|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 14:25:05 GMT -6
Yeah, it's surprising it doesn't cause a problem. He gets questioned every time he posts a pic. I think it's specific to the Sennheisers that it's not a problem. He's got some pics with 3 Senn crammed in there, an omni included. Big ole' AEA Coles bar for the 4038's!
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jan 14, 2018 14:32:30 GMT -6
Yeah, it's surprising it doesn't cause a problem. He gets questioned every time he posts a pic. I think it's specific to the Sennheisers that it's not a problem. He's got some pics with 3 Senn crammed in there, an omni included. Big ole' AEA Coles bar for the 4038's! I was wondering. I guess it still could be a problem with other mic combos. I'd probably still line them up in the more traditional way just to be safe. I'm thinking two ribbons in M-S plus a spaced pair of ribbons/condensers further back could make for a really nice stereo image and overall room sound/ambience. I really need to try this. The combination of the beneficial nature of ribbon nulls with the reduction of overall phase issues associated with M-S could really make for a much more clear and natural sound, not that it's a surprise to those who are already doing it.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 14, 2018 14:44:22 GMT -6
Don't guys generally use a cardioid mic for the mid? Having the side mics blocking the rear lobe could give it a more traditional cardioid response.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 14:53:05 GMT -6
Don't guys generally use a cardioid mic for the mid? Having the side mics blocking the rear lobe could give it a more traditional cardioid response. If you want to think about that, you would need to read all of that guy's posts, and apply it specifically to the MKH30. I don't think any ribbon is going to work the same at all. He says repeatedly, with these mics, he can't tell a difference in sound side by side versus stacked. I can tell how that is possible, owning the mics myself and looking at the grills, spacing, and shape. I haven't tried it myself though, and wonder if it doesn't become more obvious at closer free field distances. Another point, MS with two figure 8's is ALSO Blumlein, he came up with it, and apparently evidence suggests he used it as much as the 45º non-matrix version. Guys use every sort of mic for the mid, from omni to shotgun. A film or broadcast guy is going to have all at the ready, and match the mid to the situation.
|
|
|
Post by hadaja on Jan 14, 2018 15:06:03 GMT -6
I own both the royer r101 and the stager. Tey are very different sounding mics grom each other. I didnt think think the royer sounded anywhere near as good on vocals as the stager SR2n. If that was your intended purpose for them.
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jan 14, 2018 15:16:19 GMT -6
I own both the royer r101 and the stager. Tey are very different sounding mics grom each other. I didnt think think the royer sounded anywhere near as good on vocals as the stager SR2n. If that was your intended purpose for them. Yes thank you, I'm thinking of this as primarily a vocal mic, but also needs to work well on percussion and acoustic instruments. I know the Royers get used a lot on guitars but I think I have that covered pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jan 14, 2018 15:33:28 GMT -6
Don't guys generally use a cardioid mic for the mid? Having the side mics blocking the rear lobe could give it a more traditional cardioid response. If you want to think about that, you would need to read all of that guy's posts, and apply it specifically to the MKH30. I don't think any ribbon is going to work the same at all. He says repeatedly, with these mics, he can't tell a difference in sound side by side versus stacked. I can tell how that is possible, owning the mics myself an looking at the grills, spacing, and shape. I haven't tried it myself though, an wonder if it doesn't become more obvious at closer free field distances. Another point, MS with two figure 8's is ALSO Blumlein, he came up with it, and apparently evidence suggests he used it as much as the 45º non-matrix version. Guys use every sort of mic for the mid, from omni to shotgun. A film or broadcast guy is going to have all at the ready, and match the mid to the situation. Though both considered Blumlein, the practical difference would be the need for matched mics in non-matrixed Blumlein versus unmatched mics in M-S. And by definition, doesn't Blumlein mean, at least as it's typically utilized, that you're not pointing a mic directly at the source? I guess that's one of the things about M-S that appeals to me over Blumlein, at least as I understand it.
