Fx/Bkg/Atmo recording set

[kiklop]

Hi everybody

I have been interested in purchasing a good/quite stereo mic/mic set for collecting sound fx/bkg/atmos.
In last few years, i am specialising in Fx/Atmo editing and my need for proper recording set is growing, especialy for quite Bkgs/Atmos.
I already searched through many posts on this forum about location recording setups, but i am still not sure, which one would best suit my needs.
At the moment my set up consists of Rode NT4, sound devices MicPre and Fostex FR-2LE. I also have Zoom H2 (for additional perspectives or back up recorder).
In past, for additional needs (mostly Atmos recording) of projects i was renting Schoeps MS set (CCM8 and CCM4).
I am leaning towards MS set, because of its 'transparency' and 'depth', its portability, as well as it leaves me with an option of deciding later about stereo imaging.
My budget is around €2000.
Remaining options that are closest to my needs/budget are:

Neumann km 120/140
Sennheiser MHK 418S
Sanken css5 (already decoded MS signal)
Audio Technica BT4029

About Sennheiser MHK 418S is writen a lot on this forum and it seems that its side capsule is too noisy for quite recordings.
Sanken css5 seems a good option, although it is not clear to me if it is too noisy for quite recordings. Did anybody tried it for atmo recording?
What about other two options, Neumann km 120/140 and Audio Technica BT4029? I couldn't find any reviews on it nor i could find them at local rental place.
Any thought and suggstions would be very helpfull.
This is my first post on this forum, so i wuld use this opportunity to say to everybody.

[charles maynes]

the CSS5 is not M/S SANKEN MICROPHONE CO .,LTD. | Product [ CSS-5 ]

there is a lot of contradictory info on it, so beware- it is a great mic though.

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by charles maynes

the CSS5 is not M/S SANKEN MICROPHONE CO .,LTD. | Product [ CSS-5 ]

there is a lot of contradictory info on it, so beware- it is a great mic though.

Thanks for reply...yes it seems that there is a lot of contradiction on CSS5.
I desperetly trying to find a link, where it is stated that css5 is using Mid-Side capsules, but that its signal gets decoded and output is 'normal' L/R.
Did anybody compared css5 with cms10?

[JSt0rm]

man I always thought the css-5 was mid-side too.

[crussom]

The Neumann KM120/140 series mics are real nice. I've used them for ambience recording in the past. I ended up selling those mics, and despite all the mics I now own, I still regret getting rid of those.

[airbornesound]

IMHO you can't go wrong with the Neumann 191. Very rich, accurate with amazing depth and clarity.

If you use that with the Sound Devices MixPre you'll get good stuff.

I've used that set up for years... I recorded these recordings of rain in a rainforest with that mic. They are MP3s.. but you'll get the idea of the depth and accuracy. (Forgive the watermark ☺ )

You may be able to find a 191 used for €2000 - keep an eye on the RAMPS - it is mostly production sound but from time to time you'll see a Neumann 191 go by as it is the default stereo FX capturing mic for the production sound guys.

I've also seen a few on ebay.

Best of luck!

[ggegan]

Not to resurrect a dead horse for more beatings, but here is a post I wrote on a different forum regarding MS recordings for use in feature films:

"By the time you get to the Dolby SR print mastering process where steering issues arise, there is very rarely anyone on the stage other than the mixers and the Dolby rep, certainly almost never the person who knows how a particular sound effect was recorded, so you never know for sure why a sound that was panned L/R wound up in the surrounds, but it is going to have something to do with either acoustical or electrical phase relationships between the left and right channels because the Dolby matrix decoder will send in-phase stereo signals to the front and out-of-phase stereo signals to the surrounds.

On a purely theoretical basis, MS would seem to present a situation that will produce front/rear steering issues because of the opposing phase of the two sides of the figure eight mic. If the left and right sides of the figure eight cancel each other in mono, leaving just the mid mic audible, then when panned to the front left and right speakers, the audio that canceled in mono should be sent to the surrounds by the matrix, with the mid mic sent to the center speaker. Phase relationships can be very complex, so the shift probably wouldn't be absolute, but I would think it would be fairly audible.

XY or ORTF recording technique may pick up sounds that are out of phase due to comb filtering or delays created by acoustic reflections, but they are generally considerably lower in level than the coincident direct sound, so any front/back steering problems in the matrix should be fairly subtle, although there could still be a fair amount of collapse into mono due to identical in-phase audio being present in both the left and right sides.

