I am going to record a CD with Dowland lute songs in two weeks and have doubts about the recording setup. The recording will be in a nice but rather "reverby" refectorium in an old monastery. We have played there several times and love it's atmosphere. The room is rather big (app. 20m long, 8m high and 9m wide), has a stone floor and is acoustically untreated. There will be lots of very large blankets and chairs around that can be used to dampen the room's most prominent reflections. Ah, and one logistical problem: I will be the lute player also so no control room monitors, only headphones to control the setup.
The musicians will be:
a countertenor with a room filling voice
lute and bass viola da gamba (playing the lute part together)
additional descant viola da gamba for a few songs
there will be a few instrumentals also consisting of lute solo, viola da Gamba solo and combinations of lute and both violas.
The first point will be to find a nice place in the room. On the long side or maybe better on the short side?
My main idea is to give the countertenor a separate MS microphone (Schoeps MK4/MK8) and set him up opposite the instrumental group (for good communication and control). The instruments get a main ORTF like microphone (MK4 or MK21) in which the singer will appear on the right spot but softer. Probably a spot microphone for the lute Maybe also room mics for balancing the reverb but I strongly suspect there will be enough of it in the main mics.
This setup gives me (as both player and tone engineer)
good control of balance of the group and singer
good control of reverb (being quite close to the musicians)
good communication, as we are facing each other.
The standard idea would be to use one main microphone for the whole group
and use spot mics for the instruments. This would give quite a large setup so that the main mic needs to be quite at a distance (max. four musicians with need for quite some space around them) probably resulting in too much reverb.
These are my main thoughts at the moment and I would be very happy for some other ideas/critique. We have no time pressure for this project as the recording is sceduled for two full days and a big part of the repertory has been played lots of times, although setting the whole thing up will be a bit of a stress for me but maybe this can be done on the evening before.
Microphones:
4 Schoeps CMC5 with 3xMK4, 2xMK21, 2MK2s, 1xMK8
4 Neumann KM84 with 3 additional KK83 capsules
4 Oktava MC012 with all capsules
Recorder:
Fireface800 (4pres)
Lake People F35II 2channel preamp (very nice!)
6 channels of LA Audio and old Behringer mic pres (decent)
ACER Laptop (very quiet!) running Samplitude, remote hard disk)
Is this an amateur or a pro job? If it is a pro job with sales at the end of it I would suggest rather than "doing it yourself" if you are serious about this record, hire a good engineer/producer for a couple of day's to sort it out.
Ultimately this will help you achieve a much better sound rather than trying to wear both hat's and finally a much better CD as you can concentrate on the playing and the performance.
As to your original question, it is impossible to know without being at the venue. You may well be right in all your assumptions, it is also possible that the whole thing can be captured beautifully with just a stereo pair, however a good producer/engineer will make all this academic and should cost less than a 1000 Euros for a couple of days, a cheap record in my book!
Roland, you are putting the finger in a wound here (don't know if this is actually a good English term). This is really a "no budget" project, that has been in my head for quite a while (no wonder, being a lutenist). We are a professional early music group and plan to produce this on our own to offer it to a few labels. So if this will be a professional job will turn out when the whole thing is in the box and can persuade a label.
The reason I plan to do it on my own is that I have done some similar recordings (with me as player and soundengineer) that turned out to sound nice enough for a potential release although they were just planned as promotional CDs for these groups. The reason I feel a bit unsecure about this one is the addition of a singer. In my expierience it has always been a bit more difficult to balance a recording with a singer and lute or viola da gamba.
I am personally always afraid to combine too many microphones together. It often tends to sound a bit unnatural/comby/phasey. But maybe it can work ... I rarely found anything better sounding than a single stereo pair ..
I agree. With attention to careful setup not only should two mics be all that is necessary but will acutally yield best results. Budget lots of time for fine tuning ensemble and mic placement. If you have any HesperionXXI CDs done by Nicolas Bartholomée or Alpha CDs done by Hughes Deschaux you can hear some very fine results of just this sort of ensemble done often with simply a pair of 4006s. The booklets also frequently have photos of sessions that might be helpful in giving clues to starting setup positions. My own preference for this type of group would be to use your MK2s but if the venue is particularly resonant the MK21s could yield good results. I've often found that using risers of 8-12 inches for instruments such as viola da gamba or lute/theorbo can help to add a bit of body to the sound as those instruments can sometimes be tricky to capture faithfully. And the few recordings I have done when I was also a performer convinced me to avoid that as often as possible. I find it really attention dividing although if there's no budget for even an assitant then perhaps it will be unavoidable. Post some clips when you've finished.