|
|
|
Post by jampa on Jan 14, 2018 15:47:20 GMT -6
Another contender: RM BIV-1 "Fat head killers"... I got my pair US$270 shipped Get them without the shock mount and use your own mount
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 14, 2018 15:52:52 GMT -6
That's what happens with too much Side in the blend. It should have very clear localization. Thanks, that actually gives me a lot to ponder. I'll have to play around with it more. It took me a while to figure out how to mix ms. Obviously you need a matrix. But there are 2 points that dont get much air. 1. Start with the mid channel at unity gain then bring up the side channel until you get the amount of room you want. I mean the channels feeding the matrix. 2. Process the mid channel and the side channels separately. For eg. Use an 1176 on the mid to bring out the punch of the kit and use an eq in the side channel to shape the cymbals and roll off the bottom end to improve clarity. As mentioned ms should have a strong centre. Its benefit is that during mix you can go from mono all the way to room only with every width, size, distance front to back you desire and with minimal phase issues.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 15:53:53 GMT -6
If you want to think about that, you would need to read all of that guy's posts, and apply it specifically to the MKH30. I don't think any ribbon is going to work the same at all. He says repeatedly, with these mics, he can't tell a difference in sound side by side versus stacked. I can tell how that is possible, owning the mics myself an looking at the grills, spacing, and shape. I haven't tried it myself though, an wonder if it doesn't become more obvious at closer free field distances. Another point, MS with two figure 8's is ALSO Blumlein, he came up with it, and apparently evidence suggests he used it as much as the 45º non-matrix version. Guys use every sort of mic for the mid, from omni to shotgun. A film or broadcast guy is going to have all at the ready, and match the mid to the situation. Though both considered Blumlein, the practical difference would be the need for matched mics in non-matrixed Blumlein versus unmatched mics in M-S. And by definition, doesn't Blumlein mean, at least as it's typically utilized, that you're not pointing a mic directly at the source? I guess that's one of the things about M-S that appeals to me over Blumlein, at least as I understand it. Right on the first. On the second, both are Blumlein, typically understood is another matter. Yes, matching 90º figure 8's pointed 45º off center is the version most frequently mentioned. They decode to the same pattern, on paper, if both are matched. Non-matrix setup tends to not collapse to mono as well, shows losses of highs, and really shouldn't be panned at anything other than LR to image properly, where MS version can go full mono with no change in the center.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 16:01:31 GMT -6
Thanks, that actually gives me a lot to ponder. I'll have to play around with it more. Its benefit is that during mix you can go from mono all the way to room only with every width, size, distance front to back you desire and with minimal phase issues. I'd argue here you CAN'T go all the way to room only (side) in the matrix because that's just competing opposite polarity information, with no stereo steering. Some mid has to remain to steer localization cues. It's at least 'non-localized stereo' side-panned information if it's matrix and pan. If you take side out of the matrix and use it by itself, then sure, it's max pure ambience with no cancellations. Sure, you can use it either way, but if you want maximum width control and localization cues, you have to get width right through mic placement.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Jan 14, 2018 16:09:34 GMT -6
Though both considered Blumlein, the practical difference would be the need for matched mics in non-matrixed Blumlein versus unmatched mics in M-S. And by definition, doesn't Blumlein mean, at least as it's typically utilized, that you're not pointing a mic directly at the source? I guess that's one of the things about M-S that appeals to me over Blumlein, at least as I understand it. Right on the first. On the second, both are Blumlein, typically understood is another matter. Yes, matching 90º figure 8's pointed 45º off center is the version most frequently mentioned. They decode to the same pattern, on paper, if both are matched. Non-matrix setup tends to not collapse to mono as well, shows losses of highs, and really shouldn't be panned at anything other than LR to image properly, where MS version can go full mono with no change in the center. To me anyway, everything about M-S seems superior to Blumlein, at least as far as recording a drum kit goes. When would there be a situation where Blumlein is the better option?
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 16:28:34 GMT -6
Good question. If I park musicians in a circle around crossed figure 8's, it's a tossup which wins. One argument is that non-matrix is free from the non-coincident time related errors the matrix creates for vertically oriented reflections with a typical vertically stacked array, which results in comb filtering above the critical frequency as dictated by the distance between elements. Anything arriving from the front, along the 90º relative plane is free from that problem with the matrix version. The remote guys get into that discussion, the guy I pointed out is sold on using MS with 8's. It's what I've arrived at as best practice at close distances in the free field, such as most studios.