Of course this is all just theorizing and I readily concede that there could be a flaw in my logic, which I would hope someone would point out. In order to verify it someone would need to sit down with a lot of MS and XY recorded tracks and run them through the matrix individually, taking note of the outcome. In the meantime, I'm sticking with XY."

[JSt0rm]

I think for me my biggest problem has been noise and how to exclude that noise from a recording. I always thought ms was great (I dont use it as I cant afford a good mic yet so I speculate) because it allowed you to pick up the mono highly directional signal AND some ambiance that you could "dial in" if the situation is correct. Is this the wrong approach? Should I be looking into something else like the mkh70? long shotguns? I know there isnt a magic bullet and you need multiple setups for different things but I was kinda hoping something like a css5 would cover both highly directional work AND some ambiance style recording as well.

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by airbornesound

IMHO you can't go wrong with the Neumann 191. Very rich, accurate with amazing depth and clarity.

If you use that with the Sound Devices MixPre you'll get good stuff.

I've used that set up for years... I recorded these recordings of rain in a rainforest with that mic. They are MP3s.. but you'll get the idea of the depth and accuracy. (Forgive the watermark ☺ )

You may be able to find a 191 used for €2000 - keep an eye on the RAMPS - it is mostly production sound but from time to time you'll see a Neumann 191 go by as it is the default stereo FX capturing mic for the production sound guys.

I've also seen a few on ebay.

Best of luck!

airbornesound, a year ago I did some test recordings with rented 191 and if i have no budget limit (dream equipment list becomes realistic wish list), that would be my first option. I have a look around. thank you
what is RAMPS?

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by ggegan

Not to resurrect a dead horse for more beatings, but here is a post I wrote on a different forum regarding MS recordings for use in feature films:

"By the time you get to the Dolby SR print mastering process where steering issues arise, there is very rarely anyone on the stage other than the mixers and the Dolby rep, certainly almost never the person who knows how a particular sound effect was recorded, so you never know for sure why a sound that was panned L/R wound up in the surrounds, but it is going to have something to do with either acoustical or electrical phase relationships between the left and right channels because the Dolby matrix decoder will send in-phase stereo signals to the front and out-of-phase stereo signals to the surrounds.

On a purely theoretical basis, MS would seem to present a situation that will produce front/rear steering issues because of the opposing phase of the two sides of the figure eight mic. If the left and right sides of the figure eight cancel each other in mono, leaving just the mid mic audible, then when panned to the front left and right speakers, the audio that canceled in mono should be sent to the surrounds by the matrix, with the mid mic sent to the center speaker. Phase relationships can be very complex, so the shift probably wouldn't be absolute, but I would think it would be fairly audible.

XY or ORTF recording technique may pick up sounds that are out of phase due to comb filtering or delays created by acoustic reflections, but they are generally considerably lower in level than the coincident direct sound, so any front/back steering problems in the matrix should be fairly subtle, although there could still be a fair amount of collapse into mono due to identical in-phase audio being present in both the left and right sides.

Of course this is all just theorizing and I readily concede that there could be a flaw in my logic, which I would hope someone would point out. In order to verify it someone would need to sit down with a lot of MS and XY recorded tracks and run them through the matrix individually, taking note of the outcome. In the meantime, I'm sticking with XY."

I had some problems with MS recordings in 5.1 to LtRt downmixing process, where some of L and R (side signal) ended in Center, creating a phased signal, as well as some of signal ending up unintentionaly in surrounds.
As it was only a few scenes in film, playing slightly with panning of MS recording did minimized an artifacts, although i didn't find any rule to help me solve this problem.
Did anybody found any workaround?
Does downmixing in editing process would help?
Until then, as i mainly do Fx/Bkg editing and mostly i am not present at re-recording stage, i guess i should stick to non-MS set as it seems they produce less artifacts.

[pkautzsch]

The 4029 sounds a bit more "balanced" than the 418 to my ears. However, it is way more susceptible to handling noise and wind.

How often will your recordings end up in a surround matrix?

[airbornesound]

Hi kiklop,

RAMPS is rec.arts.movies.production.sound. It's a Google group:

Discussions - rec.arts.movies.production.sound | Google Groups

Please note not much of it is relevant for post... the discussion is set-centric (I sometimes swing a boom on set) -- however there are often posts selling mics, including the 191 from time to time.

