.  Very Happy

Karl
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Dave Dermont on January 02, 2009, 06:45:45 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 15:23

 
I have also compared the 22 to an RE-20 and found the RE-20 to sound muddy by comparison.



Bob,

Was it the same rusty old piece-of-crap RE20 Bob was using in his trade show booth the first time I saw his mics?

Mr. Heil really turned me off was when he used the term "Variable-D bullshit" to describe the RE20.

I kinda know what Variable-D is, and I am pretty sure it's not bullshit.


DD
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on January 02, 2009, 11:41:49 pm
Dave Dermont wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 18:45

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 15:23

 
I have also compared the 22 to an RE-20 and found the RE-20 to sound muddy by comparison.



Bob,

Was it the same rusty old piece-of-crap RE20 Bob was using in his trade show booth the first time I saw his mics?

Mr. Heil really turned me off was when he used the term "Variable-D bullshit" to describe the RE20.

I kinda know what Variable-D is, and I am pretty sure it's not bullshit.


DD


Dave,
No it wasn't that beat up mic Bob Heil uses, it was a fairly new one I borrow from time to time. To be fair I didn't do anything with the EQ and have used them in the past with great results. So I'm not saying the RE20 isn't a great mic, the last one I used just seemed to be dull.

All manufacturers have a method for tuning their mics. It doesn't matter to me what it's called as long as it works, so it could be Variable-A,B,C,D but I don't remember him using that term at the Boston sessions though. It's just a name given to the process for tuning the mic and whose to say one process is better than another. So I'm with you there.

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on January 02, 2009, 11:53:51 pm
"Krazy" Karl Bader wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 15:27

Bob,

What may I ask made you feel puzzled? Maybe I can clarify, and plus I would always like to do some self improvement.  Very Happy

Karl


I think it was this line Karl;

"The durability of the PR-22 was questioned because the grip of the mic seemed to slip through my hand, and the overly thick case made me question its ability to hold up to the rigors of the road"

Maybe I was reading to much into the statement. Dropping the mic may be a result of the grip, but failure is not the result of the grip.

An overly thick case would not cause me to think the mic was more fragile than others of it's type.

My first impression when seeing the mics for the first time was, "Nice, something better than a crap bag to protect it, and it holds all the accessories as well. That's a first at this price level."

All in all a really good and honest review Karl.

You have to admit though, the extra grills, case and windscreen are a definate bonus.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on January 03, 2009, 08:28:17 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 21:53

You have to admit though, the extra grills, case and windscreen are a definate (sic) bonus.


I'd rather save fifteen bucks and not have the case. All of my mics go into my mic box for storage. When I travel with mics, they get put into individual Shure and Audix pouches. The Heil case is nice but waaaay too big.

NB that this isn't limited to Heil. I have the plastic cases for my CAD E-100s, for some EV 408s, for a D112 and for my SM81s. I suppose the boxes are fine for studios with mic lockers.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Stephen Payne on January 11, 2009, 11:40:09 am
Andy Peters wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 23:12

Tonight at the ol' Gallery we had something other than the usual two-gtrs/bass/drums rock: My Brightest Diamond and Clare and the Reasons. Ah, quiet stuff, no backline noise ... let's try the PR-22 here on vox.

Now both Shara (MBD) and Clare brought Beta58As but agreed to try the PR-22. Shara has an amazing voice and the mic worked well enough for her.

Clare, however, sings so quietly that I offered her five bucks to sing louder. (She said she needed at least $7.) And I had the gain cranked and was not getting enough voice before various feedback birdies appeared. Clearly the PR-22 was not working so we put up the Beta58A and voila ... we are good to go.

-a


I've only used mine 3 times but this was my experience also. I had to set the gain 25% higher than a Beta58a and with a quiet type it's very difficult to use.
It sure sounds beautiful on the right singer though.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: rick earl on January 11, 2009, 08:53:46 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Sat, 29 November 2008 23:12



I'm sure that I could've hacked the EQ to make the PR-22 work but I thought the whole point was to avoid doing that. The mic swap was the right thing to do.


PR-22 is a cracking good snare drum mic, though.

-a


I agree on both points.  

