DV Info Net

DV Info Net (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/)
-   All Things Audio (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/)
-   -   I need a pair of mics for live performance recordings (https://www.dvinfo.net/forum/all-things-audio/67276-i-need-pair-mics-live-performance-recordings.html)

David Lach May 12th, 2006 11:57 PM

I need a pair of mics for live performance recordings
 
I run a small video production business which does both live event coverage and corporate work. I think I'm pretty much set as far as equipement goes for the video part, but there are still some obvious sound related deficiencies.

So I'm looking to 'complete' (humor me) my audio arsenal with a pair of nice mics for live performance (mostly music) recordings in various places (big and small bars/theaters/concert rooms of various sizes/etc.).

I record live sound to an Edirol R-4 on which I have 4 seperate channels for audio, so my ideal setup would be to have a feed from the board for the voice(s), one for the instruments and use the other two for stereo recording the performance.

So I need your advice on a couple mics to buy for the stereo recording part, more or less in the sub-1K range for the 2, that will be versatile enough for all kinds of accoustics, room sizes, sound levels and types of performers.

I don't have the money for the high end stuff, but I need to best this money can buy me, because so far I've realized the artists I work for usually never complain about the video aspect as they don't know much about that, but they are awfully picky about sound and it needs to be as good as possible.

I've asked the question to a B&H rep but to my surprise he recommended the CAD GXL-3000 package (see it here). I'm a tad sceptical about that one as I've never heard about it and it's an awfully cheap price for 3 mics.

So far in my research I've heard good things about the Rode NT3/5, the AKG C1000s, AT-3031, AT-4041, AT4051A, AT897, AKG C3000BTP, Earthworks SR25, AKG C451B, Shure KSM141, Beyerdynamic MC930, SE-Electronics SE3, Studio Projects C4 and AKG Blue Line Series with CK91 cardioid capsules.

But I'm not sure which specs I should be looking at more carefully, which characteristics are more important, and which mics sound the best (see richest, flatest, fullest) in live recording conditions, or which ones are more susceptible to handle most of the recording situations I'll throw at them.

Any favs on your side? A clear cut winner for this type of application maybe? Any help will be greatly appreciated. I'm not an audio guy and I struggle a bit with the audio related technical stuff.

Alessandro Machi May 13th, 2006 12:23 AM

LOL, I like the Sennheiser ME-66 that runs off of batteries. The reason I like it is I can avoid all phantom power issues and I can keep it close to the stage yet back a bit get a decent sweep. However if your performers are free to go everywhere on stage than two of those won't be enough.

I never mix on location, I iso four channels of audio and then mix it later, don't you find it risky to do a mix on location?

Steve House May 13th, 2006 04:50 AM

Something to keep in mind with stereo recorded for video (or broadcast), in contrast to stereo recorded for music CDs, is that many of the listeners will actually be hearing the final product in mono. Some broadcasters and cable operators collapse stereo material into mono when they broadcast it. Some set-top boxes collapse a stereo signal to mono on their own (including most devices such as DVD players or VCRs hooked up to send their signal to a TV's antenna input through an internal RF converter). Even some TVs that claim to be "stereo" are really mono electronics feeding two dinky speakers in the cabinet. All this means that it's important to use a recording technique that is compatible with both stereo and mono delivery. Because of this you might want to explore the advantages of Mid-Side micing for your stereo pair using a combination of a cardioid and a figure-8 mic. In that mic lines you mentioned, the AKG Blueline has the CK91 cardioid and the CK94 figure-8 capsules. A pair of the Blueline power-preamps, a pair of CK92 omni heads, a pair of CK91 cardioid heads, a CK93 hypercardioid, and a CK94 figure-8 capsule would give you a kit that would cover almost all 2-channel stereo recording situations you might encounter.

Alessandro Machi May 13th, 2006 09:06 AM

Ironically, the Sennheiser has been panned by some because it doesn't isolate well enough and/or the frequency response isn't optimal, but I think that's why it does an Ok job for live performances where only some isolation is required. If I only have two mikes to cover the stage I don't want too much isolation but if the mikes pick up everything that might not work either.

Are there any comparisons that have been done with accompanying graph overlays of the "sweep" or mike coverage one gets for different mikes?

Steve House May 13th, 2006 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alessandro Machi
Ironically, the Sennheiser has been panned by some because it doesn't isolate well enough and/or the frequency response isn't optimal, but I think that's why it does an Ok job for live performances where only some isolation is required. If I only have two mikes to cover the stage I don't want too much isolation but if the mikes pick up everything that might not work either.

Are there any comparisons that have been done with accompanying graph overlays of the "sweep" or mike coverage one gets for different mikes?

For a music performance you need to cover the stage evenly if you're going to mic with a stereo pair. Instead of turning the mic to follow a performer as he moves about the stage, thus keeping him always in the same position in the stereo sound field, you want the field to be static and hear him moving around within it. If the soloist starts on the left hand side of the stage and moves over to the right, you want his recording to start out coming from the left speaker and gradually move over to the right speaker as well. There are various techniques you can use - A/B, X/Y, ORTF, MS, Blumlein - but they all involve omni or cardioid (and more rarely hypercardiod) mics. But highly directional mics like a shotgun aren't generally used for that style of recording.

Close mic'ing the individual instruments and vocals and recording mutiltrack, mixing in post, is another matter - you don't want a performer's mic to be picking up much of the other artists' performances and directional mics are more useful there, especially on soloists. With that style of recording you're artificially creating the soundstage by mixing and panning in post and you can position the sounds picked up by a shotgun mic anywhere in the sound field you want it to be..

What you're calling the "sweep" of the mic is its polar pattern and you'll find those graphs for virtually every professional or wanaabe professional grade mic made on the manufacturer's websites. It's one of the crucial considerations in fitting a given mic to a given situation.

