MS recording with 2 track?

[d_fu]

Originally Posted by springer

Is that it?

Yup...
If you have Samplitude, you don't need to copy the S track. You can just use the Object Editor to phase-flip one side of it..

[ghellquist]

Yep, you got it right on.

Or download the free VST plugin MSED from Voxengo. No need to copy tracks or invert things. Remember to set it to decode.

The R122 is probably not the first choice among S mics as the front and back have different characteristics. Good for testing though.

Two errors that can happen when decoding MS (been there, done that).
- the S mic turned 180 degrees wrong, Left and Right will be swapped after decode-- solution, invert phase of S before decode
- the M and S has swapped channels , right channel after decode will be inverted phase (odd, sounds quite OK in headphones, crap on speakers) -- solution, either swap channels before decode or invert right channel after decode.

Have fun

Gunnar

[springer]

Many thanks for the quick responses - ok what would your optimal MS set be?
Beyer M160 and M130? Senn. mkh30+40? How about AKG 414?


Also for what application have you found MS to be the best stereo config?

[hughesmr]

You'll find lots of praise for the Beyer MS set up you mention. In the SDC arena, it's hard to beat Schoeps MK4+MK8.

[Roland]

Originally Posted by hughesmr

You'll find lots of praise for the Beyer MS set up you mention. In the SDC arena, it's hard to beat Schoeps MK4+MK8.

The only porblem with the Schoeps set-up is that the MK8, excellent as it is, has a severely curtailed low frequency response rolling off from approximately 200hz at about 3db an octave. The Sennheiser MKH30 is probably as good a fig 8 microphone as any out there.

Regards


Roland

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by Roland

The only porblem with the Schoeps set-up is that the MK8, excellent as it is, has a severely curtailed low frequency response rolling off from approximately 200hz at about 3db an octave. The Sennheiser MKH30 is probably as good a fig 8 microphone as any out there.

In reality I do not find this to be a problem with an S mic in a MS setup. The reason is that low frequencys are not localized by the ears anyway. This is the reason why we can use only one sub speaker.

You might also see that the MK8 is used in real life by people doing MS recordings. The MK120 from Neumann has a very similar frequency response, that mic is used as well.

I have not run the MK8, but I do run an MKH30 and quite often I roll-off the lowest frequencys of the S mic to get a more stable stereo image.

Finally, let me ask a question to you Roland. As English is not my first language, please bear with me a bit and do not become annoyed. And as this is not the first time you raise this exact point: how much personal experience do you have of the MK8 in real world application as MS mic?

Gunnar

[Roland]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

In reality I do not find this to be a problem with an S mic in a MS setup. The reason is that low frequencys are not localized by the ears anyway. This is the reason why we can use only one sub speaker.

You might also see that the MK8 is used in real life by people doing MS recordings. The MK120 from Neumann has a very similar frequency response, that mic is used as well.

I have not run the MK8, but I do run an MKH30 and quite often I roll-off the lowest frequencys of the S mic to get a more stable stereo image.

Finally, let me ask a question to you Roland. As English is not my first language, please bear with me a bit and do not become annoyed. And as this is not the first time you raise this exact point: how much personal experience do you have of the MK8 in real world application as MS mic?

Gunnar

A lot!


Regards


Roland

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by springer

Many thanks for the quick responses - ok what would your optimal MS set be?
Beyer M160 and M130? Senn. mkh30+40? How about AKG 414?
Also for what application have you found MS to be the best stereo config?

Some thoughts, rather random. I record only classical music really so this applies only to that area.

The only quality MS setup I have is MKH30 + MKH40. I find a lot of good things about that setup, but cannot really tell if it is optimal. I tend to like the results.

My first choice is generally spaced pair of omni mics. But that is not always supported by the room.

I tend to use either ORTF or MS if the room does not support omnis. With ORTF I have to stay a little way away from the source. If the appearent angle as seen from the mics to the outer members of the orchestra goes above 90 degrees (about, not exakt), the stereo positioning can get a bit funny. With MS I can go closer, even inside the group. Changing the M mic to an omni is even better in that respect.

Another thing with MS with a cardioid M mic is that the center musician is a bit more featured and the side a bit attenuated compared to ORTF. It is a slight difference but sometimes it is what is needed.

Lately I got a stereo Rycote windshield and furry cover for the MKH30+MKH40. This, somewhat clumsy, setup allows me to record outdoors in windy conditions.

And yes, ORTF can sound funny in mono while MS gives you only the M mic in mono. Not that mono is very important today.