I will always try something else if I find myself twisting too many knobs. Although I like the sound of the PR-22 especially on female vocals, there are times where it just doesn't work right, granted my job now entails working with inexperienced vocalists in a college setting, I have problems with many mics.  I have yet to find the "Golden" vocal mic that works without much EQ every time.  The PR-35 has been better for me in this regard.  I've only switched it out once so far.  

The PR-22 is now my first out of the box for snare.  I really like it for drummers who use brushes.  I don't have to work as hard to get a sound.  So far I have not switched it out for anything else.

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on January 18, 2009, 08:32:00 pm
with dynamic mic technology progressing quite a bit there seems to be a number of dynamics on the market that are clamiming condenser like audio quality such as the AKG D7, Telefunken M-80, Equation Audio DS-V10, DS-V11....now maybe some or even all may not be as pristine as the heils report to be but they may address the clarity vs off axis rejection balance a little better?
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Jordan Wolf on January 18, 2009, 11:49:30 pm
I think that some of the people here will get their hands on them and compare...they're quite the curious bunch.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Adam Cooke on January 23, 2009, 06:12:58 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 23:41

I'm not saying the RE20 isn't a great mic, the last one I used just seemed to be dull.


You're right, the RE20 isn't particularly bright. I suspect that's why EV made the RE27. It's essentially a modernized RE20 with extended high frequency response, higher sensitivity, and more EQ switches. I wonder how it would compare to the Heil microphones?
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on January 24, 2009, 10:23:15 pm
Adam Cooke wrote on Fri, 23 January 2009 16:12

Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 02 January 2009 23:41

I'm not saying the RE20 isn't a great mic, the last one I used just seemed to be dull.


You're right, the RE20 isn't particularly bright. I suspect that's why EV made the RE27. It's essentially a modernized RE20 with extended high frequency response, higher sensitivity, and more EQ switches. I wonder how it would compare to the Heil microphones?


Well, I wouldn't want to use the RE20 or RE27 in handheld applications.

-A
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on January 25, 2009, 10:48:53 am
Robert Alan wrote on Sun, 18 January 2009 20:32

with dynamic mic technology progressing quite a bit there seems to be a number of dynamics on the market that are clamiming condenser like audio quality such as the AKG D7, Telefunken M-80, Equation Audio DS-V10, DS-V11....now maybe some or even all may not be as pristine as the heils report to be but they may address the clarity vs off axis rejection balance a little better?


I used a pair of 35's as drum overheads in a recording session this week and was REALLY happy with the sound..very natural and even. I am using Heils more and more in the studio.
John
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on May 14, 2009, 02:53:06 am
Wow, it's a night of dredging up old threads.

One point I think I made here was that the PR-22 ships in a fancy leatherette case with two extra grilles. Most live guys have mic boxes and the leather case is typically discarded or at least put on a shelf and never used. And my musing was, "well, I'd be happy if I could save a bunch of money and NOT get the extra grilles and case I don't need."

So maybe somebody at Heil listened and they now offer the PR20 (not the 22) with just a Shure-type pouch and clip.

Oh, yeah, Heil has published polar patterns. Here's the PR22:

http://www.heilsound.com/pro/products/pr22/PR22-polar.jpg

This chart and the accompanying documentation indicates neither the frequency at which the data were taken, nor even the scale of the plot!

There is also a front and back frequency-response plot:

http://www.heilsound.com/pro/products/pr22/pr22-frequency.jpg

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Caleb Dick on May 14, 2009, 01:00:09 pm
Very cool.  Now how long until there is a PR35 UT?
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on May 14, 2009, 01:36:28 pm
Been demoing the Telefunken M 80..really good sounding and useful mic. I have been throwing up 58's, OM5's, PR 35's, PR22's, Senn. 935,945...and whenever it comes around during a show, when a vocalist using the PR22 opens his mouth...I notice it.
Could be luck in choosing the right mic for their voices but the 22 always sounds better than anything else..still picks up too much hash..but sounds great. I am still finding that the Senn. offerings sound to fake and hyped for my taste. I do have 1 inch HF drivers so maybe the hype is designed more for a 2 inch system?

John
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Lee Brenkman on May 14, 2009, 11:46:18 pm
Caleb Dick wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 10:00

Very cool.  Now how long until there is a PR35 UT?




