Best of flying mics

[David.H]

Originally Posted by Larry Elliott

David
What is the “Stereo” cabling that you are using?

Larry Elliott

Probably Starquad. Here in England I use Canford Audio's SQB 4.7 BBC PSF 4/1 light weight cable. I have made up 5 sets so far for main pairs. I also know a lot of people do not agree using it as shown, however does not half make the job easier and lighter to rig.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by David.H

Probably Starquad. Here in England I use Canford Audio's SQB 4.7 BBC PSF 4/1 light weight cable. I have made up 5 sets so far for main pairs. I also know a lot of people do not agree using it as shown, however does not half make the job easier and lighter to rig.

I also use Canford BBC spec. starquad.


But for stereo runs I use Canford's SQJ - this is two separate BBC spec. starquads, individually jacketed, in a single outer sheath.

[David.H]

Originally Posted by John Willett

I also use Canford BBC spec. starquad.


But for stereo runs I use Canford's SQJ - this is two separate BBC spec. starquads, individually jacketed, in a single outer sheath.

Hi John,

Sorry I will not be at the BSRA meeting this weekend. My Canford cable is not individually sleeved after stripping, however after removing the outer plastic cover I then use head shrink tubing over the inner wires. Then to improve durability I then cover this with expandable braided sleeving which is held in place with Hellermann heatshrink tubing.

[d_fu]

While this thread has veered off into cable matters, here's what I've been using for years...

[John Willett]

SQJ-2 looks like this - two individually jacketed BBC spec. starquads inside an outer sheath (they also do 4, 8 and 12 way options - see HERE).

But I always use a short flexible XLR tail from the mic. through the cable clamp on the shockmount to decouple the mic. from the cable, so no "handling" noise is trabnsmitted to the mic.

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by d_fu

While this thread has veered off into cable matters, here's what I've been using for years...

Just got some Sommercable quad wire. The stuff is built like a tank, but yet it is also flexible... So far so good. I'm happy with what I'm getting off of it. It is expensive in this country (close to double the cost of Canare star-quad), but so far it seems to be worth the cost.

--Ben

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by fifthcircle

Just got some Sommercable quad wire.

What's the name of this one? Does it come with individual XLRs?

[fifthcircle]

Nah... Just raw cable. I bought a spool and I keep Neutrik XLRs around...

--Ben

[gareth.h.rees]

Back to microphones...

I'm in a bit of a dilemma about a main pair of mics to buy.

Was going to be the Beyer m160's, but I think now I've hit on some more "classical" work which is going to need a main stereo pair.

That got me thinking mc930's, but Beyer have just put out some omni and hypocardioids...

The mc805's are hypo's... would you recommend the new version over the cardioid mc930?

Cheers Daniel!
Gareth

[trompetfreak]

DAMN DAMN DAMN!
I had the perfect flying ORTF, Ambience ORTF and spot ORTF flying, excellent for this thread, and I FORGOT MY CAM!!!

I'm so sorry.


I had on one arm a 40CM bar with two C451's for public, 20 cm below that, I had the ORTF (km140) above the band, center stage. Then above the horns/woodwinds, I had an ORTF of KM184's, hanging in a grid made of 2 boom arms, an extension, a G-clamb and some misc crap.

Have fun imagining

[summer_room]

Originally Posted by trompetfreak

DAMN DAMN DAMN!
I had the perfect flying ORTF, Ambience ORTF and spot ORTF flying, excellent for this thread, and I FORGOT MY CAM!!!

Please hang up the rig again at home, and take some pics - we want to see it

- Jon

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by summer_room

Please hang up the rig again at home, and take some pics - we want to see it

Yes, good idea...

Originally Posted by gareth.h.rees

That got me thinking mc930's, but Beyer have just put out some omni and hypocardioids...
The mc805's are hypo's... would you recommend the new version over the cardioid mc930?

