Our fellow writer Tomás Robisco had the opportunity to try out a series of microphones for professional applications in his studio. Among all the samples he received, the Shure KSM 9 stood out as “different.” The idea was to test all those microphones in the studio, but the KSM 9 differed, basically, because it was a handheld. Did a handheld mic make sense in a studio? Tomás and I visited the manufacturer's website, and it told us that the KSM9 is a product designed for studio and live use. Versatility, or just a marketing line?
Since we were testing the whole range of microphones Tomás had to review for this magazine, we included our KSM9 in the tests. And that's where the surprises began.
As a live sound engineer, I fell in love with the KSM9 the moment I unpacked it. First for its robust, excellent construction, with an aluminum body heavy enough to feel sturdy, yet light enough not to be a nuisance or tire the hand. With a perfect grip, the only thing I might criticize is the use of metal, which could induce some unwanted noise when the singer wears rings, for example. When I took off the capsule grille, a second wonderful surprise: a small switch let us choose between a cardioid or supercardioid polar pattern. Its specifications list a very linear frequency response, able to keep the proximity effect in check while offering absolute control over feedback. That's the live orientation.
With the help of Lola Gascón, singer of the band Lo:La, and Tomás at the control desk, we put the KSM9 through a simple but effective studio test. At the command “sing!”, Lola confirmed that the KSM9 is a tremendously valid option in the studio, although it doesn't reach the exacting extremes of other, shall we say, more professional options based on 1" capsules. That's obvious, but there's always someone who refuses to use a studio mic or who proposes recording a group in a fake live setup. The KSM9 passes with flying colors on aspects like handling noise (completely nonexistent, even with rings) and cable noise, and it delivers a very crisp, clean and coherent signal. Tomás confirmed our suspicions by accepting the take as valid and considering working with it.
But the live world is usually tougher, so I didn't hesitate to take the KSM9 out for a spin. I had the chance to put it through a major event, coinciding with the always interesting Fiestas de la Mercè in Barcelona. The stage, quite literally, was the central Plaza Cataluña, with a flown JBL Vertec rig and a Midas Heritage 2000 console, and all the paraphernalia we're used to having within reach.
The KSM9 was set up as the lead microphone for Roger Mas, a singer-songwriter in vogue in Catalonia who stands out precisely for his powerful, deep voice. Until recently, he used the SM58 as his standard, although I suggested switching to the Beta87, since it let me control the proximity effect far more, because Roger's voice drops very low, something he knows and exploits. The KSM9 met all my demands absolutely.
What a Live Performer
Roger Mas's voice stands out for its wide dynamic range. He has good control of his voice and knows perfectly well that he can reach low tones without much difficulty. For the engineer on duty, this means having to EQ his voice very carefully, looking for that perfect balance between the proximity effect and the need not to destroy the singer's dynamics. Compression becomes necessary in his case, so besides the proximity effect, it's very easy for the voice to “boom” at certain frequencies, especially on somewhat guttural sounds.
Choosing the Beta87 solved part of the problem: not only did the low end reach the console in a compact, controlled way, but it also added a certain “sparkle” in the upper spectrum. With it, I could keep all the dynamics and frequency response intact with fairly gentle compression settings, leaving the singer the possibility of regulating the dynamics even better depending on what he was singing. Even with the Beta87, though, I always have to make small EQ adjustments depending on which song he's performing. Sometimes it was worth boosting the lows; other times I had to keep the presence of those lows from being masked by the bass or any other instrument sharing the same register.
During the tests, the first thing I did was applaud the excellent signal level and quality the KSM9 delivers. With hardly any EQ (and that was with the system very badly set up, so the phase problems were tremendous), I already got a very good response. In fact, the KSM9 gives the engineer a lot of freedom by letting them really work with EQ as an “artistic” element, instead of as a fix for the small problems each microphone has.
As for the low end, I realized the KSM9 was doing a magnificent job. It was able to give me all the frequencies that make Roger Mas's voice something special, with exuberant linearity. The lows were there, without my ever thinking about the proximity effect. After adjusting the compressor appropriately, I also noticed how effectively the KSM9 responded to it. If I wanted the signal level to be perfect up to a certain point, the KSM did it as if it were the most natural thing in the world.
The monitor engineer told me he hadn't had any problems EQing the mic either. He received the same clean, controlled signal and noticed that it was truly robust against feedback. In fact, he had plenty of trouble with standard mics like the SM58, but not with the KSM9. He could deliver a good signal level in the singer's wedge long before the singer noticed any sign of feedback. What a wonder!
Faced with the barrage of feedback that unfortunately tends to occur during soundcheck (more so if the monitor engineer isn't very cooperative about it), Roger, the singer, asked for me to come onstage. Not used to this microphone, we both wondered whether some of the feedback was the KSM9's fault. That's what he asked me when he saw that any comment he made in a low voice, even from 50 cm away from the mic, was reproduced very precisely in his wedge. Well, no, not at all.
With the band playing, Roger's voice with the KSM9 seemed to shine above everything. Obviously that was my goal behind the console, but I can't help praising the virtues of the KSM9 because it made this task enormously easier. It was very easy to place his voice wherever you wanted, precisely because it gave me the signal every engineer wants: high level, extreme quality and guaranteed versatility.
Conclusion
All right, it's true that it costs money, but it's worth it. It's also true that, as a result, it's not a mic we can demand yet from just any sound rental company (we have enough trouble getting a Beta87). But it is a mic that, given the landscape, we can buy and keep in our case to use whenever we want a precise, powerful vocal on stage. I recommend it blindly, and if I haven't kept it, it's simply because I will soon.
In the studio, Tomás Robisco wouldn't hesitate to use it if the artist wants a handheld mic. The artist will get what they want, while the studio engineer won't have to give up too many sonic qualities that could only be achieved with microphones of higher quality, construction and design. Rarely has a handheld vocal mic managed to win over a studio engineer and a live engineer alike. There must be a reason.