There are no interchangeable windscreens to lower the cost by eliminating them on the PR-35.

It just ships with the little "suitcase" and the clip that it falls out of too easily Wink!

I'd be happy with a zipper pouch and a clip that grips a little better.

And is the PR-20 UT still burdened with the less than effective internal shock mount?


Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on May 15, 2009, 01:15:37 am
with the heils out the equation due to wash with anything moderately loud behind the singer i imagine the next best thing dynamic wise is gonna be the telefunken M80 (if it really is much more manageable then the heils) the only thing is that, here at least in the uk, they are pretty expensive. about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on May 15, 2009, 01:53:35 am
Robert Alan wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 01:15

with the heils out the equation due to wash with anything moderately loud behind the singer i imagine the next best thing dynamic wise is gonna be the telefunken M80 (if it really is much more manageable then the heils) the only thing is that, here at least in the uk, they are pretty expensive. about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Bob Leonard on May 15, 2009, 08:00:50 am
John Chiara wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 01:53

Robert Alan wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 01:15

with the heils out the equation due to wash with anything moderately loud behind the singer i imagine the next best thing dynamic wise is gonna be the telefunken M80 (if it really is much more manageable then the heils) the only thing is that, here at least in the uk, they are pretty expensive. about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Karl Bader on May 15, 2009, 08:51:12 am
Lee Brenkman wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 23:46


And is the PR-20 UT still burdened with the less than effective internal shock mount?



Ummm that's why the PR-22 was developed. Bob teamed up with a guy who developed Sorbothane foam to eliminate the handling noise of the PR-20. I wrote a whole article about it in Pro Audio Review...

Karl

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Weogo Reed on May 15, 2009, 10:13:41 am
Hi Andy and All,

Thanks for posting the charts.

Everybody take a look at the 180 degree off-axis chart.
See the 8K peak?  I have been notching that down a good bit and cymbal bleed issues are much smaller.
It seems to be a venue/speaker-specific issue - in some halls, the peak is around 6K, others closer to 10K.

Good health,  Weogo
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on May 15, 2009, 11:16:57 am
as far as i can make out from all that i have read the wash/bleed problems with the heils is more to do with loud sound sources in front (behind the singer) rather than from their off axis null angle. like others i suspect that they might have a wider than usual on  axis pattern and i think if a polar pattern that showed more than one frequency was created it might show this.

Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on May 15, 2009, 01:56:12 pm
Lee Brenkman wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 20:46

And is the PR-20 UT still burdened with the less than effective internal shock mount?


The conspiracy theorist in me figures that there's no UT version of the PR22 because he's trying to liquidate the PR20s. At $150 a pop for a flawed mic, it doesn't make sense, but at $99 is might. And it's true that the money is saved in the packaging but as I said, who needs the stupid case anyway?

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Andy Peters on May 15, 2009, 01:57:26 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 05:00

Strange that this thread was brought back up. I was looking because I wanted Andy to know that the polar plots had been done, and by an independent company as well.


The polar plot indicates neither scale nor frequency at which the data were taken.

It's the kind of spec that would make Uli proud.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Lee Brenkman on May 18, 2009, 01:45:04 am
Andy Peters wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 10:56

Lee Brenkman wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 20:46

And is the PR-20 UT still burdened with the less than effective internal shock mount?


The conspiracy theorist in me figures that there's no UT version of the PR22 because he's trying to liquidate the PR20s. At $150 a pop for a flawed mic, it doesn't make sense, but at $99 is might. And it's true that the money is saved in the packaging but as I said, who needs the stupid case anyway?

-a



I agree that the motivation for the UT might be a way to liquidate the remaining stock of PR20s.  I can see the people in the stockroom stripping the extra windscreens etc. from the packages to be re-inserted in the boxes of PR22s.

I still like the sound of both of them but the "footfall factor" on the 20 makes it a no go even at the lower price.

I do find myself using the PR-35 a lot for my jazz shows.

lee
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: John Chiara on May 19, 2009, 11:23:14 am
Lee Brenkman wrote on Mon, 18 May 2009 01:45

Andy Peters wrote on Fri, 15 May 2009 10:56

Lee Brenkman wrote on Thu, 14 May 2009 20:46

And is the PR-20 UT still burdened with the less than effective internal shock mount?


