|
Post by M57 on Feb 15, 2019 7:27:52 GMT -6
Not as real-world, but "musical," why not four tracks with a KM and a WA on-axis and a KM and a WA off-axis? Compare/contrast.
Also, when I think of "off-axis" looking at a typical cardiod polar pattern, I think of 90°, not 180°. Isn't the max nulling at something like 120°? All that said even more real-world for a "test" might be something like 45°. Just spit-balling ideas.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 15, 2019 7:29:47 GMT -6
off axis just means not at 90 degrees from source so if you visualize the capsule cardiode profile, off axis would have the one side (L) of the cap pock up profile largely picking up the source and the centre aiming off back behind the source and the other side (R) of the cap picking up the room.
Seems to me this is really using eh 84 more like an ambiant mike, largely picking up reflections not direct signal ?
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 10:25:08 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Feb 15, 2019 10:33:41 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. So if I understand correctly, color aside - the off-axis advantage is all about how it handles self-reflections and bleed from other instruments.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Feb 15, 2019 10:38:18 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. That's fine, brother bill, but you know the room size also must be taken into account and this is not always possible. in my 9' 1/4-round vocal booth, it's impossible to keep a KM84 3' off an acoustuic for example, and 12-18" is more practical (for those doing the math, from the corner point to the other rounded wall, there is always 4 1/2' total distance). So to be 2-3' away (up to 1 meter for some folks) would mean having to use the big room
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Feb 15, 2019 11:00:55 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. That's fine, brother bill, but you know the room size also must be taken into account and this is not always possible. in my 9' 1/4-round vocal booth, it's impossible to keep a KM84 3' off an acoustuic for example, and 12-18" is more practical (for those doing the math, from the corner point to the other rounded wall, there is always 4 1/2' total distance). So to be 2-3' away (up to 1 meter for some folks) would mean having to use the big room Ward Are you suggesting that in the placement is more about a ratio between the distance to the instrument and reflection points than a set distance between the mic and the instrument? If the latter, are you suggesting that drbill 's assertion might preclude one from using a KM-84 in a smaller space?
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Feb 15, 2019 11:17:00 GMT -6
I'm not the ultimate authority of course but I kind of think this off-axis-magic is being overemphasized a bit.
Also, and I don't know the answer to this, what's the actual physical/mechanical/electrical relationship between on axis and off axis sound? If you have a mic that's largely indistinguishable from the KM84 when it's on axis, under what circumstances are their off-axis responses drastically different?
Or put another way, if (and it's truly an "if") you had a clone that people couldn't reliably pass blind tests with on-axis, what would those blind test numbers look like if you compared off-axis? Any different?
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on Feb 15, 2019 12:00:59 GMT -6
I tested the off axis response as soon as I got my pair of KM84. It’s easy. As posted above: place ithe mic for recording acoustic guitar, and then sing while you play. That vocal sounds unlike any other mic. It’s just a softer, more distant and dark version of the real thing. No resonances, no nastiness, no peaks, no valleys. Really, you don’t even need to listen for it, it’s very evident.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 12:20:07 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. So if I understand correctly, color aside - the off-axis advantage is all about how it handles self-reflections and bleed from other instruments. Yes. Essentially. The color / timbre / EQ / transient response of an 84 is what many call the essence of the mic, but in my experience, the real beauty is in it's reach, the way it absorbs the room - or doesn't depending on placement, and how other instruments in the room sound thru the mic.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 12:22:09 GMT -6
On GS an awful lot of people don't know what to listen for. A blind test should theoretically not matter where it is published? So, if people got a legitimate blind test wrong then the differences may not be as apparent as stated ? But maybe as those of you who have real 84 experience know, if the real magic is in the off axis behaviour unless you test too, is the test thorough enough: arguably not. It's not where it's published, it's who listens to it where it's published. Not all people listen the same way. For example, people withj an uneducated ear frequently confuse an over hyped top end or even sometimes HF distoprtion with "detail".