To be pedantic, a hypocardioid would be a sub or wide cardioid. The 805 and the new 950 are hypercardioids.
Wouldn't use these as a main stereo pair only. The 930 gets good reviews here (and again I only have the predecessor, 803, which is great), and may be more flexible than just a pair of omnis. Depends on what else you've already got, though.

[Audiop]

Not pedantic at all since the difference between a hypocardioid and hypercardioid is almos as big as the difference between an omni and fig.8.

The pick up from behind (180 degrees) has opposite polarities in the two types and the nulls that you see on the hypercardioid are not to be found on the hypocardioid.




/Peter

[gareth.h.rees]

Woops, my bad!

The only other (suitable) mics I have are Naiant omnis... 930's it is then!

Cheers!
Gareth

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by d_fu

The 805 and the new 950 are hypercardioids.

Actually they are super-cardioids.

It might be useful to quote this little info-sheet I made up a few years ago:-

During a recent ibs (Institute of Broadcast Sound) meeting a discussion ensued regarding the difference between super-cardioid and hyper-cardioid microphones, as many people seem to use the two terms as the same thing.

There are, however, important differences between the different types of cottage-loaf microphone patterns, which is why Sennheiser make super-cardioid microphones and not hyper-cardioid.

The pressure-gradient microphone with the best directivity of 4 is dubbed the hyper-cardioid. Its disadvantage, however, is the lack of rejection for sound coming directly from the rear (180º). The rejection here is only 6dB. Trying to optimise the directional characteristics, Sennheiser created a super-cardioid microphone with equal rejection at 90º and 180º. This improves the rear rejection figure without sacrificing the side rejection figure too much, and still retains a high directional coefficient of 3.86.

The theoretical figures for the various cottage-loaf microphones are:-

Hyper-Cardioid
The hyper-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 109.5º.
It is optimised for the maximum directivity coefficient of 4.0.
Rejection at 90º is -12dB
Rejection at 180º is -6dB

Super-Cardioid
The super-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 125.3º.
It is optimised for the maximum front to rear index and has a directivity coefficient of 3.73.
Rejection at 90º is -8.7dB
Rejection at 180º is -11.6dB

Sennheiser Super-Cardioid
The Sennheiser super-cardioid microphone has it’s angle of maximum rejection at 120º.
It is optimised for equal attenuation at 90º and 180º, it has a directivity coefficient of 3.86.
Rejection at 90º is -9.5dB
Rejection at 180º is also -9.5dB
The attenuation at 90º is equal to the attenuation at 180º (the 180º signal being out-of-phase of course), this means that the attention is concentrated on the sound coming to the front of the microphone. The disadvantage of the hyper-cardioid is that sounds from the rear can be too high due to the lack of rear attenuation, and the disadvantage of the standard super-cardioid is that its side rejection is not enough.

Please note that these are the theoretical figures which may differ slightly in practice

I hope this helps.

[d_fu]

Beyer indeed refers to it as supercardioid, but to be honest, I haven't really heard that distinction being made - this website does, too, though, and offers diagrams. It's a bit strange, though, considering that super and hyper are essentially the same thing, except that one is Latin and the other Greek. There is no linguistic reason to assume that hyper is more than super, while hypo and hyper are in fact opposites.

[GES]

:-)
this is the first experience I had with flying mics and omni figure in a church. It was fun, but took a lot of time, specially make all the instalation and trust that the nylon string will handle the weight of all the thing, I used two different handle points just in case one would be broken (two ways of suspending everything)...at the end, everything resisted very well. ... the result is a clean view of the stage, and in this case (me the player) a clean view of the nice church...I have still to determine how is the sound quality...

Next time I will try it with a bigger stereo bar, and try to have a wider image.
Bye!

[GES]

(i had to put mp3....wav was huge...)

little raw sample of this setup.
Tarrega's Prelude (endecha) -excerpt-
very soft and pp

technical data:

mics: 2x se electronics 4400a omni
self made cables-13 meters.
dav BG1 pres.
rme FF400
88.2 / 24 b

troubles: once I had the system, make changes to the microphone placement was out of the question (But you can allways move the chair!). It was hard for me to get along with the reverberant church. And of course, the live audience's noises.
Most of the time, I took planning the setup, then make it is faster...but had to be very well planned and no weak points in it (in the handles and knots!)