The conspiracy theorist in me figures that there's no UT version of the PR22 because he's trying to liquidate the PR20s. At $150 a pop for a flawed mic, it doesn't make sense, but at $99 is might. And it's true that the money is saved in the packaging but as I said, who needs the stupid case anyway?

-a



I agree that the motivation for the UT might be a way to liquidate the remaining stock of PR20s.  I can see the people in the stockroom stripping the extra windscreens etc. from the packages to be re-inserted in the boxes of PR22s.

I still like the sound of both of them but the "footfall factor" on the 20 makes it a no go even at the lower price.

I do find myself using the PR-35 a lot for my jazz shows.

lee


Ditto, the 35 is just stunning on a good jazz vocalist.
John
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Shaun Hayward on May 19, 2009, 12:30:07 pm
Good afternoon

First post

I've been watching the threads on Heil microphones with interest over the past year or so. We've been looking at new microphones for our church, to replace our 12-year-old $39.95 specials. Articulation and Intelligibility are key.

We just demoed 6 microphones in our price range:

  • Shure SM58
  • Shure Beta58a
  • Sennheiser E845
  • Audio Technica AE6100
  • Heil PR-35
  • Heil PR-22


Our tests were pretty extensive, taking about 8 hours. In the end, we were down to the Shure Beta58a and the Heil PR-22. Both sound great, warm, articulate, intelligible, and easy to use.

What really blew us away was the live test with a singer on the Heil PR-22 and an acoustic guitar. The Heil seems to sit in the mix as distinct and separate while allowing the singer to blend with the instrument. In other words, the Heil PR-22 seems to just get out of the way.

Also, our mixer's meter showed the same level. And our SPL meter showed the same level. But the Heil PR-22 felt much, much more present and "there" than the Shure Beta58a. It was stunning. We had to keep turning the PR-22 down and down and the Beta58a up and up just to get their perceived levels the same.

I've used the term "presence" for years. I thought I knew what it meant. But the PR-22 seemed to redefine it for me, for our singers, and our sound operator.

You hear people say things like, "It's not a microphone - it's your voice, only louder" and you think it's just hype. Well, yes... in part, it is. But there is some truth to it.

A very nice microphone and I'm looking forward to next week for a second full-band test and a feedback "squeal" test.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Robert Alan on May 19, 2009, 02:11:58 pm
wow, maybe its to do with what mic sounds "best" on a particular singer and what sound your trying to achieve  but i have to say im quite surprised that you found the beta 58 better than the AE6100 or even the e845 for that matter (though the the B58 is better for loud rock and such as it does have more cut-e845 is fuller, warmer and smoother but less cut)once again maybe its just my voice but the AE6100 sounds less coloured, clearer, more articulate and smoother than a B58. B58 sounds too coloured, can sound thin, brittle and harsh. the real eye opener is when you listen back to just a single recorded vocal track.

you might also want to checkout the sennheiser 900 series mics if you do find that there is too much wash with the heils. also the telefunken M80 seems to be getting the thumbs up though is quite expensive.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: David Mars on May 25, 2009, 01:32:44 pm
Hello, pardon me please, if I'm digressing here. I'd like some opinions about the PR 22 and 35. I'm considering one of these microphones.

I'm not the loudest singer around and very much prefer not to "push too hard" when I sing. My band - we play rock n' roll and alternative - however, is often loud and happy about it. Also, we tend to play more at places with bad acoustic and sometimes without a sound engineer. The PA systems and amps/equipment provided, if any, are usually pretty basic too.

So, is it worth my money to get one of these Heil mikes? I currently own a Shure SM58 and while it does fine most of the times in rehearsals, I've rarely used it for gigs and the only time I did, I pretty much couldn't hear myself. Well, to be fair, that was the gig without a sound man.

If it's worth my time and money to invest in these in spite of the shitty, not-under-our-control situations my band often find ourselves in, which one will be a better choice for my case?

Here's a bit about my band:
6 piece with two guitars and one keyboard/piano/synth, I'm the lead singer and that is pretty much the only thing I do. We sound like The Beatles, the Stones, Mando Diao, RHCP, the Strokes, Kings of Leon, Pink Floyd etc.

Thanks for any input!