Gunnar

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by Roland

A lot!
Regards
Roland

Well, then you should have quite a bit of experience to share. Can you elaborate then what you like and not like of the results with the MK8 as side mic. What kind of music and rooms did it work well on, and what not as well.

I am tempted to get a MK8 so real world experience would be a great help. Do you still use the MK8 or have you gone to other mics?

Gunnar

[Roland]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

Well, then you should have quite a bit of experience to share. Can you elaborate then what you like and not like of the results with the MK8 as side mic. What kind of music and rooms did it work well on, and what not as well.

I am tempted to get a MK8 so real world experience would be a great help. Do you still use the MK8 or have you gone to other mics?

Gunnar

My experiences are that the MK4/Mk8 combo is a little "light" in the bass. Schoeps mic's are great, but not my favourite, although I have used them on many occasions. Attached is a mp3 recorded with a Mk4/mk8 combo.

Regards


Roland

[ghellquist]

Hi Roland.

Great recording! Quite nice orchestra and well captured.

Now, back to the mk8. And you have to help me here if am totally off. But my impression is that any ligtness we hear is due to the M mic. I tend to think of it like the M mic gives the energy, the S mic places it in the stereo field. It works that way for me when cutting bass from the S mic anyway. The conclusion I have is that the bass fall-off for the mk8 is not any issue in a MS setup.

Gunnar

[Matti]

I tend to think Schoeps curves are measured
in a honest way as we know directional mics
are prone to proximity effect anyway.

matti

[Roland]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

Hi Roland.

Great recording! Quite nice orchestra and well captured.

Now, back to the mk8. And you have to help me here if am totally off. But my impression is that any ligtness we hear is due to the M mic. I tend to think of it like the M mic gives the energy, the S mic places it in the stereo field. It works that way for me when cutting bass from the S mic anyway. The conclusion I have is that the bass fall-off for the mk8 is not any issue in a MS setup.

Gunnar

I have to point out that some corrective eq was applied to the bass end. Here is another sample this time recorded with Sennheisers.

The orchestra comprises of a lot of players, many of whom play in the London film orchestras a la Harry Potter, Lord of the rings etc.

Regards


Roland

[Roland]

The server wouldn't let me upload the Sennheiser file, so I'll try again later.

Regards


Roland

[Scott 1/2 Normal]

May I recomend "The New Stereo Sound Handbook" (I think that's what it's called - don't have my copy nearby) by Ron Streicher. Captivating read. Everything you ever wanted to know about direct to stereo recording but were too afraid to ask!

You should also play with Prof. Blumlhein's other technique. The one which bares his name and which encodes naturally into Dolby Stereo and Pro Logic.

Have fun - on both tracks.

[Roland]

Maybe this time!

Roland

[DaveD]

Roland, are both the Schoeps and the Senn files the MS pair only? They both sound lovely... but I agree that the Senn example has a bit more fullness to it. Just a bit.

Cheers.

[Roland]

Originally Posted by DaveD

Roland, are both the Schoeps and the Senn files the MS pair only? They both sound lovely... but I agree that the Senn example has a bit more fullness to it. Just a bit.

Cheers.

There's the smallest amount of spots on the Rachmaninoff, Positioning of the mains are critical, I will try and find a recording sample with just the Schoeps MS.

Regards


Roland

[krs]

Hey Roland,

What seating arrangement do these orchestras use? I've listened to your examples, in the Eroica the basses sound as if they are sitting left, which would be (in my books anyway) unusual. Also cellos sound centered and violins split across the front?

I've never recorded with the M/S, but I have to say I find the stereo picture unusual, esp. in the Paganini. (In the Eroica I had an easier time of placing the sections, only that the players weren't where I expected them to be!)

I'd be interested to hear uncompressed versions of these.

Nice recordings! thumbsup

[Roland]

Originally Posted by krs

Hey Roland,

What seating arrangement do these orchestras use? I've listened to your examples, in the Eroica the basses sound as if they are sitting left, which would be (in my books anyway) unusual. Also cellos sound centered and violins split across the front?

I've never recorded with the M/S, but I have to say I find the stereo picture unusual, esp. in the Paganini. (In the Eroica I had an easier time of placing the sections, only that the players weren't where I expected them to be!)

I'd be interested to hear uncompressed versions of these.

Nice recordings! thumbsup

Nothing wrong with your hearing, the conductor prefers the "classical" layout with violins left and right cello's centred basses indeed left. I'll post a few more samples when I get time.

Regards


Roland

[phil.]