GS has a vast pepulation of uneducateds or badly educated ears.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 12:24:25 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. That's fine, brother bill, but you know the room size also must be taken into account and this is not always possible. in my 9' 1/4-round vocal booth, it's impossible to keep a KM84 3' off an acoustuic for example, and 12-18" is more practical (for those doing the math, from the corner point to the other rounded wall, there is always 4 1/2' total distance). So to be 2-3' away (up to 1 meter for some folks) would mean having to use the big room Of course. And the mic works killer up close, but so do a lot of other mics. I've found that with the 84, I can get further back than I normally can with most mics, and really tailor and dial in how much ambience I want from the room. I'm kind of tired of feeling like every instrument is mic'd up close and personal in a lot of modern music. I enjoy allowing the personality of a room to creep in to some degree. of course, this is maybe not as wanted or needed on a vocal, but really beautiful on other instruments. My personal bias....
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 12:27:55 GMT -6
I you're decidedly modern, and mic everything 6" from the source, you're not going to get the beauty of the KM84. Pull back 2'. 3'. More. Put multiple musicians in a room. Mic a string quartet with 84's. You'll quickly find the beauty. If this is foreign to you, a modded 012 or a WA84 will probably be good for your needs. This is something I've wondered about... do modern mic cloners assume (probably correctly) that the vast majority of their customers are just going to 'stick it in the grill' and thus their target of getting their 'clone' to sounds as close to the original as possible when put as close to the source as possible? I'm assuming they do but it does allow some of their claims to be easily disproven by those with more experience with real-world professional use of the gear (note: this isn't about the WA84 or Warm specifically just speaking in generalities) Yeah...I do't know if it's manufacturer's assumptions, or modern manufacturing processes, or everyone sourcing their capsules from the same place or what. But I've found that modern "clones" don't hold up as well as the mics they emulate when you get more distance from the source. This is of course a generalization, but I think kind of holds true. We're so infatuated with boxes like the M7 and how it can "put an instrument in a room", but why not just pull the mic back - and PUT the instrument in a room? LOL
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 12:35:58 GMT -6
I'm not the ultimate authority of course but I kind of think this off-axis-magic is being overemphasized a bit. Also, and I don't know the answer to this, what's the actual physical/mechanical/electrical relationship between on axis and off axis sound? If you have a mic that's largely indistinguishable from the KM84 when it's on axis, under what circumstances are their off-axis responses drastically different? Or put another way, if (and it's truly an "if") you had a clone that people couldn't reliably pass blind tests with on-axis, what would those blind test numbers look like if you compared off-axis? Any different? Only if you close mic everything. From my perspective, I'd disagree completely. That's the #1 thing I like about the 84. If I want to get up close and personal with a AC Gtr, the modded Oktava 012's get REALLY close. But pulled back, they can't hang. They don't have the reach. They don't keep the "presence" while allowing one to "dial in the room" just the right amount. They don't sound as good with multiple mics up in a room on a bunch of instruments. THAT one aspect of the 84 is what separates it from all other mics I've tried. Now.....that may or may not be important to any particular engineer / user, but it's important to me. I can't comment on any clones (cause I don't know of any other than the mercenary attempt and it was a dismal failure even up close from the clips I've heard) other than the 012, and it's not really a clone - it just sounds very similar up close. But at distance - fail. Don't get me wrong, it works, but it doesn't have the mojo I'm looking for and get from the 84 at greater distances. This is so hard to describe, but if you've used one in good rooms, and like to dial in room tone in your instrumental tracks, you know exactly what I mean. If you haven't or don't, my observations are useless.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 12:41:29 GMT -6
A blind test should theoretically not matter where it is published? So, if people got a legitimate blind test wrong then the differences may not be as apparent as stated ? But maybe as those of you who have real 84 experience know, if the real magic is in the off axis behaviour unless you test too, is the test thorough enough: arguably not. So what might a good off-axis test look like? I'm not talking test-tones. I want a musical example. I'm not certain what you mean by "look like". No microphone company that I know of publishes anything but the most cursory representation of off-axis response, for the fairly obvious reason that you'd need a small book of response graphs taken at various points around the microphone. And anyway, this is one of those "ears, not eyes" things. You can hear when a mic has good off axis response because material recorded from the side or even the back of the microphone sounds the same as material recorded directly on axis. For example, when you record a snare drum with a KM84 the bleed from the hi-hat doesn't sound like bloody hell. In fact many, if not most people find they can dispense with the hi-hat mic.