David Mars
Title: Re: Heil PR-22
Post by: Shaun Hayward on May 26, 2009, 05:58:36 pm
Quote:

but i have to say im quite surprised that you found the beta 58 better than the AE6100 or even the e845 for that matter (though the the B58 is better for loud rock and such as it does have more cut-e845 is fuller, warmer and smoother but less cut)once again maybe its just my voice but the AE6100 sounds less coloured, clearer, more articulate and smoother than a B58. B58 sounds too coloured, can sound thin, brittle and harsh. the real eye opener is when you listen back to just a single recorded vocal track.


There were three votes on all mics and that's the trouble with democracy Cool

We were looking for microphones that were primarily articulate, that caused the vocals to "sit on top" of the mix, and that didn't require a lot of EQ. We don't always have the luxury of good channel-strip EQ. So I guess we were after a "naturally EQed" mic, which is contrary to the normal goal of finding "flat" gear.

I personally didn't like the Beta58 as well as some other mics because I found it somewhat coloured. But it did have a quality to it that made it articulate. And overall, I found it worked well. Once in the mix, though, the mic's colouration started to show.

The E845 and AR6100 were both flat, which I liked. And I suspect that they are incredibly EQ-friendly. But without EQ, both of them fell flat and dead in the mix.

The Heil PR-35 actually fell victim to that as well. In fact, my contemporaries complained that my voice sounded bad through it... had a wabble to it... didn't sound stable. I had to inform them that this is what my voice actually sounds like  Embarassed. But it would be a fantastic broadcast mic.

It was very interesting to see how different mics handled in both acappela and in the mix.

The Heil PR-22 seemed to "just work" without EQ in every situation we threw at it. On our main system, which has lots of channel-strip EQ available, we'll probably tweak the mics SLIGHTLY. But over-all, they worked well and in the mix they were golden. Our female singer did this low alto-tenor thing that was so rich and shimmering. Then she sang harmony over top of me and it was just wonderful.

So yes, E845 and AE6100 are noteworthy mics and I'll bet you could get a lot of millage out of them - especially with lots of EQ flexibility. Lots of room to tailor, I'm sure.

For us, the PR-22 fit the bill almost perfectly out of the box.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Shaun Hayward on May 26, 2009, 06:36:59 pm
Quote:

Hello, pardon me please, if I'm digressing here. I'd like some opinions about the PR 22 and 35. I'm considering one of these microphones.


It's definitely worth putting on your eval list. I'd still try it against some other microphones. It will kill your SM58 to be sure. And as I mentioned, it wiped the floor with the Beta58a in the mix.

Quote:

I'm not the loudest singer around and very much prefer not to "push too hard" when I sing.


You need 2 things: good singing technique and good microphone technique. These two things will help you with any microphone.

That said...

With many microphones, the closer you get the more "bassy" and "boomy" it gets. It's call "proximity effect". Some people like it and use it with their mic technique. Other people just want their voice heard naturally wherever the stand. The Heil PR-22 doesn't have nearly the proximity effect as many other microphones so you can get quite close without the sound "booming" on you.

I've also noticed in our two-week trial that since the Heil PR-22 is so clear and so "present", it's easier to hear yourself in the monitors. Thus you can sing more naturally without bordering on "screaming" and "straining". I strained my voice on Sunday because I went back to my Radio Shack SM58 knock-off.

Quote:

My band - we play rock n' roll and alternative - however, is often loud and happy about it. Also, we tend to play more at places with bad acoustic


You're fighting physics now.

If the band is loud, they will bleed into the vocal mics. Especially if you have drums or guitar cabs behind you. Drum bleed is often exacerbated in a room with poor acoustics.

One question with have with the Heil PR-22 is how well it's going to handle drum bleed. Fortunately we're going to buy a drum shield.

Audix makes some microphones that are meant specifically for high stage volume. The OM6, I believe. I haven't tried them but apparently they reject a lot of sound on loud stages. The only thing is you have to be REALLY close to them.

We cranked the Heil PR-22 until it hit feedback and it gave us a quite a bit. On an open stage with 3 monitors and two mains, we had the gain high enough to clip the master output while yelling from the sound booth 60' away. with no feedback. We normally run around -12dB (and clipping is at 0dB).

But you still have to obey physics.

