|
Post by M57 on Oct 31, 2018 10:53:27 GMT -6
This may be fodder for another thread, but can you elaborate just a little more on this, say when recording something like piano? Depending on the genre, sometimes it seems like people here live in dramatically different worlds of gear (mostly mics - but also pre-amps) and placement techniques. ..pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. So when choosing say.. room mics - what drives the decision to use such a different range of gear? In both cases (pop and classical) proximity is less of an issue, right??? (Maybe not). So why do SDCs seem to get called on more often in classical music? Everyone loves KM84's, but even here it seems classical engineers prefer different models that you never see used in a pop recording. KM84's are pretty flat with no color, no??
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Oct 31, 2018 11:23:53 GMT -6
..pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. So when choosing say.. room mics - what drives the decision to use such a different range of gear? In both cases (pop and classical) proximity is less of an issue, right??? (Maybe not). So why do SDCs seem to get called on more often in classical music? Everyone loves KM84's, but even here it seems classical engineers prefer different models that you never see used in a pop recording. KM84's are pretty flat with no color, no?? If you study the history of both audio and Classical recording you will find that most of the classic LDC’s were used at one time for main arrays and spot mics. Over time the general opinion has developed that some SDC’s captured a more realistic image of a performance. There still some who use LDC’s in Classical recording and some who will choose based on performance and venue. I think in pop we tend to lean on tube LDC’s for the sense of intimacy and because most of us do what others have done. The exception being Bob and the Motown gang and the KM86.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Oct 31, 2018 11:24:34 GMT -6
..pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. So when choosing say.. room mics - what drives the decision to use such a different range of gear? In both cases (pop and classical) proximity is less of an issue, right??? (Maybe not). So why do SDCs seem to get called on more often in classical music? Everyone loves KM84's, but even here it seems classical engineers prefer different models that you never see used in a pop recording. KM84's are pretty flat with no color, no?? The classical people all sound as if they were happy to see the KM84's go, for the most part. They wanted the lower noise floor, lower color, and brighter response of the KM140 and KM184, if they liked the Neumann sound at all. Lots don't like it at all, it gets religious in intensity. Many of the preferred classical SDC's cost a good bit more than most non-classical engineers will spend; they also buy fewer channels of them for the most part. You can't use flat in the diffuse field unless it's quiet enough to accept large treble boosts in post. Directly related, you need mics that work at distance. You generally need mics with higher outputs and lower noise floors. You need very well controlled off axis response, so the bleed isn't intrusive.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Oct 31, 2018 11:32:58 GMT -6
..pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. So when choosing say.. room mics - what drives the decision to use such a different range of gear? In both cases (pop and classical) proximity is less of an issue, right??? (Maybe not). So why do SDCs seem to get called on more often in classical music? Everyone loves KM84's, but even here it seems classical engineers prefer different models that you never see used in a pop recording. KM84's are pretty flat with no color, no?? No KM84s are not flat by any means. Not really colored either..but not ultra flat. SDC are used over LDC as they are less noisy and easier generally to hang or put up in the air. They also tend to not let HVAC systems move the diaphragm as much. Eric is pretty on the dot though. You generally want to capture as true of a representation of what is happening in the space with the main microphone array. Or make it better. For instance, the hall i work in is very dark sounding and boomy at times. A brighter mic can help a lot to get clarity back. But I still want to capture the room as much as the performer. Its a fine balance between sounding too close like a pop thing and too far like your in a cavern.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Oct 31, 2018 13:26:00 GMT -6
So when choosing say.. room mics - what drives the decision to use such a different range of gear? In both cases (pop and classical) proximity is less of an issue, right??? (Maybe not). So why do SDCs seem to get called on more often in classical music? Everyone loves KM84's, but even here it seems classical engineers prefer different models that you never see used in a pop recording. KM84's are pretty flat with no color, no?? No KM84s are not flat by any means. Not really colored either..but not ultra flat. SDC are used over LDC as they are less noisy and easier generally to hang or put up in the air. They also tend to not let HVAC systems move the diaphragm as much. Eric is pretty on the dot though. You generally want to capture as true of a representation of what is happening in the space with the main microphone array. Or make it better. For instance, the hall i work in is very dark sounding and boomy at times. A brighter mic can help a lot to get clarity back. But I still want to capture the room as much as the performer. Its a fine balance between sounding too close like a pop thing and too far like your in a cavern. Yes background noise can be a large factor in mic choice, in Classical locations are often chosen with their acoustic properties, location, cost and availabliblity as the primary factors. Unfortunately most of these were not built with recording in mind , HVAC and outside noise can be major issues. I know a recordist who has a fairly noisy pair of KM84’s that cover the traffic noise in a certain old church unobtrusively, another who owns most of the classics but uses U87’s in a hall simply because everything else brings out the HVAC and the place is either fridged or a furnace. I know of one old church that sounds magnificent except for the buzz of the vibrating stain glass windows. Many performance venues can make very good recording venues but are usually expensive and work best in a configuration other than that used for performance. An example of this ( I forget the details) but a certain reviewer wrote a glowing review and was describing the “ perspective of sitting in the fifth row” of the venue, I ran into him and had to explain that for the recording the first 10 rows of seats were pulled a temporary stage extension was built and the concert master was seated at approximately the fifth row, this meant that his perception of being seated in the fifth row was more of a sonic illusion rather than a purposeful reproduction. He hasn’t spoken to me in over 30 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2018 14:16:19 GMT -6
