Ribbon Madness....Some Comparisons

[krs]

wow.

Looks like I'm going to pick up 205 #2 tomorrow

[WKG]

Great thread. I have a pair of the modded 205's with the Lundahls and I have been really liking them on alot of things but haven't had the opportunity to use them on piano yet. The Coles sound absolutely great also, it would be a tough choice to pick between the two in this case. Interestingly some who have done the transformer swap in the 205's didn't think it made much difference. I thought it helped clear the mic up through the midrange, which is where it sounds like it made the difference to you between the two here.

Very educational post, thanks for taking the time to do it.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by WKG

Great thread. I have a pair of the modded 205's with the Lundahls and I have been really liking them on alot of things but haven't had the opportunity to use them on piano yet. The Coles sound absolutely great also, it would be a tough choice to pick between the two in this case. Interestingly some who have done the transformer swap in the 205's didn't think it made much difference. I thought it helped clear the mic up through the midrange, which is where it sounds like it made the difference to you between the two here.

Very educational post, thanks for taking the time to do it.

WKG - I'd be willing to bet that those that think the Lundhal doesn't make much of a difference are recording e guitar and/or drums. On something as harmonically complex as the piano, I think they make a huge difference, although I didn't have a stock 205 to drop into the fray...

[dlmorley]

Personally I think that Mic 1 was nicest. Great test btw thumbsup

Also nicely shows how good the D&R pre's are especially for standard desk pre's. Nothing cool and no buzz word, but they do the job exceptionally well.

[Inner Light]

This is just brilliant!
thanks soo much

I had picked the coles as my fav.

now I'm in a worse situation, as I wanted to pick up 2 Cascade Fat headsII and now I'm thinking of the Moded Apex.

oh well i guess it's not a bad situation to be in considering the price.

[Brad McGowan]

I was afraid I had picked the Coles. Damn. Anything else out there sound similar, but much cheaper?

Again--excellent work, Bill! Thanks for sharing.

Brad

[freestyle tromb]

awesome!
i was kinda guessing that mic 1 was a coles!
this was a very enjoyable shootout.

[resound]

Fun!

I wonder how Mic 1 would have fared if positioned in place of Mic 2? Definitely, Mic 1 picked up too much of the piano's voicing on the louder passages. I can hear this in Mic 2 as well, but being further off the strings, this quality is lessened.

A darker, more classically-voiced instrument with softer hammers might have yielded different results, though at the risk of muddiness.

As an aside, I travel through the Minneapolis airport often. They have a nice, concert Steinway (model D, I believe) on the main concourse and there's often a new age pianist there playing. The instrument sounds really great for this music: darker than a Yamaha but still very clear. Ironically, this is in very close proximity to the infamous men's room re: Larry Craig. Coincidence? Maybe not....

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

I was afraid I had picked the Coles. Damn. Anything else out there sound similar, but much cheaper?

Brad

The Coles 4038 uses a 1" long ribbon tuned a bit higher than the Apex 205 which uses a 50mm (1.97"), very low tension ribbon.

For a bit leaner sound in the bass and perhaps a different midrange feel, one of the "short ribbon" (35mm), higher tuned mics like the Nady RSM-4 or Cascade Fathead would be worth a try.

[analogjeff]

michael:

which of these inexpensive ribbons, if any, would you recommend for recording organ through a Leslie cab?? -- looking for an inexpensive pair that will provide an airy, harmonious top end, and no mud on the bottom... or maybe a ribbon isn't the right thing at all for this???

thanks!!!

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

I was afraid I had picked the Coles. Damn. Anything else out there sound similar, but much cheaper?

Yeah, how about mic 2. With just a little bit of EQ (HPF, LPF & tiny mid bump), I could make 2 sound like mic 1. But why would you want to? j/k

Do the slutty thing - GET BOTH!

[drBill]

Originally Posted by VukOnCrack

Fun!