The Shure website has some excellent white papers in their knowledge base on various mic techniques.

David Ennis May 13th, 2006 10:51 AM

Getting back to the group you want to choose from, David, it's unlikely that anyone has compared all of them. My experience is with a pair of AT3031s. I can't swear that they are better than the others but I'm sure you'd be happy with them. They're moderately sensitive, quiet, accurate, have a very high max SPL (148 dB) and are just plain nice-sounding. These qualities add up to versatility. With A little practice I've gotten excellent stereo coverage of jazz bands, choruses and orchestras with them set up as an x-y coincident pair. I've also used them one at a time for room ambience and for interviews.

At about $170 each you could add a pair to your kit and still have most of your $1000 left to add more. I have a hard time believing that even if you spent two or three times as much per mic you'd get enough improvement to justify not spending the difference instead on different types of mics that would round out your kit.

David Lach May 13th, 2006 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alessandro Machi
I never mix on location, I iso four channels of audio and then mix it later, don't you find it risky to do a mix on location?

Like I said, I only partly mix. I have 4 seperate channels on the R4. So I want a stereo coverage with my own mics (did it with my XL2's stereo mic before, the result was less than stellar), then depending on the type of event I'm covering (rock band, solo singer, recital, etc.) I try to get 2 other seperate feeds from the board when possible for key elements (usually the voice), but this is highly depending on the contracted soundman's good will and time, so I can't assume I'll always get those extra feeds. I have to assume the show's sound might only be my own limited stereo recording, so it needs to get as pristine on its own as it can. That's the challenge I'm facing right now. to find the proper mics for that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
Something to keep in mind with stereo recorded for video (or broadcast), in contrast to stereo recorded for music CDs, is that many of the listeners will actually be hearing the final product in mono. Some broadcasters and cable operators collapse stereo material into mono when they broadcast it. Some set-top boxes collapse a stereo signal to mono on their own (including most devices such as DVD players or VCRs hooked up to send their signal to a TV's antenna input through an internal RF converter). Even some TVs that claim to be "stereo" are really mono electronics feeding two dinky speakers in the cabinet. All this means that it's important to use a recording technique that is compatible with both stereo and mono delivery. Because of this you might want to explore the advantages of Mid-Side micing for your stereo pair using a combination of a cardioid and a figure-8 mic. In that mic lines you mentioned, the AKG Blueline has the CK91 cardioid and the CK94 figure-8 capsules. A pair of the Blueline power-preamps, a pair of CK92 omni heads, a pair of CK91 cardioid heads, a CK93 hypercardioid, and a CK94 figure-8 capsule would give you a kit that would cover almost all 2-channel stereo recording situations you might encounter.

That's an interesting perspective, although somewhat puzzling concept to a sound novice like me. So far what I've done are usually products that will serve the artist to book some future contracts, either on TV or with a concert room. There is one artist manager that is thinking of possibly selling the DVD I did for him, but nothing I've done so far has been meant for broadcast purposes, so I don't know how much I should take this into account when doing the recording.

I myself record, mix and output to DVD in stereo and while I'm aware mixing down the soundtrack to mono will degrade and clug up the sound, will the occasional occurence of the problem for my clients be such a key issue that I should really reconsider recording in normal stereo and follow along your suggestion of mid-side micing?

By the way, I won't pretend knowing what that is, are you putting the figure 8 in a front-center position of the stage and the cardioid off centered in such a configuration? If it's the case, I get the impression the stereo image would be less natural and full sounding than a classic stereo setup no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
Getting back to the group you want to choose from, David, it's unlikely that anyone has compared all of them.

Well to be fair, these are the ones I've heard about so far that were used in these types of application, it doesn't mean I won't consider anything else, I'm open to all suggestions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
My experience is with a pair of AT3031s. I can't swear that they are better than the others but I'm sure you'd be happy with them. They're moderately sensitive, quiet, accurate, have a very high max SPL (148 dB) and are just plain nice-sounding. These qualities add up to versatility. With A little practice I've gotten excellent stereo coverage of jazz bands, choruses and orchestras with them set up as an x-y coincident pair. I've also used them one at a time for room ambience and for interviews.

At about $170 each you could add a pair to your kit and still have most of your $1000 left to add more. .

I've heard the AT3031 mentioned more than once before. Seems like a popular choice. I particularly like the fact it has a 10db pad for those loud environments. How about frequency response? My concern is for accurately picking up the lower frequencies of a band like kick drum and bass. I don't want recordings that will be thin and need bass overcompensation in post. It says on the B&H spec page that it's 30 Hz - 20 kHz but I wonder if that's at ±2db accuracy.

How is it doing regarding handling noise? I have an Oktava MK012 that I love but the ridiculous sensitivity to handling/air movement noises makes it impracticle for almost anything.

Did you buy matched pairs or is that irrelevent?

I like the idea of buying cheap if it can provide the quality I need because that would probably allow me to buy a couple SKP100/500 transmiters (depending on the mics I choose) for those situations where there is just no practicle way of running XLR cables from the mic position to the recorder (as is often the case in crowded bars).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
I have a hard time believing that even if you spent two or three times as much per mic you'd get enough improvement to justify not spending the difference instead on different types of mics that would round out your kit.

Honestly I have no idea and that's really what I'm trying to figure out here. Wise spending is what I'm after. I don't like throwing money out the window. If cheap mics will do, cheap mics it will be. But I'm ready to spend more to get a clear cut advantage too.

Steve House May 13th, 2006 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
That's an interesting perspective, although somewhat puzzling concept to a sound novice like me. So far what I've done are usually products that will serve the artist to book some future contracts, either on TV or with a concert room. There is one artist manager that is thinking of possibly selling the DVD I did for him, but nothing I've done so far has been meant for broadcast purposes, so I don't know how much I should take this into account when doing the recording.

