Microfone for voice with very flat response

I have an audio interface usb with 6.5 mm and xlr(or cannon) conector and phantom power, and i use a very cheap dinamic microfone with a xlr to 6.5 trs male conector. I tested to maximum my voce on sinnging and my voice have frequencies out of normal equalization theory padrons with lots of lows and highs. When i record my voic the record sounds a lots of different from my real voice as some listeners say when listen to me alive and presencially. I tested a lot and i dicoverede that my microfone eat lots of frequencies and then i need to use equalization on figure to record as you can see in picture and not yet sounds very realistic. I want to buy some cheap equipment to have an icrofone that sounds equal to my voice listened presencially.
What equipment to buy and what tip can you d to my situation

Well, you could use a [u]Measurement Microphone[/u]. They are made to be flat and they usually come with a calibration curve so you can use EQ to make them even flatter. But they are omnidirectional, which means they pick-up sound from all directions, including unwanted sound. And the fact is, professionals don’t like flat mics.

Most professionals record vocals (and almost everything else) with a [u]large Diaphragm Cardioid Condenser microphone[/u].

Every mic is going to sound different so it’s hard to know what you’d like. …It’s not unusual to equalize to some extent.

When i record my voic the record sounds a lots of different from my real voice as some listeners say when listen to me alive and presencially.

A recording is rarely going to sound the same as live, especially in a small space. And, don’t forget the playback system affects the sound too.

We do really well with maker names and part numbers. If you have an XLR interface, why don’t you use that for the microphone? I didn’t follow your connections.

If the interface has a TRS socket, that’s usually for a high volume connection such as a mixer or an instrument such as a guitar. I would not expect a microphone to do well plugged into that.

I don’t think you need special microphones, interfaces or connections. I think you need to get what you got connected properly. Many posters who complain about bad microphones are much happier correcting connection errors or recording in a quiet room.

If you think what you have is correct, do the newspaper test. Start recording and crunch up a newspaper in front of the microphone. Reduce the volume until the crunching doesn’t overload.

Then Analyse > Plot Spectrum.

Screen Shot 2018-10-21 at 20.11.36.png
Ignore the peak at 10Hz. That’s not sound. All the sounds are within about 8dB across the audible range, 20Hz to about 15KHz.


Thats my interface, and i use an xlrfemale to trs male cable for the mic.
Thats my interface and i conect that cable to the conector that are xlr and trs combined.

Yes. I have a Behringer UM2. Which microphone have you got?

We have to build your system in our imaginations to help you. It helps if we have maker names and numbers.


About the mic is an 10€mic(10$ store). I dont know for now what the model.

About the mic is an 10€mic(10$ store). I dont know for now what the model.

A good microphone is usually going to cost about $100 USD or more, and they go up… way up… from there.

You may be happy with something cheaper, or maybe you have the budget for something better. Price isn’t everything… Your “favorite” mic may not be expensive. And, the main thing that gives a mic it’s particular sound is frequency response and that can be adjusted with EQ.

Yes I know that theres probably the problem, thats the reason of the post i would like to use an microphone that aren’t so hungryed like a shark that heat :smiley: frequencies. Thats the problem of my mic heat highs. Inside an hour i post the model of mic.

The object of the model number is so we know what the microphone is and how it’s supposed to work. If not a common microphone, we can’t do that. There’s nothing wrong with a UM2, but you do need to use a higher quality XLR microphone to do good recordings.


I know I’m on record saying it’s possible to get almost any kind of microphone to work reasonably well, but there are some conditions. I have a really good, soundproofed room with no echoes. In fact, I can get a wide variety of microphones to work, most reasonably well.

If you have a really terrible environment or maybe no room at all, you can get a reasonable recording by throwing money.

If that’s what I think it is, there’s $1200 USD sitting inside that wind sock not counting the field recorder, headphones, etc. Probably upwards of $2100.

It will be clear and audible, but nobody will mistake that for an audiobook reading.

If you have a known good interface (like the UM2) and the recordings don’t sound very good, it could be the environment, but if your microphone cost less than a cappuccino and doesn’t connect with a USB cable, my bet is a poor microphone.


If you’re talking for voiceover/podcast type work I would recommend the SM7B. It’s an industry standard used in radio, though you may need a Cloudlifter to bump up the gain depending on your mic preamp.

along with the Electro-Voice RE20/RE27, Sennheiser MD 421, beyerdynamic M series, AKG C-Series, Neumann TLM series, and many others.

though you may need a Cloudlifter to bump up the gain depending on your mic preamp.

You should be careful with a Cloudlifter because it doesn’t work with all microphones. It doesn’t work with most condenser microphones that need phantom power because Cloudlifter “uses up” phantom power to do its sound boosting leaving nothing for the microphone.

It can get more complicated yet, because you can buy a phantom power adapter to run the microphone, Cloudlifter or not. After you get done with all that, it would have been good to get a small sound mixer and not use either the Cloudlifter or the phantom power adapter.

Things can get crazy fast with home recording.


Agreed. I bought it specifically to use just with the 7B. I initially had to use about +55dB of gain from my Apollo Twin, which is near the top of the pre (with audible noise, especially after post processing) and I’m now able to get a clean signal with just +20-25dB.

Though to your point, I don’t know why one would want to use a Cloudlifter with a condenser microphone.

Regarding a small sound mixer; the preamps on a small mixer likely don’t have enough gain to run this microphone either, so a Cloudlifter will be necessary as well.

==> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYhxtLFL27Y

The SM7B mic has a fairly low output (around 9dB lower than a SM57beta and around 20dB lower than a KSM42).
It is a “professional” mic designed primarily for close-up voice recording.

You should note that professional radio presenters (the target user) tend to have quite loud voices (though with some notable exceptions). Also, professional studios record at much lower levels than most home studios, typically peaking around -20 dB for a pro studio compared with -6 dB for a home studio.

If you have a quiet voice, and/or don’t like to be very close to the mic, and/or are aiming for a peak level of around -6 dB or higher, then the SM7B is probably not a good choice because of its low output level. Rather than adding a Cloudlifter, it’s better to chose the right tool for the job, which in these cases would be to use a more sensitive microphone.

This is not to say that Clodlifters are useless. They were designed for boosting the output of passive ribbon mics. which have notoriously low output but may excel in other areas.

I’m not personally a fan of the SM7B. For about the same price, and for similar applications, I would generally go for an Electro-Voice RE20. Personal preference is a big factor when choosing a mic, and for vocal mics in particular, choosing a mic that suits the character of the voice and performance style has major importance.