I wonder how Mic 1 would have fared if positioned in place of Mic 2? Definitely, Mic 1 picked up too much of the piano's voicing on the louder passages. I can hear this in Mic 2 as well, but being further off the strings, this quality is lessened.

A darker, more classically-voiced instrument with softer hammers might have yielded different results, though at the risk of muddiness.

Mic 1 and 2 were both the same distance off the strings. I believe their difference in positioning to be minimal, but as you know, sometimes even a small offset makes a difference. (I'll post pics later today - hopefully. I've got afternoon sessions...)

On a darker piano such as a steinway, the "issues" with the coles on louder passages would definately have been exacerbated, and mic 2 would have become more important.

On a tinny thin piano, the coles would definately have been the call.

This particular Yamaha has had the hammers softened a bit, but it is still a fairly bright piano.

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

The Coles 4038 uses a 1" long ribbon tuned a bit higher than the Apex 205 which uses a 50mm (1.97"), very low tension ribbon.

For a bit leaner sound in the bass and perhaps a different midrange feel, one of the "short ribbon" (35mm), higher tuned mics like the Nady RSM-4 or Cascade Fathead would be worth a try.

I actually have been eyeing those Fatheads... Thanks for the tip, Michael!

Brad

[Brad McGowan]

Originally Posted by drBill

Yeah, how about mic 2. With just a little bit of EQ (HPF, LPF & tiny mic bump), I could make 2 sound like mic 1. But why would you want to? j/k

Do the slutty thing - GET BOTH!

I was thinking about that. You know I actually have a Shiny Box 46 that is very similar to your 205. It started out as a stock 46 and then was having some problems so I sent it back to Jon. It ended up being a manufacturing defect in the paint on the magnet that was corrected on later models...mine was an early one. While Jon had it in possession I totally had him pimp out the mic--he installed a Lundahl transformer, removed all the inner mesh/baffles, and then installed his own handmade ribbon motor. It's a beautiful sounding mic. It has characteristics that remind me of things I heard in your Mic 2 sound clips. I'd be very curious to hear it in comparison to an OktavaMod 205 at some point. Maybe I'll just have to send you my mic for a week so that you can make us all more clips.

Brad

[drBill]

As promised :


Mic Pics

Rear View

You can see the rear mics are firing down at the strings and up at the lid - fig 8 pattern of course.



---

Front View

If you look close, you can see that the front mics are firing L and R and NOT up at the lid and down at the strings.



---

This pic shows the front mics a little better. And you can see the rear mic's positioning as well.



---

From the side. Note the R92's positioning.



---

And lastly - the room mic position shot from the piano.



---

Hope that clears up any mic positioning questions. Feel free to ask if you have any more. I know it's kind of a bizzare figure 8 puzzle, but as you heard......it sounds sweet!

Cheers,

bp

[lpkyer]

which lundahl tranny is used in there?

I already have an apex 205 that i modded the grillz (improves a lot) but didnt installed a new transformer yet.

[freestyle tromb]

whoa!! those mic positions are crazy! please explain the reasoning? i want to understand, because you're right- i already heard them, and they DO sound great.

[drBill]

Originally Posted by freestyle tromb

whoa!! those mic positions are crazy! please explain the reasoning? i want to understand, because you're right- i already heard them, and they DO sound great.

Well...I wish I could take credit for it and you could name it the drBill technique, but the reality is a buddy (tj) showed it to me a while back. I'm not sure who invented it or used it first, but I've never seen anyone else except my buddy do it. Since he showed it to me, I've used it several times recording pianos. Works great doesn't it? Each mic is turned 90 degrees (in different directions) than what you would normally expect. The front mic is turned on it's side to fire L/R instead of up down and the rear mic is turned 90 degrees in and positioned back, but remaiining in an up/down position.

The reasoning behind it? I don't really dig the typical L to R piano sound that seems to be the status quo piano recording technique. It seems unnatural to me. This placement when panned hard L/R seems natural, rich in stereo and not L/R gimicky as you play up and down the keys. Natural - like you ears would hear it if you were standing in front of the open lid of the piano. It also holds mono compatibility pretty well - especially if you take time to mess with mic placement a bit. (This time I didn't really have enough time with so many mics in the piano, but it's holding mono fairly well anyway.)