I myself record, mix and output to DVD in stereo and while I'm aware mixing down the soundtrack to mono will degrade and clug up the sound, will the occasional occurence of the problem for my clients be such a key issue that I should really reconsider recording in normal stereo and follow along your suggestion of mid-side micing?

By the way, I won't pretend knowing what that is, are you putting the figure 8 in a front-center position of the stage and the cardioid off centered in such a configuration? If it's the case, I get the impression the stereo image would be less natural and full sounding than a classic stereo setup no?

Actually M/S IS a classic stereo mic'ing technique and there was a big article in March "Electronic Musician" magazine on its advantages and how to do it. I strongly suggest you take a look...

http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_front_center/index.html

The Schoeps web site also has a page on the various stereo mic placements that you should take a look at ASAP

http://schoeps.de/PDFs/stereo-record...chniques-e.pdf

M/S is a coincident technique where both mics are placed front and center, The figure-8 is aimed so its lobes point left and right (lay the "8" on its side like an infinity sign) while the cardioid is just above it and almost touching, pointed straight at the centre stage. You either pass the two signals through a mixer with a decoding matrix or you can record the mics "as is" and then decode it in post. Decoding consists of adding together the cardioid (mid mic) and the figure-8 (side mic) signals - mid plus side becomes the left channel. You invert the phase of the figure-8 mic and add that signal to the mid mic to make the right channel. mid minus side equal right (It's harder to describe than it is to do and you don't need any special equipment to do it).

This does not give a less full sounding stereo image than other techniques, far from it. It's a common technique, especially in Europe, for micing symphony orchestra concert recordings. One advantage is it gives you a lot of control in post production with the spread and depth of the stereo imaging and you can even rotate the direction on the centre of the stereo image relative to the listener.

You said that when you mix to mono it "degrades and chugs up the sound" and that is one result of recording without considering what will happen later. When you mix the Left and Right channels created by the M/S process, the +side and the -side components of the signal cancel each other out and you're left with the mid mic's signal only, just as if you had recorded the performance with a single cardioid mic in mono right from the start - no degradation. With other mic techniques you need to pay more careful attention to avoid phasing problems when mixing.

You say you don't know how much consideration you need to give this since you're not recording for broadcast. But consider - you shoot a demo for an artist and put it on DVD. He gives that DVD to someone who plays it back on his DVD player hooked up to a mono TV. All of a sudden your nice stereo recording is being played in mono completely without you being able to do anything about it.

I'll second Fred's recommendation of the AT3031 cardioids. I have a pair and they're very nice sounding mics at a good price. Do a web search on X/Y and ORTF micing or look at the Schoeps page and the Shure materials I mentioned for some good ideas on how to best use them.

David Lach May 13th, 2006 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
Actually M/S IS a classic stereo mic'ing technique and there was a big article in March "Electronic Musician" magazine on its advantages and how to do it. I strongly suggest you take a look...

http://emusician.com/mag/emusic_front_center/index.html

The Schoeps web site also has a page on the various stereo mic placements that you should take a look at ASAP

http://schoeps.de/PDFs/stereo-record...chniques-e.pdf

M/S is a coincident technique where both mics are placed front and center, The figure-8 is aimed so its lobes point left and right (lay the "8" on its side like an infinity sign) while the cardioid is just above it and almost touching, pointed straight at the centre stage. You either pass the two signals through a mixer with a decoding matrix or you can record the mics "as is" and then decode it in post. Decoding consists of adding together the cardioid (mid mic) and the figure-8 (side mic) signals - mid plus side becomes the left channel. You invert the phase of the figure-8 mic and add that signal to the mid mic to make the right channel. mid minus side equal right (It's harder to describe than it is to do and you don't need any special equipment to do it).

This does not give a less full sounding stereo image than other techniques, far from it. It's a common technique, especially in Europe, for micing symphony orchestra concert recordings. One advantage is it gives you a lot of control in post production with the spread and depth of the stereo imaging and you can even rotate the direction on the centre of the stereo image relative to the listener.

You said that when you mix to mono it "degrades and chugs up the sound" and that is one result of recording without considering what will happen later. When you mix the Left and Right channels created by the M/S process, the +side and the -side components of the signal cancel each other out and you're left with the mid mic's signal only, just as if you had recorded the performance with a single cardioid mic in mono right from the start - no degradation. With other mic techniques you need to pay more careful attention to avoid phasing problems when mixing.

You say you don't know how much consideration you need to give this since you're not recording for broadcast. But consider - you shoot a demo for an artist and put it on DVD. He gives that DVD to someone who plays it back on his DVD player hooked up to a mono TV. All of a sudden your nice stereo recording is being played in mono completely without you being able to do anything about it.

I'll second Fred's recommendation of the AT3031 cardioids. I have a pair and they're very nice sounding mics at a good price. Do a web search on X/Y and ORTF micing or look at the Schoeps page and the Shure materials I mentioned for some good ideas on how to best use them.

Boy I've just become a little less dumb audio wise thank you. So if I understand correctly there is not a one-setup-fits-all and if I want to be ready for all types of room sizes and accoustics I will probably need to look into buying more than one type of mic (figure 8 + 2x cardioids).

Say for example I was to buy a pair of AT3031's, is there a figure 8 mic that would complement one of them nicely in a M/S configuration?

BTW, ever heard of the CAD GXL-3000 Studio Stereo pack? It comes with the GXL-3000 Cardioid, Omni, Figure 8 switchable mic and 2 GXL-1200 Cardioid mics.