Quote:

 and sometimes without a sound engineer. The PA systems and amps/equipment provided, if any, are usually pretty basic too.


That's where the Heil might come in handy. Part of why we chose them is because they seemed "naturally EQed" to the human voice, easy to hear, it seems natural. I'm not sure how else to describe it. It's one of those things you'll have to experience to describe.

What I'd say is rent a Heil PR-22 one week, another mic a different week, so on. Try them out in various conditions and see what you like. But the PR-22 should be one that you test out for sure.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: David Mars on May 27, 2009, 12:10:29 am
Thanks, Shaun, for the good reply! You mentioned in the other reply your friends said you sounded wabbly through the PR 35. Care to share more about that and other experiences with the 35? How does it compare to the 22 in your opinion?

Unfortunately, I may not be able to rent the Heil mikes here. I'm based in Singapore and over here, as far as I've seen, it's Shure, Senn or AKG that the sound companies usually carry. And yes, I hate that proximity effect, haha. Without proper EQ (we don't have that luxury many times), the proximity effect just booms me out. I'll love to learn how to EQ a mike but that's going to take time.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: Shaun Hayward on May 27, 2009, 05:55:43 pm
Hi David

The "wobble" is my voice not maintaining a 100% true pitch. It goes flat then sharp and then flat and then sharp. Some people call it crappy singing. I call it tremolo. Very Happy

PR-35
The subtle flavors in a person's voice or in an acoustic guitar or other sounds are called "transients". My slight wobble might be considered a transient. The PR-35 has a big, big element and seemed to capture those transients extremely well. Too well. Without reverb, EQ, or a band to drown them out, it was noticeable.

Also, the PR-35 came across as flat and almost dead without reverb and EQ, like the Sennheister E845. That's exactly what you want for a broadcast or studio mic, or if you have a sound guy that can really tailor your sound.

Have a look at the frequency response to see how dead-flat it is until you hit the presence peek:

http://www.heilsound.com/pro/products/pr35/


PR-22
The PR-22 seemed to be incredibly present. It seems to boost some frequencies to make the mic both "there" and intelligible. Plug it in flat and you've got a pre-EQed mic, near as I can tell.

Very "alive" and "real" sounding. Sounds that are often a problem (including "S") seem to really sparkle without being overbearing. I MIGHT cut the "S" back SLIGHTLY with EQ in some venues.

The transient response is also "subjectively" good. Meaning some aspects of the transients are picked up very well and others are less so. To me, the transients that are missing are the ones I don't want any how  Laughing

Now, some engineers are probably going to hate all of that. They wanted full control over how every nuance comes out. But then again, they also have the luxury of a 4 band shelving EQ on each channel. I have that luxury in some settings but not in others.

To me, the PR-22 sounded 98% how I would personally want a mic EQed right out of the box. That's nice. And maybe others wouldn't like how the PR-22 is "pre-EQed".

There's no accounting for taste and no magic solution. But I like it.



I'm hopefully getting pricing and placing the order this week. I'm not sure how long it will take for delivery. But after I've set up the PR-22 mics and used them I can post back here if you wish. If you haven't heard anything late-June, post back or PM me.

In the mean time, start renting other mics and see what you like.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: Fred Merkle on May 27, 2009, 08:00:17 pm
Shaun Hayward wrote on Wed, 27 May 2009 17:55


The subtle flavors in a person's voice or in an acoustic guitar or other sounds are called "transients". My slight wobble might be considered a transient.


Not exactly.  Transients are by definition short bursts of sound, which implies very high frequency.  The snap of a snare drum is a transient.  The tremolo of a voice is a low frequency effect--varying of the fundamental by a few hertz up and down.

-Fred
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: Andy Peters on May 27, 2009, 08:26:51 pm
Shaun Hayward wrote on Wed, 27 May 2009 14:55

PR-35
The subtle flavors in a person's voice or in an acoustic guitar or other sounds are called "transients". My slight wobble might be considered a transient. The PR-35 has a big, big element and seemed to capture those transients extremely well. Too well. Without reverb, EQ, or a band to drown them out, it was noticeable.


Two comments:
a) As Fred points out, your definition of "transient" is incorrect.
b) Most would argue that a large diaphragm is less able to capture transients, at least if one uses the correct definition of "transient."