If you can get critical distance right, non-matrix just feeds to each speaker as a hard pan, and you're done. It's easier to monitor in the field on a remote, though recent portable recording tech is changing that.
The argument is made a decent and properly EQ corrected tetrahedral Ambisonic mic makes the most perfect virtual matrix or non-matrix 90º figure 8 array. Not a ribbon version of that! I feel like pattern control is superior with the MKH30's, compared to any of my ribbons, and the Samar is a winner there among ribbons, especially in the highs where front to back path length becomes critical.
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 14, 2018 16:31:53 GMT -6
For me blumlein v ms is more about room quality.
Blumlein picks up too much room to work in bad sounding rooms whereas m/s will still work.
|
|
|
Post by reddirt on Jan 14, 2018 16:37:09 GMT -6
For me the sticking point in M-S is that in a situation of mono play back the sides cancel and depending on how loud they are mixed, you can lose volume and thus mix balance on that instrument. Cheers, Ross
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 14, 2018 16:44:35 GMT -6
For me blumlein v ms is more about room quality. But it's not if it's apples to apples with the same mics. That has to be parsed. You can lose volume and mix balance with ANY stereo mic array when summed to mono. Each has it's faults.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Jan 14, 2018 17:43:18 GMT -6
SAMAR VL37
|
|
|
Post by jampa on Jan 14, 2018 19:13:36 GMT -6
Seeing as you guys are talking about stereo... Same price as two singles - around US$270
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jan 15, 2018 13:01:34 GMT -6
In all honesty I haven't completely fell in love with the stager sr1a's yet. Seems like people love then. Used them on drums mostly and I always miss the 4038's and switch to those. Completely different voicings but still. I have had success with stager on acoustic guitar.
I need to spend more time with them.
The Samar ribbons are amazing. I also LOVE the sf12.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,943
|
Post by ericn on Jan 15, 2018 13:10:54 GMT -6
If your shopping for modern Ribbon, first make these choices. 1. Do I want active high output? 2 do I want something in the traditional ribbon signature sound or modern more condenser sounding Ribbon? Congratulations you just made your choices easier!
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on Jan 15, 2018 13:38:51 GMT -6
If your shopping for modern Ribbon, first make these choices. 1. Do I want active high output? 2 do I want something in the traditional ribbon signature sound or modern more condenser sounding Ribbon? Congratulations you just made your choices easier! Looking for traditional/classic ribbon sound and output. I suppose that puts me closer to the Stager than the Rode NTR, no?
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 14,943
|
Post by ericn on Jan 15, 2018 13:45:53 GMT -6
If your shopping for modern Ribbon, first make these choices. 1. Do I want active high output? 2 do I want something in the traditional ribbon signature sound or modern more condenser sounding Ribbon? Congratulations you just made your choices easier! Looking for traditional/classic ribbon sound and output. I suppose that puts me closer to the Stager than the Rode NTR, no? Probably I'll add the Stagers are the one Ribbon on my must hear this year, but I do know a couple of guys who have said they would never buy a Rode mic who like their NTR's and have found their Nikes taste worse than they ever thought!
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jan 16, 2018 8:57:12 GMT -6
Cool thread.
I didn't read most of the first page, but I have one to consider.
Some guy on another forum built his own ribbons out of wood, he used the Samar ribbon motor / transformer kit from Microphone Parts .Com.
You could more easily just put them in a FatHead as intended.
I thought they sounded pretty incredible.
Comes in about half the price of Royer / Coles things like that.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 16, 2018 10:08:27 GMT -6
Getting Samar to do a custom is far cheaper too, if he's still doing that. Way back when mine came in under $400 ea.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Jan 16, 2018 10:10:39 GMT -6
Getting Samar to do a custom is far cheaper too, if he's still doing that. Way back when mine came in under $400 ea. VL37 is $950 now. I can't imagine him doing custom mics for $400.
|
|