I'll do a bit more research on the stereo setups thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

Jerry Jesion May 13th, 2006 02:18 PM

I have had great success with stereo recording concert bands using the MS technique with the Studio Projects LSD2. It has 2 capacitor mics mounted one above the other. The top capsule rotates 270 degrees and each capsule can be used as omni, cardioid, or figure of eight. That means that the one mic can to X-Y, MS, or blumlein stereo. IMHO the stereo imaging of this mic in the MS mode is nothing short of amazing. And one can adjust the stereo imaging in post. Don't be put off by the list price, Full Compas has it for less than $500. Derogs are that it needs phantom power and it is a bit heavy.

Regards,
Jerry

Seth Bloombaum May 13th, 2006 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
...I have an Oktava MK012 that I love but the ridiculous sensitivity to handling/air movement noises makes it impracticle for almost anything.

Did you buy matched pairs or is that irrelevent?...

I like the idea of buying cheap...

That's funny, I was going to recommend that you can do a variety of stereo mic setups with mc/mk012, but, you already have one and apparently don't like it much.

I've done a LOT of acoustic music recording with a pair of Oktavas that cost me all of $200 on sale at Guitar Center. Apparently, this was before the chinese imitations came out (see the sticky thread at the top of this forum). Handling noise is never an issue, as they are always on a stand in shock mounts. Any pair of cardiod condensor mics you use for stereo recording should be rigged this way - include shock mounts in your budgeting. If you go this route, skip the standard Oktava shock mount for the MK012, the new spider-shockmout is OK. There are others that will fit.

I also converted an old c-stand to a 12' stand by mounting an atlas-style boom in the grip head, very heavy, lots of height.

Air movement hasn't been a problem for me, all my recording has been indoors. Granted, the oktavas are more sensitive than some, but all cardoid condensor mics are pretty sensitive to air movement. It doesn't take much to rattle the diaphram. oktavausa.com sells a foam windscreen, and sound-room.com sells a bigger windscreen too.

So that's my experience. A pair of cardoid condensors will allow you to experiment with x-y, a/b and ORTF configs. X-Y is more mono-compatible, but, unlike Steve, I've mostly stopped worrying about mono compatibility and now use ORTF almost all the time because it has such a nice stereo image. My recordings aren't going via broadcast or cable, but direct-to-video DVD distribution, and even the least expensive dvd player and TV support stereo these days.

M-S is great too. It's pretty magical to dial in the stereo spread you want in post.

Generally, two mics in shock mounts, whether cardoids or m-s array are a little bit of a hassle to set. I've been wanting to try the LSD-2 mentioned above. Rode sells a great X-Y mic in one body. Most "stereo" mics are x-y.

Stu Holmes May 13th, 2006 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
Rode sells a great X-Y mic in one body. Most "stereo" mics are x-y.

Yes indeed - thats the Rode NT4.

David Lach May 13th, 2006 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
That's funny, I was going to recommend that you can do a variety of stereo mic setups with mc/mk012, but, you already have one and apparently don't like it much.

I've done a LOT of acoustic music recording with a pair of Oktavas that cost me all of $200 on sale at Guitar Center. Apparently, this was before the chinese imitations came out (see the sticky thread at the top of this forum). Handling noise is never an issue, as they are always on a stand in shock mounts. Any pair of cardiod condensor mics you use for stereo recording should be rigged this way - include shock mounts in your budgeting. If you go this route, skip the standard Oktava shock mount for the MK012, the new spider-shockmout is OK. There are others that will fit.

I also converted an old c-stand to a 12' stand by mounting an atlas-style boom in the grip head, very heavy, lots of height.

Air movement hasn't been a problem for me, all my recording has been indoors. Granted, the oktavas are more sensitive than some, but all cardoid condensor mics are pretty sensitive to air movement. It doesn't take much to rattle the diaphram. oktavausa.com sells a foam windscreen, and sound-room.com sells a bigger windscreen too.

I have a love-hate relationship with my Oktava (which is a real one) because I was using it camera mounted on a K-tek KSM shockmount and even with a windscreen, the movements and the camera handling noises were very audible, which is not the case for say my MKH416 (I know, different types, but still). I find that the Oktava responds well in certain situations (stand mounted for ambiances in a room with good accoustics) while horribly during others (boompole mounted or camera mounted is impossible, no matter the shockmount, regardless if I was to use the hyper, omni or cardioid capsules). It's not that I don't like it, but it's not versatile enough for me.

Plus I only have one so there is a good chance that if I get a new one now, it won't match at all as there is some variations from mic to mic with the Oktavas.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
So that's my experience. A pair of cardoid condensors will allow you to experiment with x-y, a/b and ORTF configs. X-Y is more mono-compatible, but, unlike Steve, I've mostly stopped worrying about mono compatibility and now use ORTF almost all the time because it has such a nice stereo image. My recordings aren't going via broadcast or cable, but direct-to-video DVD distribution, and even the least expensive dvd player and TV support stereo these days.

M-S is great too. It's pretty magical to dial in the stereo spread you want in post.

Generally, two mics in shock mounts, whether cardoids or m-s array are a little bit of a hassle to set. I've been wanting to try the LSD-2 mentioned above. Rode sells a great X-Y mic in one body. Most "stereo" mics are x-y.

So out of curiosity, are you able to get decent mono sound when using an ORTF setting? I'm in the same situation as you, direct-to-DVD productions, but I thought Steve made a valid point about at least thinking about the possibility. Let's put it this way, the stereo imaging is the priority, but I don't want it to sound horrible if it were for a reason or an other to be listened in a mono fashion. That would reflect very badly on me.

One thing is for certain though is I won't be buying a stereo mic (of the X/Y type). Never been a fan. The LSD2 seems like an interesting one, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to get say a couple C4 and a C3 so that I'm covered for pretty much any kind of recording situations.