Quote:

The transient response is also "subjectively" good. Meaning some aspects of the transients are picked up very well and others are less so. To me, the transients that are missing are the ones I don't want any how  Laughing


Again, methinks you need to come up with a term other than "transient" to describe this.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: Jordan Wolf on May 28, 2009, 02:28:36 am
I believe you're thinking of "timbre" (pronounced tam-ber).  It's a not-so-slightly vague musical term referring to the quality of sound (or lack thereof) of an instrument.

Also, as far as EQ goes, I would look at a 4-band Parametric EQ as very handy - especially if it has a variable Q/bandwidth (whichever of the terms they're using on there) function.  That could allow for a shelving filter at the high and low ends, as well as peaking filters in-between.  More precise control of boosts/cuts can be an amazing thing in the hands of a pro.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Stephen Payne on May 31, 2009, 03:55:50 pm
David,
The situation you describe is almost exactly the one I couldn't make the PR22 work on. Soft singer on loud stage in smallish bad room. If you hold the mic really close and your voice has any body  to it then it might work for you. In the right situation it does sound quite good. Give it a try.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: David Mars on June 01, 2009, 12:29:00 am
Thanks, Steve, and everybody else for your input. I haven't had the chance to try any of them due to financial constraints. So, it's the 58 still, for now.

But I'm caught in a dilemma here. The 35 may work better than the 22 on a loud venue with bad acoustics and a soft singer (anybody can testify to that?) but will need some professional EQ. The 22 does not need much EQ most of the time (any different experiences here?) but may not work in my situation due to the volume. Well, it's loud most times with no professional EQ! Pretty much a worst case scenario, aye? Perhaps I should save up to get both, haha.

And does anybody know if the 22s AND 35s come in customised colours for the body (like the PR 20s)? If they do, how can I get them?

Thanks again for all your replies!

Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 01, 2009, 08:25:20 am
David Mars wrote on Mon, 01 June 2009 00:29

Thanks, Steve, and everybody else for your input. I haven't had the chance to try any of them due to financial constraints. So, it's the 58 still, for now.

But I'm caught in a dilemma here. The 35 may work better than the 22 on a loud venue with bad acoustics and a soft singer (anybody can testify to that?) but will need some professional EQ. The 22 does not need much EQ most of the time (any different experiences here?) but may not work in my situation due to the volume. Well, it's loud most times with no professional EQ! Pretty much a worst case scenario, aye? Perhaps I should save up to get both, haha.

And does anybody know if the 22s AND 35s come in customised colours for the body (like the PR 20s)? If they do, how can I get them?

Thanks again for all your replies!




Doug,
You don't need "professional EQ" to make a PR-35 work for you. What you need is a flat EQ, selective use of the roll off switch, and slight EQ from that point.

Bob Heil has a custom shop. Call them and they'll paint or plate your mics in any color or plating you want. All you have to do is call them.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: Tim Padrick on June 02, 2009, 12:23:16 am
I had a singer for whom I was hoping the PR22 would be the one that "sounds as good as she does".  It was not good in a band situation.  It might have worked had she been solo (and perhaps on IEMs as well).

Get an OM7 from RatSound.  If an OM7 won't get the job done, nothing will.  (And IMHO, it sounds better than most all of the commonly used mics.)  If that's too dear, you can get a 767a on eBay for under $60.
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: David Mars on June 02, 2009, 07:54:43 am
Thanks Bob! But did you call me Doug? I'm David Mars.

Anyway, which, the 22 or 35, do you think is more suitable for a loud stage?

Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & 35
Post by: David Mars on June 02, 2009, 08:05:17 am
Hey Tim, thanks for replying. I'm in Singapore and the microphones you've mentioned (especially the OM7) will really cost, haha. I have heard about its excellent rejection and gain-before-feedback though.

I've also heard about EV's 767. It was on my list before I came across Heil and thought I'd give the larger diaphragms a shot! As far as I've read, Heil microphones seem to use the larger diaphragms as their unique selling point. Is it really something unique to Heil in the dynamic microphones market? And what's your opinion about a larger diaphragm in relation to the sound it reproduces? How will you compare it to other mikes like EV 767 or AKG D5? If the PR 22 won't work in my situation, do you think the 35 will?