Kinda makes you think doesn't it? Who would have thought this would work so well? How much are we missing out on because of the status quo mindset we have fallen into. Unfortunately, at least in my end of the biz, there seems to be too little time for experimentation.

For everyone who hung in on this thread to this point, the TJ-90/90-drBill technique ( ) is a free gift! Go out and give it a try!!! Don't forget - figure 8 patterns.....unless of course you want to experiment and try something new. In which case you must report back!

Cheers,

bp
Mindseye
http://www.mindseyeprod.com

[Inner Light]

Amazing Technique, it actually when you think about it, it makes total sense.


That's the problem today, everyone is in such a rush, and expects results so fast that experimentation goes out the window.

I know I feel a tremendous difference with clients that don't mind getting the right sound, and realize that it takes a little experimentation.

At a major local studio here in Montreal, I setup the drum mics with the Glynn Johns setup. The assistant looked at me like I was a weirdo or something. I guess after countless sessions they stick to the tried and true methods. Well after 2 songs recorded, they started to ask me where i got the technique!



thanks for all your time and sharing these clips, and technique with us.

[Fletcher]

Originally Posted by drBill

Each mic is turned 90 degrees (in different directions) than what you would normally expect. The front mic is turned on it's side to fire L/R instead of up down and the rear mic is turned 90 degrees in and positioned back, but remaiining in an up/down position.

If I'm reading this right I would like to offer you [and your buddy] congratulations on redefining the Blumlein technique... ya know that neat stereo technique done with a pair of figure 8 microphones 90' off from each other so the lobes of each mic lives in the nulls of the other mic. Very cool trick... comes standard in the AEA R-88 and the Royer SF-12 to name but two.

My only other question is that your least favorite of the 3 was the R-92's as they had the least bottom... am I missing something? In the photos you put up it looks like they're like 6 feet away from the instrument while the other mics appear to be about 6 inches from the instrument... doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that they wouldn't have quite the same amount of bottom oriented proximity effect going on as the other mics.

I will admit I have not listened to the clips and sincerely apologize if I've been reading this wrong... but something seems a bit a miss to me and I'm trying to figure out just what that something might be.

[Michael_Joly]

Originally Posted by Fletcher

If I'm reading this right I would like to offer you [and your buddy] congratulations on redefining the Blumlein technique...

I don't see this as a redefinition of Blumlein - which provides a highly correlated amplitude and phase relationship (for accurate stereo imaging) between two closely positioned figure 8 mics.

But it is a technique that emphasizes de-correlation between spaced figure 8 mics and thus a big stereo sound without Esquevell-esque ping ponging across the L/R stage.

[Fletcher]

Gee, the way I read it the technique seemed like the business side(s) of one mic were being put into the null of the other mic [albeit at different angles the results would be pretty much the same]... sometimes I can indeed be rather obtuse so it is indeed very plausible that I'm just not getting it.

[SoundWeavers]

Fletcher, well I was surprised by the sound of the modded NADY ribbons, but I'm smart enough that the R92s were just positioned out of contention as far as a full sound is concerned. Also, I would argue the R84's would be a better choice for a piano.

Nevertheless, I am seriously considering acquiring NADY ribbon mics for modding by Michael. I have long wanted a Coles 4038 but I just can't afford it. So far, I have no GAS for the DIABLO yet.

[Recycled_Brains]

i'll be the minority here in saying that i thought the R92's on the outside sounded the best. combine those with that room track, and you've got a nice, organic, "sitting in the room with the piano" thing happening.

-ryan

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Fletcher

If I'm reading this right I would like to offer you [and your buddy] congratulations on redefining the Blumlein technique... ya know that neat stereo technique done with a pair of figure 8 microphones 90' off from each other so the lobes of each mic lives in the nulls of the other mic. Very cool trick... comes standard in the AEA R-88 and the Royer SF-12 to name but two.