Seth Bloombaum May 13th, 2006 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
So out of curiosity, are you able to get decent mono sound when using an ORTF setting? I'm in the same situation as you, direct-to-DVD productions, but I thought Steve made a valid point about at least thinking about the possibility. Let's put it this way, the stereo imaging is the priority, but I don't want it to sound horrible if it were for a reason or an other to be listened in a mono fashion. That would reflect very badly on me.

One thing is for certain though is I won't be buying a stereo mic (of the X/Y type). Never been a fan. The LSD2 seems like an interesting one, but I wonder if it wouldn't be better to get say a couple C4 and a C3 so that I'm covered for pretty much any kind of recording situations.

I'll try a mono render of some of my ORTF stuff later and report back.

I've not had direct experience with the Studio projects C4... but it has a good rep and looks good. I'm always thinking "value", a cardoid condensor I'd like to try is the Rode NT5, $299 USD (a matched pair!) at bhphotovideo.com right now.

Ideally, the capsules/diaphrams in M-S should closely match, but I've not tried a large diaphram such as the C3 with a small-diaphram mid mic.
Other figure-8s to recommend for M-S: Schoeps (which is well beyond my budget) and AKG also has a figure-8 in their blue line modular mics.

Or, a dedicated M-S mic in one housing.

BTW, IMHO camera mount is no place for a stereo mic. Generally, I think you want the stereo image to remain constant regardless of camera movement.

David Ennis May 13th, 2006 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
...Generally, two mics in shock mounts, whether cardoids or m-s array are a little bit of a hassle to set...

Oh yeah, roger that. That will be the factor that drives me to try M-S, probably one of AT's single housing mics.

Bruce S. Yarock May 14th, 2006 01:33 AM

I took Steve House's (thanks, steve) suggestion a few months back, and bought a pair of AT 3031's. I'm very happy with them for live music.
Bruce yarock

Dave Largent May 14th, 2006 02:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
Oh yeah, roger that. That will be the factor that drives me to try M-S, probably one of AT's single housing mics.

What are some of the M/S mics that are around?

Dave Largent May 14th, 2006 02:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
That's funny, I was going to
So that's my experience. A pair of cardoid condensors will allow you to experiment with x-y, a/b and ORTF configs. X-Y is more mono-compatible, but, unlike Steve, I've mostly stopped worrying about mono compatibility and now use ORTF almost all the time because it has such a nice stereo image. My recordings aren't going via broadcast or cable, but.


Any inexpensive stereo bars around, that might give the
option to do X/Y, ORTF, NOS?

Steve House May 14th, 2006 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
...
So that's my experience. A pair of cardoid condensors will allow you to experiment with x-y, a/b and ORTF configs. X-Y is more mono-compatible, but, unlike Steve, I've mostly stopped worrying about mono compatibility and now use ORTF almost all the time because it has such a nice stereo image. My recordings aren't going via broadcast or cable, but direct-to-video DVD distribution, and even the least expensive dvd player and TV support stereo these days.

...

Just a note - a lot of inexpensive "stereo" TVs are really mono electronics feeding 2 speakers spread only about a foot away. Even stereo TVs where the speakers are on the front of the cabinet, the speakers are so close to each other and they might as well be mono. Phasing problems can still occur as the sound travels from the speaker to the listener.

Steve House May 14th, 2006 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Largent
Any inexpensive stereo bars around, that might give the
option to do X/Y, ORTF, NOS?

I looked all over and couldn't find any - the inexpensive ones all put the two mics at the same height above the bar. Shure makes stand top unit - the A27M - but it sells for $60 !! Then I hit on an ingenious idea - Microphone holders and stand tops came in two thread sizes, 3/8 and 5/8, with 5/8 the most common. You can find 3/8 to 5/8 and back screw adapters almost everywhere and they only cost a couple of bucks. What I did was get one of each adapter. On one end of a cheap stereo bar I screw one of the mic holder that came with my AT3031's. On the other end of the bar I fasten first a 5/8 to 3/8 adapter, then on top of that a 3/8 to 5/8 adapter, and then finally the AT mic holder. The combined height of the two adapters stacked on top of each other puts the mic on that end about 1" higher than the mic on the other end, it's perfectly solid, and the perfect height for the vertical stacking required for X-Y placement. Problem solved!

Steve House May 14th, 2006 06:25 AM

For those who are interested in M/S, the Waves S1 Stereo Imager VST and DirectX plugin for your audio editing program decodes M/S tracks to stereo and lets you do some interesting things with stereo spread, balance, and direction in the process.

David Ennis May 14th, 2006 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Largent
What are some of the M/S mics that are around?

AT835ST, AT815ST, Shure VP88

David Ennis May 14th, 2006 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I looked all over and couldn't find any - the inexpensive ones all put the two mics at the same height above the bar. Shure makes stand top unit - the A27M - but it sells for $60 !! Then I hit on an ingenious idea - Microphone holders and stand tops came in two thread sizes, 3/8 and 5/8, with 5/8 the most common. You can find 3/8 to 5/8 and back screw adapters almost everywhere and they only cost a couple of bucks. What I did was get one of each adapter. On one end of a cheap stereo bar I screw one of the mic holder that came with my AT3031's. On the other end of the bar I fasten first a 5/8 to 3/8 adapter, then on top of that a 3/8 to 5/8 adapter, and then finally the AT mic holder. The combined height of the two adapters stacked on top of each other puts the mic on that end about 1" higher than the mic on the other end, it's perfectly solid, and the perfect height for the vertical stacking required for X-Y placement. Problem solved!

Great idea, Steve. No vibration troubles with using the clip mounts instead of shockmounts? I use my AT shockmounts which have sets of holes in their side brackets allowing setting the mics at different levels, but it's a cumbersome process to do that, set the angles, make them level, and align the front ends.