IMHO, based on my experience in classical acoustic music the ideal goal is that all you use is the main array. Your not looking for color or how it will work in a mix, your try to present a reproductive of a performance. Spot mics are used these days because of the economics, you can’t afford to bring the orchestra back in because the clarinets are not coming through and overdubs just won’t fit in right. You pointed to piano and here is where pop is very much the inverse of classical: pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. The 'main array' approach is nice, but I think there's a little less purity in the approach these days. I've got a friend who regularly records large orchestras and I've seen as many as 80 mics hanging. It's true that most of the contribution is from main mics, but spots are used to add detail where needed. Those spots are typically way, way down unless a little more detail or crispness is needed for a soloist or section.... ...Having said that, I sat in on a rehearsal a couple of years back. It was the choral movement of the Beethoven 9, and only 50 mics were needed. But my friend had a pair of Samar ribbons in a Blumlein configuration behind the conductor. He was set up so we could quickly A/B the 50 mics against the pair. Sure, the multi-mic setup was more detailed, but the Samars really held their own and were spectacular on the low strings and contrabassoon. If you were only going to use 2, it would be hard to argue against them. In my world of location chamber music, I often have to get in a little closer than I'd like. There's ambient noise, iffy rooms and all sorts of issues. Of late, I've found something that works pretty well--M/S in the center and spaced omnis. If I've got room (and it doesn't freak out the players) I might set up a Decca tree, but that grabs a little too much attention in some places. BTW, I've recently added a Samar VL37a as my side mic for the M/S setup. You're quite correct in regards to the function of microphones in pop. You'll often choose a mic particularly for its coloration. In the classical world, we spent a lot of time looking at off-axis response.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Oct 31, 2018 14:42:13 GMT -6
IMHO, based on my experience in classical acoustic music the ideal goal is that all you use is the main array. Your not looking for color or how it will work in a mix, your try to present a reproductive of a performance. Spot mics are used these days because of the economics, you can’t afford to bring the orchestra back in because the clarinets are not coming through and overdubs just won’t fit in right. You pointed to piano and here is where pop is very much the inverse of classical: pop the close mics are the main and room mics are more of an effect, classical the room mic is the main and close mic is more of an effect. The 'main array' approach is nice, but I think there's a little less purity in the approach these days. I've got a friend who regularly records large orchestras and I've seen as many as 80 mics hanging. It's true that most of the contribution is from main mics, but spots are used to add detail where needed. Those spots are typically way, way down unless a little more detail or crispness is needed for a soloist or section.... ...Having said that, I sat in on a rehearsal a couple of years back. It was the choral movement of the Beethoven 9, and only 50 mics were needed. But my friend had a pair of Samar ribbons in a Blumlein configuration behind the conductor. He was set up so we could quickly A/B the 50 mics against the pair. Sure, the multi-mic setup was more detailed, but the Samars really held their own and were spectacular on the low strings and contrabassoon. If you were only going to use 2, it would be hard to argue against them. In my world of location chamber music, I often have to get in a little closer than I'd like. There's ambient noise, iffy rooms and all sorts of issues. Of late, I've found something that works pretty well--M/S in the center and spaced omnis. If I've got room (and it doesn't freak out the players) I might set up a Decca tree, but that grabs a little too much attention in some places. BTW, I've recently added a Samar VL37a as my side mic for the M/S setup. You're quite correct in regards to the function of microphones in pop. You'll often choose a mic particularly for its coloration. In the classical world, we spent a lot of time looking at off-axis response. Yeah I have seen more and more spot mics as time goes on, I think it has to do with the influence of film and of course the cost of time. I really didn’t think about the fact more and more chamber and small ensembles are being miced closer, I guess I thought it more of a function of the fact that we use smaller venues these days because of budget. Lately I have seen some interesting approaches to classical I think some of it has to do with more and more engineers are starting in the pop arena and are a friend of a friend. I think personally my more minimalist approach comes from to many large scale PA and broadcast mixes of an orchestra where everything is miced and I just can’t get that “feel” of what it sounds like in a room. You can get the balance but not that sensation of a mass of instruments you get in the room, both the intimacy and the power don’t translate the same.
