Might not be what you want to hear, but I'd rather put my $500 into a world class dynamic mic than a mediocre condenser. At least the dynamic mic will retain it's resale value. Just saying...
Good luck with whatever you choose.
Such as? My favorite dynamics are the Beyer 201 and the Senn MD441, but those are about $200, and $1000, respectively.
The BF541 is exactly the same mic as the MD441-U3. Basically they don’t have the bass rolloff Filter which you don’t need anyway and they are black instead of silver/black. No need to call it a little brother I had both of these mics and they are certainly among the best dynamics at all. I liked them much more than for example the RE27N/D which always had a metallic resonance to it. The 441/541s were very close in sound to a C414B-ULS, the EV never came near to that level for my taste at least...If you look around, you might be able to find the 441's little brother, the 541 for less than $500.
The BF541 is exactly the same mic as the MD441-U3. Basically they don’t have the bass rolloff Filter which you don’t need anyway and they are black instead of silver/black. No need to call it a little brother I had both of these mics and they are certainly among the best dynamics at all. I liked them much more than for example the RE27N/D which always had a metallic resonance to it. The 441/541s were very close in sound to a C414B-ULS, the EV never came near to that level for my taste at least...
Audix D6
Audix ADX51 (2)
Audix i5
Sennheiser e902
Sennheiser e604
Sennheiser e835 (2)
I will probably begin the process with a three mic system...
THANKS AGAIN GUYS!
Can't thank you enough for THIS^ Brent. Your time and expertise are very much appreciated. I don't take people's time for granted, so again-THANKS!You're not going to speed your progress by trying endlessly to achieve with three mics, the sound that is typically created using eight. Adding a condenser to your present collection is a great idea. A room mic can sound great in figure 8 or omni, and is more important than you probably think it is at the moment. You can do some serious recording with what you have. You have a pair of condensers for overheads, which is good -- dynamics tend to sound harsh from a distance.
If you're going to bother to set up everything, and do a take, you may as well do overheads plus kick, snare, and tom mics. Learn to gate and EQ them so that the close mics still sound natural. Add in a "crotch" mic; the e604 is worth trying out in this position, it's rolled off high end could work in your favor. Add in a room mic. Mic the bottom of the snare. Use two mics on the kick (on inside and one outside). Use all your channels. All of them. You can't add that stuff in afterward, so get it while you can.
Much of your micing decisions need to reflect your vision for the WHOLE SONG, not just the drums. Micing decisions are essentially MIXING decisions, before you've started to mix. The drums will sound fine on their own, unless you do something really silly. Is the material mellow, singer-songwriter stuff? Consider moving the overheads up a bit, and add a room mic instead of the crotch mic to get a more ambient, less aggressive sound. The natural reverb of your room (undesirable though it may be) is almost certainly better than reverb from a plug-in, though you'll have to EQ and compress it a bit to get a usable sound.
Is the material heavy rock, with Marshall-Les-Paul-type guitars? Move the mics a bit closer, because you'll want the presence and punch to be there, in order to poke through the wall of dirty guitars and bass. If desired, you can raise the fader on the room mic during "kick only" parts, tom fills, etc. You might want to use a bottom snare mic here, too. The snare will be plenty snare-ey when it's just the drums, but you'll be surprised how much snare tone get swallowed up by a dense, heavy mix.
Had a drum sound I really liked using the Glyn Johns over the shoulder\over the snare\bass drum. That's why I mentioned three mics. But I see the sense in what you suggested. So I will go forward with using it all.
As far as sound-I like Garibaldi's sound with TOP, and at the opposite end, the Russ Kunkel sound off of Tapestry and the whole 70s singer-songwriter vibe.
Not to throw a wrench in the mix, but I'd advocate for a "less is more" approach. Sure, you can mic everything and have way more channels than you need for the sake of coverage. But, is it necessary? Personally, some of my favorite recordings were made with fewer drum channels - not more.
You might also consider the down side of having so many drum channels. For instance, using lots of mics can quickly introduce phase problems into your recordings. Instead of making things sound better, you could be making things sound thinner and worse.
Not to mention how much more work you'd be making for yourself - you'd have to start worrying about the mic technique and processing (gating/eq/compression/reverb/etc) of each of the extra channels you wanted to use. Why not make it easy on yourself?
If you like the Glyn Johns technique, go for it! If you want to emulate Garibaldi & Kunkel and go for a drier, 70's sound, awesome! Just not sure if going in the direction of more drum channels is necessarily going to get you there any quicker. Instead, your idea of focussing on the basics like the sound source and your room is probably time better spent, IMO.