Steve House May 14th, 2006 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
Great idea, Steve. No vibration troubles with using the clip mounts instead of shockmounts? I use my AT shockmounts which have sets of holes in their side brackets allowing setting the mics at different levels, but it's a cumbersome process to do that, set the angles, make them level, and align the front ends.

Not so far, but then I haven't used them yet in a high vibration setting. The same adapters should work with shock mounts though. The main thing is figuring out how to get one mount 1 inch higher than the other. I looked all over for either a "tall" mic mount that was longer in the shank that connects to the stand than a regular mount or some sort of extension tube and concluded that such things don't exist. Interestingly, this month's Sound on Sound magazine has a review (page 56) of the Microtech Gefell small diaphram condenser mics and the $2500 stereo pair illustrated on the page comes with a mounting bar that looks almost exactly like mine with my thread adapter invention - total cost for my bar and adapters - $15

David Ennis May 14th, 2006 10:17 AM

Again, it really is an elegant solution and I'm going to use it. Thanks.

Seth Bloombaum May 14th, 2006 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave Largent
Any inexpensive stereo bars around, that might give the option to do X/Y, ORTF, NOS?

I've been using an akg bar that is 3 pieces joined with two swivel joints - it works, but needs fiddlin'. I'll probably buy the sabra-som bar that is available for $40 at sound-room.com. I've not been doing x-y, so, haven't needed a riser as Steve developed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
For those who are interested in M/S, the Waves S1 Stereo Imager VST and DirectX plugin...

Many NLEs will allow you to duplicate the s channel and invert the phase, which is all you need to decode m-s in an NLE. There is a freeware vst plugin as well, from voxengo.com/freevst. Waves is great stuff too...

Setup in an NLE with no plugins as follows:
Mid channel - feeds L + R equally.
S channel - Left only.
Duplicate and phase inverted S channel - Right only.
And then you have an M-S decoding matrix. Relatively lower M/higher S is a wider spread. Higher volume M/lower S is a narrower stereo spread.

The actual M-S math is:
L = M+S
R = M-S

Seth Bloombaum May 14th, 2006 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
I'll try a mono render of some of my ORTF stuff later and report back.

It turns out I didn't have any spoken word and only a little music recorded ORTF on my drives that are mounted right now. I'm currently involved in a drive shuffle due to a large project that's just started.

I do have a short piano excerpt both as ORTF and as ORTF collapsed to mono at 16/44 that I'd be glad to send you, about 4mb total. Email me at sbloombaum at that yahoo address or PM me via this forum.

Not sure how revealing it is, but it sounds OK in mono.

I'd think if phasing artifacts were to be objectionable, they'd probably be showing up in the spoken word.

Next time I have some of my older drives mounted I'll find some more music to test.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
Just a note - a lot of inexpensive "stereo" TVs are really mono electronics feeding 2 speakers spread only about a foot away. Even stereo TVs where the speakers are on the front of the cabinet, the speakers are so close to each other and they might as well be mono. Phasing problems can still occur as the sound travels from the speaker to the listener.

Well, yes, I suppose so. But the original poster asked an interesting question about regarding how ORTF actually sounds when collapsed to mono, and I realized I'd never tested it. While I appreciate the guidance of the conventional wisdom about phase and comb effects, I'm also *very* interested in how *my* ORTF mixes sound when collapsed to mono.

In ancient times we used to test these things, and every broadcast console had a "mono" switch in the monitor section.

"If it sounds good it IS good" - Duke Ellington.

David Lach May 14th, 2006 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
It turns out I didn't have any spoken word and only a little music recorded ORTF on my drives that are mounted right now. I'm currently involved in a drive shuffle due to a large project that's just started.

I do have a short piano excerpt both as ORTF and as ORTF collapsed to mono at 16/44 that I'd be glad to send you, about 4mb total. Email me at sbloombaum at that yahoo address or PM me via this forum.

Not sure how revealing it is, but it sounds OK in mono.

I'd think if phasing artifacts were to be objectionable, they'd probably be showing up in the spoken word.

Next time I have some of my older drives mounted I'll find some more music to test.


Thanks for doing this Seth I really appreciate. I'll send you an Email.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
Well, yes, I suppose so. But the original poster asked an interesting question about regarding how ORTF actually sounds when collapsed to mono, and I realized I'd never tested it. While I appreciate the guidance of the conventional wisdom about phase and comb effects, I'm also *very* interested in how *my* ORTF mixes sound when collapsed to mono.

In ancient times we used to test these things, and every broadcast console had a "mono" switch in the monitor section.

"If it sounds good it IS good" - Duke Ellington.

I agree, if there's a way to make good stereo setups sound good when converted to mono it's worth experimenting. Because I'm not a fan X/Y imaging and the M/S setup sounds nice and versatile but it also involves getting an additional figure 8 mic which means more $$$ for the whole, or less for 2 good cardioids and accessories in my case (accessories which might include 2 SKP500 transmitters).

Live music involving more than one sound source should always be listened to with the best stereo imaging possible IMO, which ORTF seems to give in most situations. I just want to make sure it will remain acceptable in the not so ideal situation where my productions were to be listened to in a mono environment.

David Ennis May 14th, 2006 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
...I agree, if there's a way to make good stereo setups sound good when converted to mono it's worth experimenting. Because I'm not a fan X/Y imaging and the M/S setup sounds nice and versatile but it also involves getting an additional figure 8 mic which means more $$$ for the whole, or less for 2 good cardioids and accessories in my case (accessories which might include 2 SKP500 transmitters)...

Caution on the SKP500s (dang, there are cautions on everything, aren't there?). The idea of wireless stereo has a lot of appeal, but the SKPs use companding (compression at the transmitter and expansion at the receiver). Douglas Spotted Eagle, for one, has said that music suffers from companding. You may want to start a new thread and see if he'll explain a bit more about that.

