How do you spell it?
- Thread starterchausman
- Start date
I prefer Mic- for everything since it's "MICrophone" and is unambiguous. Either way, I've never seen this cause confusion.
themuzicman
Well-Known Member
I will mic the artist.
I am micing up the artist.
The artist was miced.
Getting all the tenses in there.
I am micing up the artist.
The artist was miced.
Getting all the tenses in there.
sdauditorium
Active Member
I always spell it mic. Usually though, it's just as a note to myself or another tech in which case we both know what's being referred to. Thinking about it, I've never said "We're going to be micing" him/her/them. It's always in the form of, "We'll probably have to mic them."
It's irrelevant IMHO, because once again, the only time I find myself using those words is with another tech or person-in-the-know who understands what is being said, regardless of exact or proper spelling.
It's irrelevant IMHO, because once again, the only time I find myself using those words is with another tech or person-in-the-know who understands what is being said, regardless of exact or proper spelling.
MarshallPope
Well-Known Member
Did something change about the poll? Because when I voted twice, I thought the second one was a different conjugation of mic/miced/micing, not with an apostrophe. Oh well. I always use the mic* variations. Mike* just annoys me, and extra apostrophes are a pet peeve of mine. It wouldn't be a contraction, because would you say "We're going to microphone him" or "We will be microphoning the cast today"?
Yes it did. What I was asking, and not for any other reason then discussion, I was asking about miking (like the thread "miking a flute") vs micing. Ie. The spelling you use.
---
- Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
sdauditorium
Active Member
Wouldn't micing be pronounced "mic-sing"?
But if you were "miking a flute", you aren't talking about a person named Mike. Unless the musician was named Mike, but we don't need to get into that.
---
- Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Sorry about that. I added some options not included in the original, but can't change it to non-multiple choice.
As a matter of fact, that's exactly what you are saying. You are using the shortened form of a noun as a verb.
Not quite the same thing, since specify is an actual verb form of specification, but which of the below is more better?
I spec'd the sound system.
I speced the sound system.
I specced the sound system.
I specked the sound system.
I speked the sound system.
I wondered if that thread was the impetus behind your poll. Funny, in that the OP had written "miccing a flute," which I changed to "miking," but then wondered if "mic'ing" or "mic-ing" wouldn't be more properer. To me, "miced" and "micing" appear to have something to do with more than one mouses.
Last edited:
sdauditorium
Active Member
MarshallPope
Well-Known Member
I'm guessing that I would argue that somehow, in general speech, "mic" has developed additional meanings not supported by its root. I realize that in a strictly literal sense you are saying that you are "microphoning" someone, but for some reason that conjugation doesn't exist with the non-abbreviated word.
That probably makes no sense to anyone other than myself, but it has been a long day and I just got home from working a show.
That probably makes no sense to anyone other than myself, but it has been a long day and I just got home from working a show.
None of those are "more better" or even acceptable, in writing it is "I specified the sound system."
The same applies to microphone and variations thereof. This very topic came up in a pro sound forum and the general view seemed to be that while "mic" has come to be a somewhat widely accepted contraction of microphone, other related terms like "micing" or "miking" are colloquialisms and industry jargon. Basically, they are made up words with no defined or formally accepted application or spelling, so you can't be right or wrong with how you apply or spell them. And when addressing people outside the industry, you placed a microphone on someone or you are putting a microphone on someone or you are addressing microphone technique and application.
So mic is okay as a noun, but can never be used as a verb?
I'm sure before fire was discovered, light was only a noun (and maybe an adjective). Then someone started using it synonymously with ignite, and now we light candles, we light shows,
and soundlight lightly lights light shows that show lights.
Language evolves, and if mic is not accepted as a verb by now, it's high time. I guess we'll have to work out the spelling of the tenses later.
I'm sure before fire was discovered, light was only a noun (and maybe an adjective). Then someone started using it synonymously with ignite, and now we light candles, we light shows,
and soundlight lightly lights light shows that show lights.
Language evolves, and if mic is not accepted as a verb by now, it's high time. I guess we'll have to work out the spelling of the tenses later.
Last edited:
You missed one.
The artisit is Mike. I can only Mike someone if I'm naming them. I can mic Mike or name a mic Mike. Now I have a headache.
shiben
Well-Known Member
Would Mikeing someone not be tossing a dude named mike at them?
shiben
Well-Known Member
Physically impossible...that's Chucking.
I don't use "mike" to abbreviate microphone, after all, it's not spelled "mikerophone". (We did used to have a sound guy named Mike...)
I've never really thought about how to spell it as a verb, because it's not often that I have to. But I suppose I'd do it like this:
"I need to change the batteries in this mic"
"I've mic'd all the actors"
"I'm going to be micing the orchestra this production"
But I guess it's different from venue to venue.
I've never really thought about how to spell it as a verb, because it's not often that I have to. But I suppose I'd do it like this:
"I need to change the batteries in this mic"
"I've mic'd all the actors"
"I'm going to be micing the orchestra this production"
But I guess it's different from venue to venue.
Last edited:
Similar threads