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Oct 31, 2018 20:30:56 GMT -6
M50's are the decca tree and outrigger defacto standard on the west coast scoring stages. Angel Studios in London where Adele strings are recorded uses our CM67se microphones in the Decca Tree and our CM12se as outriggers.
This was recorded with our microphones at Angel and a KM84 over every pair of strings. Angel told me the sound got a lot thinner when they pulled out the Decca Tree.
In my experience a SDC rolls out earlier in the low end. My favourite live Orchestra recording ever is 3-U47's in OMNI across the front of the Orchestra.
Cheers, Dave aamicrophones.com
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
|
Post by ericn on Oct 31, 2018 20:38:12 GMT -6
M50's are the decca tree and outrigger defacto standard on the west coast scoring stages. Angel Studios in London where Adele strings are recorded uses our CM67se microphones in the Decca Tree and our CM12se as outriggers.
This was recorded with our microphones at Angel and a KM84 over every pair of strings. Angel told me the sound got a lot thinner when they pulled out the Decca Tree.
In my experience a SDC rolls out earlier in the low end. My favourite live Orchestra recording ever is 3-U47's in OMNI across the front of the Orchestra.
Cheers, Dave aamicrophones.com
Hey Dave If memory serves me Fine used mostly Left Center Right M49’s and later M50’s on the classic Mercury Living Presence recordings. I grew up on The Music of Leroy Anderson Vol 1 & 2, only to discover in early adult hood they were prized by audiophiles. I guess you can say I have known well recorded music from birth.😁
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2018 8:07:02 GMT -6
Many of the preferred classical SDC's cost a good bit more than most non-classical engineers will spend; they also buy fewer channels of them for the most part. You need very well controlled off axis response, so the bleed isn't intrusive. That's quite true, but there's another reason that I think is more important. In any coincident or near-coincident placement (X/Y, ORTF, Blumlein) the mic may not be pointed directly at any of the players. This is especially true in the center of the image. Any differences in frequency response as you move off-axis will cause things to sound a little different in the center--possibly a bit wriggly if the player or singer is moving. It's hard for LDCs to manage off-axis response since the diameter of the diaphragm is a substantial chunk of the wavelengths you're recording. This can cause cancellation problems within the microphone.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 1, 2018 8:17:13 GMT -6
Many of the preferred classical SDC's cost a good bit more than most non-classical engineers will spend; they also buy fewer channels of them for the most part. You need very well controlled off axis response, so the bleed isn't intrusive. That's quite true, but there's another reason that I think is more important. In any coincident or near-coincident placement (X/Y, ORTF, Blumlein) the mic may not be pointed directly at any of the players. This is especially true in the center of the image. Any differences in frequency response as you move off-axis will cause things to sound a little different in the center--possibly a bit wriggly if the player or singer is moving. It's hard for LDCs to manage off-axis response since the diameter of the diaphragm is a substantial chunk of the wavelengths you're recording. This can cause cancellation problems within the microphone. Yes! I think this is why my MKH 30's seem to produce the most solid MS and Blumlein captures, even more than ribbons. Conversely, the use of mics with non-smooth off axis response in MS seems to me to be the primary reason engineers reject the technique, such as, well....any LDC in MS. It either works because you LIKE the smear, or you hate it.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Nov 1, 2018 10:41:45 GMT -6
Many of the preferred classical SDC's cost a good bit more than most non-classical engineers will spend; they also buy fewer channels of them for the most part. You need very well controlled off axis response, so the bleed isn't intrusive. That's quite true, but there's another reason that I think is more important. In any coincident or near-coincident placement (X/Y, ORTF, Blumlein) the mic may not be pointed directly at any of the players. This is especially true in the center of the image. Any differences in frequency response as you move off-axis will cause things to sound a little different in the center--possibly a bit wriggly if the player or singer is moving. It's hard for LDCs to manage off-axis response since the diameter of the diaphragm is a substantial chunk of the wavelengths you're recording. This can cause cancellation problems within the microphone. This is why I use the 4006a's the most. Their off axis is incredible. Plus I never point capsules directly at any strings when i do chamber work. Off axis sound is very important as it also helps capture the image of the room plus the performer.
|
|
|
Post by timcampbell on Nov 1, 2018 11:22:17 GMT -6
If you've heard any of Alan Meyerson's orchestral work for film then you've heard my capsules as used in FLEA F12's .
Or orchestral stuff recorded at Synchron stage Vienna
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on Nov 1, 2018 11:27:14 GMT -6
Looks like M50s in the mains there in the last photo.
|
|
|
Post by iamasound on Nov 2, 2018 13:30:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by aamicrophones on Nov 5, 2018 14:26:24 GMT -6
Here is a part of the article on Robert Fine where they describe using U47's until 1959 when the used 3-Schoeps M 201 mics.