David Lach May 14th, 2006 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fred Retread
Caution on the SKP500s (dang, there are cautions on everything, aren't there?). The idea of wireless stereo has a lot of appeal, but the SKPs use companding (compression at the transmitter and expansion at the receiver). Douglas Spotted Eagle, for one, has said that music suffers from companding. You may want to start a new thread and see if he'll explain a bit more about that.

Well I figured there might be something to that effect (loss a signal quality), after all the specs for the SKP100/500 say it has a frequency range of only 40hz to 18khz, so I was thinking of this solution as a last resort kind of thing.

This kind of brings an other question (great now I'm hi-jacking my own thread), how do you guys set any kind of stereo setup in a crowded bar for a live band with a dance floor around or in front of the stage meaning there is just no way of putting the mics on some stands close enough to the stage? Would you be clamping them to the ceiling close to the stage area in some way and running the wires alongside some pipe that might be hanging there?

Because as I said the SKP500 are a last resort kind of thing to me, I'd much prefer sticking to a wired setup for critical sound recording (not to mention save the money to buy better mics and/or accessories).

Steve House May 14th, 2006 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
...


Many NLEs will allow you to duplicate the s channel and invert the phase, which is all you need to decode m-s in an NLE. There is a freeware vst plugin as well, from voxengo.com/freevst. Waves is great stuff too...

...

Yep - just mentioned the Waves plugin because it has some really interesting tools included for expanding or contracting the spread and rotating the centre line

Seth Bloombaum May 14th, 2006 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
...how do you guys set any kind of stereo setup in a crowded bar for a live band with a dance floor around or in front of the stage meaning there is just no way of putting the mics on some stands close enough to the stage? Would you be clamping them to the ceiling close to the stage area in some way and running the wires alongside some pipe that might be hanging there?...

Well, this is a sticky issue, yes. Because there's really only one best place for the mics, and those darn clubs tend to think that's a good place for a dance floor.

My gigs tend to be different, small concerts (not clubs), no amplification, so, if I'm going to get a good recording it'll be because the room sounds good and the players had good acoustic balance. Made to order for stereo techniques.

David - rig and fly. Consider an upside-down mic stand or c-stand ny-tied to those ceiling pipes, get your local theatrical lighting supplier to make you some safety cables too. Use the really heavy nylon ties. Then, lower the mics to perhaps 10-12' off the floor, use lighter ny-ties or bongo cords to rig your long mic cables.

There's really no substitute for getting a stereo rig in the right place. Club sound is kind of variable, of course. Many house mixes are mono, but don't cover all instruments, depending on direct sound from amps on stage or some direct sound from drums.

But if you walk away with the stereo as heard in the room, the board mix, and maybe if the board mix was mono a direct out of the lead vocal channel on the last channel of your R4, plus some spot sound from your camcorder mic I think you're in pretty good shape. Really, you can't do better unless you haul a 24-track and take a split of each mic.

David Lach May 14th, 2006 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
David - rig and fly. Consider an upside-down mic stand or c-stand ny-tied to those ceiling pipes, get your local theatrical lighting supplier to make you some safety cables too. Use the really heavy nylon ties. Then, lower the mics to perhaps 10-12' off the floor, use lighter ny-ties or bongo cords to rig your long mic cables.

Is there such a thing as an upside-down mix stand, with proper anchoring hardware, or is this a type of jerry-rigging of a normal stand? I would like to go as light as possible because those club ceilings don't always have the proper mounting hardware to suspend a heavy C type of stand on there (at least not where the mics should go). I've even worked in places where the ceiling had nothing to suspend anything on, especially running cables (Duck tape will only go so far).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
There's really no substitute for getting a stereo rig in the right place. Club sound is kind of variable, of course. Many house mixes are mono, but don't cover all instruments, depending on direct sound from amps on stage or some direct sound from drums.

Yeah I learned that the hard way during my very first gig. No drums or bass in the final mix. Luckily the room was small and full of people so the cam's stereo mic picked up a relatively good clean enough sound to compensate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
But if you walk away with the stereo as heard in the room, the board mix, and maybe if the board mix was mono a direct out of the lead vocal channel on the last channel of your R4, plus some spot sound from your camcorder mic I think you're in pretty good shape. Really, you can't do better unless you haul a 24-track and take a split of each mic.

For me it usually depends on the client. If I'm recording a singer with his band, everything outside of the voice is secondary, so I make sure to have a clean channel of vocal only. Then a mono mix of the instruments on top of the stereo recording would be all I need. If it's a band without vocals, I usually try to get a mono mix of the drums and an other feed for the bass as I find those 2 instruments to be the toughest to get a clean full sound on with stereo micing (then again I never did my stereo micing the "right" way, always either camera mounted or too far back, meaning way too much reverberation).

That being said now after going through so much iffy accoustics and recording conditions, I tell all my clients up front that I offer only a basic stereo audio recording of the show/performance and the overall quality will be almost entirely dependent on the recording options and conditions at the location. If they insist on getting pristine sound no matter what, I tell them I will have to hire a dedicated soundman as well as rent some serious multitrack gear to then mix individual instruments in post, but considering the significant extra costs this adds to the final amount, they rarely ask for it (doesn't keep them from nit-picking at the end though).

Steve House May 15th, 2006 03:14 AM

I gotta ask, if the client is the band and they want a demo recorded, why are you trying to do it when they're performing in front of an audience in a gig that hasn't been arranged specifically for shooting a video and whose audience isn't there with the understanding that they're there to be the studio audience for a video production? I understand wanting the shots of the audience spontaneously interacting with the band and certainly get them at a regular performance if you like, but record the actual music and get the closeups of the band performers etc without an audience or where the audience is there knowing it's a shoot and you can start and stop in mid song, close off the dance floor for camera work, etc, and in general focus on the job of making a video and not entertaining a live audience.