My first suggestion was Roland's... I've played and recorded many times (I'm a classical clarinetist) and I have never once been happy with the results. Either I'm not playing well or I'm not recording well (or both).
Anyways, when doing early music (chamber as opposed to orchestral), I have indeed found the best results to be when using multi mic setups where there are mics on each musician and an overall pair. The overall pair is still the most important- however I've never heard a time when I'd be happy with just that.
On my website there is an early music example that I've thought turned out particularly well. In that example, careful attention was paid to the room (first and foremost), but then how it was mic'd. The main pair was an A-B setup of DPA 4006 omnis w/ diffuse field grids. Violins got Beyer 160's, lute a TLM103, Harpsichord MKH40's, cello a Beyer 160, and the voice had another TLM 103 (this was recorded before I had the mic collection that I have now- but it still worked pretty well). I set them up as they would perform and recorded direct to stereo with no EQ or reverb.
They worked as an ensemble quite well, but there were points when a bit of "electronic help" was needed. Particularly when dealing with a voice and all of those quiet instruments. I ended up micing quite close, but the soft characteristics of the mics helped disguise that a bit. The singer's mic was not particularly close to her in this case. I had it positioned probably about 3 feet away and a bit below chest level angled up towards her mouth. Meant that I could keep a present sound without being overly present. The high-frequency rise in this mic helped it cut through the reverb in the room a bit. She was set up directly between the 2 main mics facing out. Normally I'm not a fan of A-B micing when singers are involved, but the spot on her helped keep her centered.
If the room isn't too boomy, I like your idea of a M-S pair on the singers. I've done that with soloists in the past and it can be a great way to integrate a spot mic into a main sound. I keep the side level low so that instead of a "stereo" spot, it is more like a mono spot with space around it.
The only concern with having people on either side of a stereo pair is bleed. Normally for classical recording, I embrace bleed, but I've found that when you're dealing with bleed from the back end of mics that I have more issues with phase/etc... It is just that the off-axis sound isn't going to be most mic's strogest point. Even schoeps will sound decidedly different with off-axis sound like that. Doesn't mean it can't work- just means you need to be very careful about how you aprroach it.
Good luck- I think you're on the right track. Recording multitrack will also help so you can get your final sound when you don't have to concentrate on a performance.
If it is a no budget recording, then there is no possibility whatever of having acceptance in the marketplace. To have success, excellence in playing is reflected in excellence of pick-up. Trying to do both jobs to save money is a joke.
Why not hire someone good to record your record and stop worrying about areas in which your skills are stretched.
Open your pocketbook and consult with the producer/engineer--then trust.
Proposed projects like yours hack me off and I scoff at you and tell you to "just stick to the lute."
What an insult to come in here and ask for advice so that you can bypass giving our
(unknown) colleague in Austria a job.
Another vote for spot mics... You can always decide not to use the "spotted" tracks, but you don't want to come home with a pure stereo recording, and then find out that you would have liked some more lute...
I don't think I would do that MS for the counter, I'd just set them up in some kind of concert-like setup, with a main pair of omnis or the MK21, plus a spot each, as per your personal preference.
Quote:
The standard idea would be to use one main microphone for the whole group and use spot mics for the instruments.
And not for the singer...?
If it weren't so far away, I'd come by with some gear and help out (my Beyer MC 805 is great on lute... )
Hermann, I think the fact that you're trying for a "finished professional job to persuade a label" should be the most important point in determining your set-up.
No label will buy your job unless the playing is absolutely first rate. You should treat this as a concert set-up, and do everything you can to create the best possible music and balance within the group.
That being said, I think the MK21's as a main pair would be great (near co-incident, 120°, about 14" spread)... just far enough out for blend, with the pair of MK2s as distant room mic's for a little "after the fact" reverb control. Remember to re-arrange seating (as the ensemble changes size) to maintain relative mic position. The heavy blankets you mentioned could definitely be used to help control any strange reflections near the playing position.
The suggestion that you should have an assistant is a good one, even if it's just somebody to watch for equipment hiccups and keep a list of "takes." Anything to let you concentrate on the music making.
Good luck, and remember to post samples!
Rich
__________________
•
After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting.
It is not logical, but it is often true. -- Spock
Thanks everybody for your very helpful reflections, proposals and your encouragement. I think I will definately consider some assistance. Of course I will set up everything beforehand, leaving time (and energy) for working on the details. I also will try the idea with the risers as there are some in the hall.
I try to get the main microphone sound as good as possible and set up the spot as "backup" if there will be need in post production.