My only other question is that your least favorite of the 3 was the R-92's as they had the least bottom... am I missing something? In the photos you put up it looks like they're like 6 feet away from the instrument while the other mics appear to be about 6 inches from the instrument... doesn't seem like too much of a stretch that they wouldn't have quite the same amount of bottom oriented proximity effect going on as the other mics.

I will admit I have not listened to the clips and sincerely apologize if I've been reading this wrong... but something seems a bit a miss to me and I'm trying to figure out just what that something might be.

Fletcher - Is that sarcasm I detect? Nah....I must be imagining something. Yes, I'm quite familiar with the blumlein technique. Love it. However if you look at the pics, you will clearly see that this is different than a traditional blumlein setup. As for the R88 or SF12, I would have had to break them in two to get them into this position.

I'd suggest that if you would like to comment intelligently (you normally do), read the first post and maybe even listen to the clips. I think it will clear up everything for you and answer your questions as to why the 92's are outside the piano. I have said before - this was not a "shootout", "double blind" test or anything scientific. Just a quick session where time was of the essence. The 92's were a complete afterthought and were set up just as we started recording when there was no easy way to sandwich them into the already crowded piano. They are not 6' away, but they are definately far enough to make a major difference in sound - which I stated in the first post. At that location, I'm sure R84's would have sounded better. In addition, I was also using an Apogee Mini Me as their preamp which came highly recommended, but which I was dubiously scheptical about. (and still am) You'll notice (if you follow the thread) that I commented several times that the 92's didn't have a fair shot at it. Personally, from the sound of them, I don't think I would have chosen them anyway, not the flavor that I was looking for that day. They are certainly excellent mics - but perhaps designed for a different purpose. (Close up micing?)

Your comments on this board are always "put it up and listen to it for yourself, don't ask us to tell you what to do. Use your ears". That's pretty much what we did. Sorry if I botched the traditional blumlein technique or if I didn't give the 92's you sell a fair shot. Certainly you should like the comments on the 4038's - you do sell those. (And don't miss the fact that I linked Mercenary as the place to get either.) If you don't like the conclusions or don't understand the reasoning behind it......again, post #1. It wasn't a scientific "test" and there's no political or financial motivation behind it (like MANY posts on this board), just a fun listening experiment on a normal every day session.

Cheers,

bp

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Michael_Joly

Blumlein - which provides a highly correlated amplitude and phase relationship (for accurate stereo imaging) between two closely positioned figure 8 mics. .

Yes. These mics are anything but close, and would probably have been a bit further apart if there hadn't been so many dang mics in the piano.

Originally Posted by Fletcher

Gee, the way I read it the technique seemed like the business side(s) of one mic were being put into the null of the other mic

That's the way I understand Blumlein as well. I would be hard pressed to call this a Blumlein technique.

[EliasGwinn]

Originally Posted by Recycled_Brains

i'll be the minority here in saying that i thought the R92's on the outside sounded the best. combine those with that room track, and you've got a nice, organic, "sitting in the room with the piano" thing happening.

-ryan

x2

[drBill]

I love ribbons for more than Piano. I did a trumpet session yesterday, and although I didn't have the Coles to make a comparison with, I loved the modded 205, and it worked much better than a U87, 414B-ULS, 421 or GT AM62.

Now that I've figured out how to put up clips, I thought you guys might like to hear it on trumpet as well.

M. Joly 205 into a Purple Biz in dual mode, into a Digi 192. 24/44.1. No compression, EQ, verb,

[Brad McGowan]

That doesn't sound like a trumpet.

Brad

[drBill]

Originally Posted by Brad McGowan

That doesn't sound like a trumpet.

Brad

Brad - no it sure doesn't does it?? I pulled it down and will re-bounce and try again after dinner. I guess I spoke too soon about knowing how to put up clips didn't I??