Bill Southworth May 15th, 2006 07:32 AM

M/s
 
I've been using a Sanken CMS-10 and an MKH-418 MS mic. I haven't found any matrix plug-ins that work with FCP or Soundtrack Pro so I generally de-matrix in an SD 744. If I want to change the imaging in post, I re-matrix in Bias Peak. One of the truly cool things about MS is that it's reversable. You can record in MS, convert to LR stereo, and then later convert back to MS.

Another cool trick with MS is to use two mics for single point surround sound recording. This is described pretty thoroughly in a Schoeps white paper. It goes like this. Use one MS mic pointing forward and another pointing backward (upside down to keep the L sides and R sides together). Optionally you can use one more hypercardioid in front for center imaging and then "zoom out" your front MS mic for wider stereo coverage.

Douglas Spotted Eagle May 15th, 2006 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Southworth
I've been using a Sanken CMS-10 and an MKH-418 MS mic. I haven't found any matrix plug-ins that work with FCP or Soundtrack Pro so I generally de-matrix in an SD 744. If I want to change the imaging in post, I re-matrix in Bias Peak. One of the truly cool things about MS is that it's reversable. You can record in MS, convert to LR stereo, and then later convert back to MS.

WAVES has 4-5 plugs that dematrix M/S if you would prefer it in FCP or Soundtrack Pro.

David Lach May 15th, 2006 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve House
I gotta ask, if the client is the band and they want a demo recorded, why are you trying to do it when they're performing in front of an audience in a gig that hasn't been arranged specifically for shooting a video and whose audience isn't there with the understanding that they're there to be the studio audience for a video production? I understand wanting the shots of the audience spontaneously interacting with the band and certainly get them at a regular performance if you like, but record the actual music and get the closeups of the band performers etc without an audience or where the audience is there knowing it's a shoot and you can start and stop in mid song, close off the dance floor for camera work, etc, and in general focus on the job of making a video and not entertaining a live audience.

Well it's a good question Steve but usually the band/singer/artist/manager calls me to cover a live event, not just to make a video of them/their client. They tell me they have a concert/show/performance coming up and want to shoot it, sometimes to put on their web sites, sometimes for booking other shows and/or contracts of all kinds.

And truth be told, they usually don't have a lot of money to invest in this, at least here in the Montreal market, especially if it's the band itself that hires me and pays out of their own pockets, so they often need the profit they'll be making on the night with ticket sales to pay for my services.

I can understand the mentality, I've been there before when I was younger as a musicien in a band, where you want professional looking footage for demo purposes yet you're not ready to pay out of your own pocket the $800 or so it will cost for a fully edited 2 camera cover of a 2 hour show (that's about my going rate at this point in time).

I've one time asked your question indirectly to a client after seeing the room the show was going to be in and then let him know the room configuration, with a full crowd, was simply horrible for camera placement, and maybe it'd be bether to find a different place or shoot something without as many people, but he didn't care all that much, he absolutely wanted the live performance with the crowd interaction and the video was secondary. In fact, in those situations, the video is pretty much always secondary. The mentality is "we'll do a show so might as well film it to get some footage out of it for promotional purposes".

Now that I've gained sufficient experience (second year as a pro) I'm slowly raising my prices/changing my price packages to voluntarily price myself out of the bottom market that has no money, is not doing it professionally and isn't ready to pay the cost for a quality shoot. And maybe if I feel the client is serious and means business, and the conditions are right, I might be proposing to do a closed set shooting (especially the ones that come to me with music video intentions on top of covering a live event).

But don't underestimate the importance of a crowd in a show of this sort, it raises the performance level of the band while being a key element (crowd interaction) that allows to either book a future gig or get a label interested in them, or so was I told anyway.

Ralph Keyser May 15th, 2006 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Bloombaum
Generally, two mics in shock mounts, whether cardoids or m-s array are a little bit of a hassle to set....

Although several companies, Rycote among them, make M-S shock mounts that handle two mics in a single mount, and the setup becomes easy. A dedicated stereo mic is nice if you do primarily that type of recording, although I prefer the flexibility of two modular mics than can be used (with different capsules, of course) in a variety of fashions other than just stereo recording.

Steve House May 15th, 2006 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Lach
Well it's a good question Steve but usually the band/singer/artist/manager calls me to cover a live event, not just to make a video of them/their client.
...

But don't underestimate the importance of a crowd in a show of this sort, it raises the performance level of the band while being a key element (crowd interaction) that allows to either book a future gig or get a label interested in them, or so was I told anyway.

I can understand both points. But the conditions required to make a solid demo recording of the music are even more stringent than those required to get good visuals. You can use a couple of shoulder mounted cameras and work in and around the audience and experieced shooters with get good images. But a solid stereo recording of the music, something that will sell the band's sound to potential clients, is going to require very careful attention to the recording conditions in regard to things like mic placement etc or the sound is going to sound like a garage band instead of a group of professional musicians. It needs more care and attention that you might be able to achieve working around the audience during a regular club date.

Steve House May 15th, 2006 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ralph Keyser
Although several companies, Rycote among them, make M-S shock mounts that handle two mics in a single mount, and the setup becomes easy. A dedicated stereo mic is nice if you do primarily that type of recording, although I prefer the flexibility of two modular mics than can be used (with different capsules, of course) in a variety of fashions other than just stereo recording.

I've been thinking along those lines myself, thinking about the flexibility one would have to cover a variety of situations with a kit made up of, say, 2 or 3 AKG Blueline power/preamp modules and a capsule collection of a pair each of the omni and cardioid capsules plus a hypercardioid and a figure-8 capsule.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:18 AM.

DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network