"In December 1950 Fine made his first full-orchestra recording with a single microphone, documented as the first American orchestral recording, with a Neumann/Telefunken U47. The recording was William Schuman's "Judith" and "Undertow" ballet scores, performed by the Louisville Orchestra and recorded in Reeve's large scoring studio.
In April of 1951 Fine traveled to the Windy City to make Mercury's first recordings with the Chicago Symphony, under Rafael Kubelik. Having experimented with single-microphone recordings in New York studios, as well as other venues, Fine took along a Telefunken/Neumann U47 tube condenser mic, which was then relatively unknown in the States. From experiments and intuition, Fine opted to place the microphone slightly behind and above the conductor's podium. He then fine-tuned the placement based on listening to monitor speakers as the orchestra rehearsed. For this session the recording was done remotely, via a dedicated telephone line at Universal Recording Studios. Engineering legend Bill Putnam acted as tape op. Despite the fact that telephone line noise and crackle can be heard, the recording translated to mono LP excellently. Kubelik's reading of Ravel's arrangement of [Modest] Mussourksky's "Pictures At An Exhibition" quickly became a hit for Mercury's young classical division. New York Times music critic Philip Taubman described the sound "as if being in the living presence of the orchestra." The Mercury sound then became the standard-bearer for classical music in the early LP era. The U47 microphone gained its own cult status, helped along by a feature article in the Saturday Evening Post magazine.
Bob Fine and Mercury producer Wilma Cozart watched keenly as stereo playback in the home came nearer to fruition. Fine was well aware of multi-channel sound benefits and recording techniques, having worked as a film sound mixer since the 1940s. Cozart was a firm believer in the benefits of stereo for classical recording and reproduction, given the ability to add greater width and depth to the sound and more precise focus to the orchestra and its players. Mercury began doing experimental 2-channel stereo recordings in 1954, but none of the results passed muster. Fine and Cozart thought the 2-channel mic setups and techniques, be it crossed pairs or spaced omni- directional mics, either left too much of a hole in the center or constricted the sides. It also didn't allow for full-width and full-depth results. Their approach was strong-center, since the mono recordings were so successful with a single center-focused microphone.
In 1955, the Mercury team decided to record in 3- channel stereo, feeding each track on a 1/2" tape directly from left, center and right microphones. The thinking was three-fold: 1) Preserve the "gold standard" commercial viability of their mono work by keeping the center single-mic approach for the mono masters, with the assumption that mono LPs would be around for a long time, even after the stereo LP was brought to market (this happened in 1958). 2) A three channel/three mic approach is a natural outgrowth of single mic mono recording and, at the time, there was considerable talk of a 3-channel home playback format (which never materialized). 3) A 3-spaced omni mic approach makes for easy mix-down to 2-channel stereo, which was on the immediate horizon in the form of mass-duplicated 2-track reel-to-reel tapes. The first 3- channel recordings were made with the logical expansion of the single-channel technique: three spaced Telefunken/Neumann U47 mics in the omnidirectional mode of operation. The U47's coloration, an upper-midrange bump in response, was accentuated by multiplying the number of mics and increased the focus on individual instruments and sections. Cozart and Fine decided to try some other microphones. One short-lived approach was to use a U47 in the center and a pair of Telefunken/Neumann KM56 small-capsule condenser mics on the sides.
Fine had been using a Schoeps M 201 mic for single-mic mono recording since 1953. The mic was handmade by the Schoeps family in their home, and Telefunken sold the mic in the States. Its greater sensitivity, as well as a different kind of "presence bump," made it better than a U47 because it could be hung a bit further back. It could also be hung higher while still achieving excellent clarity for strings and woodwinds. From mid-1956 until early 1959, the stereo go-to setup was the aforementioned M 201 in the center and two KM56s on the sides, with a few exceptions here and there. Finally, in 1959, Fine acquired enough of the M 201s to use them exclusively on Mercury Living Presence sessions (six mics were required for the go-to travel kit, as backups were mandatory for all key pieces of gear, given the expense of gathering a symphony orchestra for a recording session). The three-channel, three-Schoeps technique was thus standardized, and all Mercury Living Presence records from 1959 through 1964 (and most thereafter) used these mics and this technique."
Cheers, Dave aamicrophones.com
|
|
|
Post by chessparov on Nov 5, 2018 14:48:10 GMT -6
Don't laugh, but I remember old posts at rec.audio.pro, where they said lots of classical albums of the 60's/70's were done with...
EV 635a's!!
In any event, this is a super cool thread! Thanks guys, Chris
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Nov 5, 2018 20:53:41 GMT -6
Don't laugh, but I remember old posts at rec.audio.pro, where they said lots of classical albums of the 60's/70's were done with... EV 635a's!! Scott Dorsey no doubt! Of course they're talking low budget local productions..... I'd take 635a's over a whole lot of things!
|
|