I really appreciate your helpful replies!

Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Andy Peters on June 02, 2009, 05:49:19 pm
David Mars wrote on Tue, 02 June 2009 04:54

Thanks Bob! But did you call me Doug? I'm David Mars.

Anyway, which, the 22 or 35, do you think is more suitable for a loud stage?


If you take the time to actually read this thread, it should become obvious that many of us think that the PR22 is NOT suitable for loud stages. As I've never used a PR35, I cannot comment on its suitability.

I will say that the EV 967 works well in my situation.

-a
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Robert Alan on June 03, 2009, 10:28:08 am
David, you say you use a sm58 at the moment. are you getting enough gain before feedback and rejection with this mic for your application? is it that you want a step up in audio quality from the 58 or that you need something with better GBF and rejection? or both?

i havent used the PR22 or PR35 buts its common sense to assume that if 90% of the articles and reviews ive read about the mics are stating that they are not suitable for loud environments such as a small loud stages(blaring monitors, cranked guitar cabs and bashing drummer not far behind the singer) then why would i want to spend about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: David Mars on June 04, 2009, 02:01:08 am
Got that, Andy. Thanks!
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: David Mars on June 04, 2009, 02:10:32 am
Hello, Robert. Thanks for information and the microphones you've suggested! I'd like to have both good GBF and rejection and sound quality. In past gigs, I usually do not hear myself enough in the monitors with the SM58. In rehearsals, it usually does fine without much tweaking at the PA console (nothing fancy) but I kind of just feel that the tone can be better. There seems to be too much coloration and I just don't sound like me. At times, my bandmates thought I sounded like I'm in a can or that I sing into an amp and then mike the amp up. There is certainly use for that kind of sound but most of the time, I prefer to just sound pretty much like me.  
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Tim McCulloch on June 04, 2009, 10:15:03 am
David Mars wrote on Thu, 04 June 2009 01:10

Hello, Robert. Thanks for information and the microphones you've suggested! I'd like to have both good GBF and rejection and sound quality. In past gigs, I usually do not hear myself enough in the monitors with the SM58. In rehearsals, it usually does fine without much tweaking at the PA console (nothing fancy) but I kind of just feel that the tone can be better. There seems to be too much coloration and I just don't sound like me. At times, my bandmates thought I sounded like I'm in a can or that I sing into an amp and then mike the amp up. There is certainly use for that kind of sound but most of the time, I prefer to just sound pretty much like me.  

David-

The part I highlighted in bold tells me you have issues that aren't specific to an individual microphone.  What you are hearing is multipath, the incoherent arrival of various sounds (including your voice) at the mic.  It's entirely possible that you're getting monitor bleed from other vocal mics as well.

Remember that a microphone can't distinguish between desired and undersired sounds, and the loudest sound at the mic diaphragm is the winner.  In the case of multiple sounds at relatively the same level it's even worse.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Bob Leonard on June 04, 2009, 02:55:45 pm
Robert Alan wrote on Wed, 03 June 2009 10:28



i havent used the PR22 or PR35 buts its common sense to assume that if 90% of the articles and reviews ive read about the mics are stating that they are not suitable for loud environments such as a small loud stages(blaring monitors, cranked guitar cabs and bashing drummer not far behind the singer) then why would i want to spend about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Andy Peters on June 04, 2009, 05:12:49 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 04 June 2009 11:55

Robert Alan wrote on Wed, 03 June 2009 10:28



i havent used the PR22 or PR35 buts its common sense to assume that if 90% of the articles and reviews ive read about the mics are stating that they are not suitable for loud environments such as a small loud stages(blaring monitors, cranked guitar cabs and bashing drummer not far behind the singer) then why would i want to spend about
Title: Re: Heil PR-22 & PR 35
Post by: Robert Alan on June 04, 2009, 08:19:50 pm
Bob Leonard wrote on Thu, 04 June 2009 19:55

Robert Alan wrote on Wed, 03 June 2009 10:28



i havent used the PR22 or PR35 buts its common sense to assume that if 90% of the articles and reviews ive read about the mics are stating that they are not suitable for loud environments such as a small loud stages(blaring monitors, cranked guitar cabs and bashing drummer not far behind the singer) then why would i want to spend about