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. |
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? |
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.
|
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? |
Quote:
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. |
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. |
Quote:
Quote:
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:
Quote:
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:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
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 |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
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 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Any inexpensive stereo bars around, that might give the option to do X/Y, ORTF, NOS? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Again, it really is an elegant solution and I'm going to use it. Thanks.
|
Quote:
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
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:
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. |
Quote:
Thanks for doing this Seth I really appreciate. I'll send you an Email. Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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). |
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.
|
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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