Originally Posted by Roland

Positioning of the mains are critical.....

Roland

Roland,

thanks for posting those great recordings, very well done! thumbsup
Would you mind commenting a little more on where you positioned your Sennheiser MS pair for this recording and what are your experiences in positioning MS pairs in general?

Thanks a lot.

Best,

Phil

[krs]

Originally Posted by Roland

Nothing wrong with your hearing, the conductor prefers the "classical" layout with violins left and right cello's centred basses indeed left. I'll post a few more samples when I get time.

Man that is a JACKED UP layout... I have never seen that...

[Roland]

Originally Posted by krs

Man that is a JACKED UP layout... I have never seen that...

It's more common than you think. The Vienna Philharmonic often adopts a similar layout, Possibly due to the stage size of the Musikverein, in fact it was a common layout during the 1700-1800's so I believe. There is a period instrument recording of Symphonie Fantastique where they used a similar layout as this was supposedly how it was originally performed. It's worth doing a search on the web as several orchestras have experimented with it even in recent times (I believe the Moscow Philharmonic sit this way regularly, (I have a friend who guest conducts them I will ask him when I next speak to him), it's an ongoing debate, often the antiphony effect is cited as justification, my own personal view is that sometimes it can work, but I often prefer the more modern approach.

Here is another sample with the Schoeps MS exclusively.

Regards


Roland

[Roland]

Originally Posted by phil.

Roland,

thanks for posting those great recordings, very well done! thumbsup
Would you mind commenting a little more on where you positioned your Sennheiser MS pair for this recording and what are your experiences in positioning MS pairs in general?

Thanks a lot.

Best,

Phil

My personal view is that I have heard great recordings made with ORTF, NOS, Decca Tree's, AB pairs, MS, Binaural, Blumlhein techniques, so I don't have too many set idea's about what works "best". As for positioning I start much the same as others here, i.e. for an orchestra, about 10ft off the ground and about 1 metre back, but this can vary a lot, often the technique I use and the position is determined by a combintion of the ensemble/artist, room, work to be recorded and something that gets rarely mentioned, but is often a major factor, the practicalities of the situation. Often time factors also play a part on sessions. I see a lot of people debating this against that, but when you are recording an orchestra because of the imenses costs involved there is little or no time for experimentation. I would also say that I am no purist, although I have done recordings that would fit that description I am happy to put up as many spots as a job needs.

Here are a couple of other samples the Philharmonia one is an AB pair the march is another MS with some spots.

Regards


Roland

[krs]

Not meaning to hijack that thread but I dislike that seating, maybe because I'm not used to it - but also, you have your outer string voices all on the left side. With the 2nd violins with their backs facing the audience further imbalances the picture.

Just my 2 cents

What was the seating for the Rachmaninoff? (I'll have chance to listen to the others later)

[Roland]

Originally Posted by krs

Not meaning to hijack that thread but I dislike that seating, maybe because I'm not used to it - but also, you have your outer string voices all on the left side. With the 2nd violins with their backs facing the audience further imbalances the picture.

Just my 2 cents

What was the seating for the Rachmaninoff? (I'll have chance to listen to the others later)

I understand what you are saying, and as I pointed out above I tend to agree, however this layout is not all that rare and as horrific as the idea may sound in reality the balance difference is not as huge as you would expect and generally it is compensated for by the players and conductor. For me, more of an issue is unison playing where first and seconds are playing the same rythmn. Being that more often than not they are used to siting together there is a lot to get used too that may not help ensemble. Interestingly I've just seen a couple of pictures of the Leningrad/St Petersburg Philharmonic and they too adopt this seating. The Rachmaninoff is not so easy to hear the seating position because most of the excerpt is ensemble playing, however it is similar too the Beethoven.

Ultimately I'm the hired hand they sit where they sit and I do my best to convey that.

Regards


Roland

[krs]

Originally Posted by Roland

Ultimately I'm the hired hand they sit where they sit and I do my best to convey that.

Of course!! Didn't mean to suggest otherwise, all I was trying to say I find that Beethoven quite weird sounding with that seating.

I'm impressed with the imaging, do you have full range monitors on location to check that or can you manage your placement with headphones?

[Roland]

Originally Posted by krs

I'm impressed with the imaging, do you have full range monitors on location to check that or can you manage your placement with headphones?

Some and some. I own a Pyramix system these days so final adjustments can be made back at base, however often I find myself going with what I had on the session. Some of those samples are, however, recorded direct too Dat The Tchaik 5 sample, this was monitored with headphones as space was very limited.

Regards


Roland