Plush, I certainly don't take away a job from an Austrian engineer because the project simply would not happen at all if I would not do it myself. Of course one can argue about the value of such a project but budgets in classical and early music productions have been declining massively in the last years.
What an insult to come in here and ask for advice so that you can bypass giving our (unknown) colleague in Austria a job.
Plush, this is a bit of a strange answer... You will observe that Hermann didn't just "come here", he's been on the board for a few years. I believe he also free-lances as a recordist, he's not just a musician trying to save money by making his own recordings with two el-cheapo mics...
There are plenty of cases where I'd also wish people would hire a pro instead of going for cheap DIY solutions, but I don't think there's a fundamental lack of recording competence here. Someone to help would be a good idea, though...
I had the opportunity to practice with a lute student. Playing Dowland's "La mia Barbara"...Only for practicing/learning purposes :-)
microphones:
se4400a (omni- ca. 1 meter appart - 3 meters from lute)
CM3 (open cardioid - ab - 50 cm from lute)
ff400 and davBG1 used...
In all of my early music recordings, and there have been a few, I have had great success with spot mics and a main stereo pair. (ortf pair - use 2 MK4's.) Spend some serious time balancing the ensemble in the space and place the ortf mics accordingly.
Record iso tracks, use a rehearsal to get good levels and correct mic placement. Multitrack and mix after the fact. Pay extremely close attention to the position of each instrument in the stereo sound field, and mimic this with panning.
I like KM84's on lute and viola da gamba. I do not like the idea of the M/S mic on the tenor, I think it is superfluous. If you can physicsally place the Tenor in the center of the ORTF image you will have no need for an M/S pair. Using it may smear your ORTF image. It is important to establish one point of perspective and then stick to it.
Not so, just exasperated.
I had a NY composer at a "world premier" demand to use my main stand for his little two-headed monster, Korg, Edirol whatever. And he was by no means the first person to try it.
Best advice is still don't try to do a left-brain and a right-brain activity simultaneously. It's harder to have fun with either.
WalterT
If it is a no budget recording, then there is no possibility whatever of having acceptance in the marketplace. To have success, excellence in playing is reflected in excellence of pick-up. Trying to do both jobs to save money is a joke.
Why not hire someone good to record your record and stop worrying about areas in which your skills are stretched.
Open your pocketbook and consult with the producer/engineer--then trust.
Proposed projects like yours hack me off and I scoff at you and tell you to "just stick to the lute."
What an insult to come in here and ask for advice so that you can bypass giving our
(unknown) colleague in Austria a job.
These kinds of arrogant, agressive posts serves no other purpose than to make the poster himself look bad. I can't help to wonder where all this negative emotions comes from.
I can't help to wonder where all this negative emotions comes from.
/Peter
Well, I suspect it comes out of frustration from very talented engineers that make are trying to make a living in a world that wants things done cheaply as possible regardless of quality. Also, after accomplishing the task, wants to make money from professional labels without a professional product. Finally, wants help from professionals to do this!
I commend him for wanting to increase his knowledge in the recording arts and knowing where to get it. However, there is a price, even on this board!
My $0.02 - Use as few mics as possible. Mult the recording so you can have it professionally mixed if a label comes up with the $. For smaller ensembles, like Ben mentioned, start with a good pair of omnis or wide cards and spot what needs to be. CYA!
__________________ www.symphonicsound.com
"The secret of life, though, is falling down seven times and get up eight times." Paulo Coelho
In my posting two and a half years ago I took a hard line approach to the OP.
My objection revolved around him trying to do both tasks at once and not using a separate engineer who could dispassionately record the session. He took someone's job.
I also consider the cheapness of the project making it necessary to choose a room totally inappropriate to the repertoire (too reverberant) to be a fatal mistake.
I did make an unclear statement in my original post. Low budget recordings can sound good if performers and room are chosen carefully. Mid line equipment can accurately capture a great performance.
However, if low budget means using just any players in any room, then the project will not come out well.
By the way--if you want to know what kind of a room you should choose to record certain repertoire in, research in which room the piece was premiered or in what rooms the piece was commonly performed.
A lute and a singer performed in a small living room type room.
Horrified posters and those who write politically correct "handle with kid gloves" objections about what I write need to check my signature below============>
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Lute songs recording setup 
so no control room monitors, only headphones to control the setup.
Maybe also room mics for balancing the reverb but I strongly suspect there will be enough of it in the main mics. 
(don't know if this is actually a good English term). This is really a "no budget" project, that has been in my head for quite a while (no wonder, being a lutenist). We are a professional early music group and plan to produce this on our own to offer it to a few labels. So if this will be a professional job will turn out when the whole thing is in the box and can persuade a label.