What I liked most of all:
The clean view of this technique

[d_fu]

Nice overall sound. Maybe cardioid would have helped control the reverb a bit. How does it sound in the louder passages?

[GES]

I think also would have been better cardioid... next time ;-)
..i will post an example later of a louder passage...
Thanks for your comment :-)

[GES]

Originally Posted by d_fu

Nice overall sound. Maybe cardioid would have helped control the reverb a bit. How does it sound in the louder passages?

Here is a small louder passage: the first movement of the Antonio Jose's sonata for guitar-excerpt-

[Audiop]

One arrangement I've used when flying mic's:



/Peter

[tourtelot]

Do any of you hang your rigs from the cable itself? That is how I have been hanging arays for a very long time. Of course this means having somewhere to hang them from but FOH lighting positions in the ceiling seem to be pretty regular in the places that I work. If I hang off the cable, I just use two pieces of nylon fishline as breasting/stablizing picks. I use a Schoeps double M-S some times and sometimes a Decca tree, and both hang from the mic cables. Never had a problem.

D.

Sorry, no snaps.

[David.H]

I often get a situation where I'm obliged to fly my microphones in building like a church, slinging from the pillers. I have a recording next weekend of a symphony orchestra and as a stand is out of the question I thought my current idea for securing the nylon cords to the pillers might be of interest. I purchased four tie downs from a hardware store these have a rachet fitting that allows a very tight secure nylon band to go round the piller. After initial tightening the band can be racheted up to full tightness. A quick release mechanism releases the rachet at the end of the gig.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by David.H

I often get a situation where I'm obliged to fly my microphones in building like a church, slinging from the pillers. I have a recording next weekend of a symphony orchestra and as a stand is out of the question I thought my current idea for securing the nylon cords to the pillers might be of interest. I purchased four tie downs from a hardware store these have a rachet fitting that allows a very tight secure nylon band to go round the piller. After initial tightening the band can be racheted up to full tightness. A quick release mechanism releases the rachet at the end of the gig.

Sounds interesting - pictures?

Please.

[David.H]

Here is a picture of one my tie downs; I have purchased four for four pillars for slinging a main pair. My client does not want a stand put up. In some situations there may be no central gangway, and also the building may not allow a stand. The nylon lines will pass though steel clips shown above which will be on the nylon bands. Tying off will be at floor level and NOT up the pillar. I might be able to get a photo of the suspension in use on Saturday. The Tie Downs are available from Wilkinson Stores (Wilco) for £3.00 per unit, so they are cheap enough.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by David.H

Here is pix of tie down, I might get a photo of it in use on Satuday.

Thanks David - interesting, I think I may get some.

[NorseHorse]

I've used tie-downs like that for various applications. It should hold your tie-line fine, even wrapped around a pillar. That's how arborists and lumberjacks climb trees, and they're much heavier than a microphone.

[audibell]

There are some ingenious and very useful tips here but I noticed that most of the examples are from Europe. The situation here is so encumbered with insurance, fire marshall and liability concerns that few temporary cable rigs can be deployed. If you can get permission/access to any lighting trusses, well and good but Union halls want their guys doing the rigging, which they'll do for a fee and don't expect them to adjust anything later. As for drilling holes in concrete or timber, that's a six-month committee project for a permanent rig, but although it is possible, you'll probably just end up with a couple choir mics positioned in front of the altar for church concerts and they won't call you back to record (sad but seen after Katrina renovations). Open air gigs here seem to be more flexible about Heath-Robinson contraptions so this thread is worthy of a stickie.
rgds
WalterT

[d_fu]

Here's an arrangement seen at a brodacast hall of a german radio station yesterday. For a bit of extra gear porn, I've added a picture of the studio, with a Stagetec Aurus desk and ADAM speakers.