|
|||||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
May 14th, 2006, 06:55 PM | #31 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
Quote:
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
|
May 14th, 2006, 07:29 PM | #32 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 3,420
|
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. |
|
May 14th, 2006, 09:19 PM | #33 | |||
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Posts: 570
|
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). |
|||
May 15th, 2006, 03:14 AM | #34 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
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.
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
May 15th, 2006, 07:32 AM | #35 |
Regular Crew
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37
|
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. |
May 15th, 2006, 07:45 AM | #36 | |
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Stockton, UT
Posts: 5,648
|
Quote:
__________________
Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com |
|
May 15th, 2006, 12:10 PM | #37 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Posts: 570
|
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. |
|
May 15th, 2006, 02:04 PM | #38 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico USA
Posts: 287
|
Quote:
|
|
May 15th, 2006, 02:49 PM | #39 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
Quote:
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
|
May 15th, 2006, 02:54 PM | #40 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
Quote:
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
|
May 15th, 2006, 03:46 PM | #41 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Posts: 570
|
Quote:
I always offer an extra audio package where I'll bring in a dedicated soundman, if not crew, and mic and record every single instrument independently to then mix it in post exactly the way they want, but so far they never chose to go for it, mainly because the visuals is what they're after. They're not selling they're sound with my product, they're selling their image. If they want to sell their sound, they should (and usually do) go and record a demo album in a studio with proper realisation. Of course I'd love to eventually provide a full high-end audio-video package, but I'm not ready yet for that to be honest, as I'm still learning the job even after one year of operation and possess only rudimentary audio knowledge (which I'm trying hard to develop by speaking with people like you on these boards). So in the meantime I'll concentrate on getting great footage with anything from acceptable to good audio to go along, always pushing for it to get better of course. |
|
May 16th, 2006, 03:35 AM | #42 | |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
Quote:
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
|
May 16th, 2006, 11:42 AM | #43 | |
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Posts: 570
|
Quote:
BTW, still looking for those mics, I've been told that small diaphragm mics have a hard time getting a rich sound up to the very low frequencies but keep a very clean sound in the higher notes (which based on experience I would say seems true), while large diaphragms (with which I have no experience) are much better at getting a rich full sounding sound in the lower frequencies but from a distance can make the sound muddy and not so bright. So based on that, I was wondering then, shouldn't a mid-side audio setup with a large diaphragm figure 8 mic and a small diaphragm cardoid give me a richer, fuller sound when decoded back to stereo? If that was the case, I think I'd narrow down my potential selections to either a couple C4 and a C3, or a couple NT5 and an NT2. Or would an ORTF setup maybe with 2 medium 3/4" diaphragms like the XML's be a good compromise for getting rich sound in both ends of the spectrum? I must say I always had trouble getting rich basses with small diaphragms so I was wondering if that might be a good workaround. |
|
May 16th, 2006, 03:19 PM | #44 |
Inner Circle
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 5,742
|
I've heard of using a pair of selectable pattern large diaphram mics like the Rode NT2-A or large diaphram mics from AT, AKG, Neuman etc like that - in a vertical line with the the capsule ends almost touching each other and both set to cardioid for X-Y or one set to cardioid and the other to figure-8 for M/S. Would be insteresting to hear an A/B comparison of large diaphram and small diaphrams used on the same piece. I tend to think of large diaphrams as basically vocal mics and small diaphrams as instrument mics. Mic's aren't like speakers and their diameter doesn't influence the frequency response the same way a speaker's does. Small diaphrams have a smaller mass to accelerate and so can follow sharp transients and attacks like drum hits or piano better.
__________________
Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! |
May 16th, 2006, 03:47 PM | #45 | ||
Major Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Posts: 570
|
Quote:
Quote:
I would also be interested in knowing if using a LD mic as figure 8 and SD mic as the cardioid in an M/S config might be a good way of getting the "best" of both worlds while negating the worst or at the very least, if it's a viable solution when you want to do an M/S config and only have small diaph cardoids and a large diaph figure 8 mic (which in my case could also serve for voice-over purposes). |
||
| ||||||
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|