Another, very common example that most people aren't aware of is the matter of room tone. Many people over-treat their recording space under the impression that they have a bad sounding room when the truth is that they have microphones with bad off-axis sound. A lot of people mic things too close for the same reason. Which is not to say that you shouldn't close mic when it's appropriate, but if you're close micing because you think that micing from a little more distance doesn't sound good it's probably an indication that your mic might not have good off axis response.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 12:46:39 GMT -6
Behind ? Do you mean in front or 2 meters off centre in front ? If its in the null, would that only (mostly), capture the capsule's off axis response ? Thx ! I believe our friend @hermetechmastering was being facetious or joking with you! Not as much as you might think. I know of quite a few engineers who use the pickup of the rear of the KM84 for their hi-hat sound. Remember that no mic perfectly rejects sound in the null, it's just greatly attenuated.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 12:52:48 GMT -6
I had read somewhere in the past that the Russian engineers had copied Neumann so apparently that was wrong but my octava were the joli mod and I thought that voiced them to be more like Neumann 84, but perhaps that too is just internet conjecture? Well, you can't believe everything you read on the internet. It's pretty obvious the the Russians didn't copy Neumann on the 012 - the capsules don't even look similar. Probably what you read was sales talk from mic pimps who were pushing Octava as "the Russian Neumann" for awhile. I remember that, too.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 12:56:32 GMT -6
ha ha, ah, you know those 84 mastering gurus: technique is everything, even if we don't understand them ! Understanding is really not that difficult, once you have the real thing to work with.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 15, 2019 12:59:38 GMT -6
it was just his description I didn't understand as it seemed contradictory !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2019 13:15:48 GMT -6
What seemed contradictory? Now I am confused. But I don't have a ball in this game, I have a pair of KM84s that I am very happy with!
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 15, 2019 13:34:12 GMT -6
u said: Acoustic guitar 2m behind the mic, Read more: realgearonline.com/thread/9524/warm-wa-84?page=11#ixzz5fd61wXwEbehind to me would mean literally behind the performer, so I understood you to mean the mike is 2 meters in front of the performer ? "in the null/180 degrees? " I think you are referring to the cardioid pattern and how that is in relationship to the performer/guitar ? or you could have just said have the mike facing the guitar, about 2 metres away from it and angled towards it at roughly 30-45 degrees, so the position description was about the physical orientation of the guitar and the mike. just two different ways of describing the same thing ? no biggee Attachments:imgres.htm (54.13 KB)
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Feb 15, 2019 13:41:30 GMT -6
u said: Acoustic guitar 2m behind the mic, Read more: realgearonline.com/thread/9524/warm-wa-84?page=11#ixzz5fd61wXwEbehind to me would mean literally behind the performer, so I understood you to mean the mike is 2 meters in front of the performer ? "in the null/180 degrees? " I think you are referring to the cardioid pattern and how that is in relationship to the performer/guitar ? or you could have just said have the mike facing the guitar, about 2 metres away from it and angled towards it at roughly 30-45 degrees, so the position description was about the physical orientation of the guitar and the mike. just two different ways of describing the same thing ? no biggee Think of the recording of the famous album "The Pipes of Pan at Joujouka" revorded by Brian Jones and Brion Gysin. This was a field recording done in the round using 2 KM84s and a Nagra. Since it done live, in the round, some of the musicians are way off axis from the mics, yet the tone remains an accurate rendition of the event.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 15, 2019 13:46:58 GMT -6
I understand what we mean by off axis and what peeps are saying about 84's, I just didn't understand that specific description of how to set up off axis: I'm a contrarian by nature: so sue me !
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Feb 15, 2019 13:50:55 GMT -6
I'm a contrarian by nature: so sue me ! OK. Your address please. And full legal name. signed, chairman for the committee for off-axis fairness and room tone
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Feb 15, 2019 14:05:34 GMT -6
Oh, come on, contrarians don’t really mean that when we say it: part of being contrary !!
Gee, tuff crowd, try the veal and don’t forget to tip your waitress !!
|
|
|
Post by Mister Chase on Feb 15, 2019 14:26:31 GMT -6
Oh, come on, contrarians don’t really mean that when we say it: part of being contrary !! Gee, tuff crowd, try the veal and don’t forget to tip your waitress !! Is it scaloppine? What's on the dessert menu?
|
|