Best of luck!
Paul

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

The 4029 sounds a bit more "balanced" than the 418 to my ears. However, it is way more susceptible to handling noise and wind.

How often will your recordings end up in a surround matrix?

How does it (AT4029) handle noise with windshield?

Lately, all the projects i worked on finished in matrix (being mixed in 5.1 and downmixed to LtRt). I am still hesitant about going for MS or XY.

Followong friday, i will do comparasion test recording for Neuman km 120/140, Sanken css5 (if it is not rented out at rental), Shoeps CCM8/4, Shoeps CCM8/CMIT5 and Rode NT4.
I am quite curious, aside from self noise levels and general sound of each mic, about differance between using shotgun and cardoid mic as M mic.
My guess is that phasing and artifacts could be problematic with 'shotgun' MS set in reflective spaces, for example high ceiling interiors or side street exteriors.
Any suggestion/idea about placement of mic and interesting location is more then welcome.
I will post results.

Vladimir

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by airbornesound

Hi kiklop,

RAMPS is rec.arts.movies.production.sound. It's a Google group:

Discussions - rec.arts.movies.production.sound | Google Groups

Please note not much of it is relevant for post... the discussion is set-centric (I sometimes swing a boom on set) -- however there are often posts selling mics, including the 191 from time to time.

Best of luck!
Paul

Thanks for clarifying it

greets
Vladimir

[kiklop]

I finaly did test recording yesterday.
Unfortunately, i didn't get hold of shoeps MS setups (friends mics and he needed them for his work), but i hope i will also test them in near future.
I tested 3 mics (with windshield):

Neumann km120/140
Sanken cms9 (css5 again rented out)
Rode NT4

For recording i used SD MixPre going into Fostex FR2-LE (48kHz/24).

Can anybody suggest best place to upload samples? It would be best if samples can remain in .wav format..
soundcloud?

[kiklop]

I finaly uploaded results from mic test. You can find them here >>>

kiklop - Stereo Mic test - SoundCloud

Personaly, i liked Neumann km120/140 set more then Sanken cms9 (Rode was only used as referance, mic that i own). It is much quiter (self noise-listen to room tone recording), it has more 'natural' sound, transparency, depth (spatial).
On other hand, Sanken sounds nice in mid freq, which i find nice for recording hard Fx. It is also less sensitive on handling noise.

any thoughts?

[ggegan]

Originally Posted by kiklop

I finaly uploaded results from mic test. You can find them here >>>

kiklop - Stereo Mic test - SoundCloud

Personaly, i liked Neumann km120/140 set more then Sanken cms9 (Rode was only used as referance, mic that i own). It is much quiter (self noise-listen to room tone recording), it has more 'natural' sound, transparency, depth (spatial).
On other hand, Sanken sounds nice in mid freq, which i find nice for recording hard Fx. It is also less sensitive on handling noise.

any thoughts?

Well, I think I like the Neumann the best, but it is very hard to make a valid judgement because the recordings were made at different times. To do a true comparison you would need to record with all three mics simultaneously.

Also, it sounded to me like some of the recordings were made using a high pass filter and others weren't.

[kiklop]

Originally Posted by ggegan

Well, I think I like the Neumann the best, but it is very hard to make a valid judgement because the recordings were made at different times. To do a true comparison you would need to record with all three mics simultaneously.

Also, it sounded to me like some of the recordings were made using a high pass filter and others weren't.

Also, it sounded to me like some of the recordings were made using a high pass filter and others weren't.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for reply Mr. Gegan.
Unfortunately, recording at different times was part of technical limitation (i had only 2 track recorder), so at this point true comparision was not possible.
Also, no filter wass applied to any recording. Can you point me out, which recordings seems high passed?
Whole process was as following:
All mics were placed on approximately same place (with few cm differance). Interiors are recorded with windshield and for exterior recordings, windjammer was added. Sizes of windhilds are varying from set to set (Rode has narrowest medium windshield kit 4 size).
Mic signal is feeded to Sound Device MixPre with same setting for all 3 mics for each enviroment. Each enviroment had its own preamp setting, varying slightly, depending on loudness (room tone using highest preamp level). Signal goes further into Fostex Fr2-Le, which is set to 12 o'clock.
Recordings are edited in PT. Both, Sanken and Neumann are passed only through massey ms encoder (as an insert on audio track) and recorded directly into new audio track and exported afterwards. Rode recording is directly exported.
I hope this clarifies process.
Any other thoughts?