Some Choral Samples

[mrsteaks]

Hi, fellow Slutz! As I'm relatively new to this, I'd like to get some of your opinions on a slice of my work. Actually, I've been wanting to do this for some time. Here are two choral clips, different groups, done in totally different acoustics, with different chains. They've been coded as MP3's, using Wavelab 5 on the first piece, and Adobe 1.5 on the second. I had specific reasons for using what I did on recording each piece, and I'll be happy to get into that if a discussion ensues.

First piece, called "Harlem Songs" - done in a nice space, using a single Royer SF-12 into an ADL 600 (Plush is right), the recorder was an MLink at 88.2/24.

Second piece, called "Epitaph for Moonlight" - done in a bad space, young choir, used a pair of Schoeps MK2S into the ADL, HD24XR at 88.2/24.

Both recordings are bone dry, no processing at all.

Your thoughts?

Thanks in advance!

[pianoman]

Thanks for the samples.

To my relatively untrained ears, the SF-12 recording sounds more present than the Scheops MK2S -- this despite my bias towards R.Murray Schaefer's "Epitaph for Moonlight", of which I have fond memories from nearly 20 years ago .

Were the mics positioned approximately the same distance? I can sense the imaging from the SF-12 better than the MK2S, although maybe it's unfair to conclude this from an mp3.

[mrsteaks]

Originally Posted by pianoman

Thanks for the samples.

Were the mics positioned approximately the same distance? I can sense the imaging from the SF-12 better than the MK2S, although maybe it's unfair to conclude this from an mp3.

You're welcome!

"Epitaph" is a nice piece, isn't it? Interesting the way it is written!

The room "Epitaph" was recorded in was 1/5 the size of the other. I couldn't use the SF-12 in there because the acoustic was so dry. I settled on the MK2S, because one of the pieces in the performance was a processional. The mics were A B pair at 60cm, 9 feet high (about four feet below the LOW ceiling) and twelve feet in front of the choir. It took a great deal of moving around before I settled on the distance. Reverberant field? What reverberant field?

The SF-12 was positioned directly behind the conductor, about ten feet in front of the choir, and ten feet high. It was angled downwards towards the middle row of the risers. The piano was just to right of the conductor, lid was on a short stick, actually the short stick was a 4x4 block! The room was very live, and problematic - but decent.

[mrsteaks]

I was hoping to hear a little more feedback on this. Yes, these are mediocre recordings, and I don't have any pictures. But - any advice towards improvement, downright pans (or even a kudo) would be welcome!

[RichS]

In general, descent recordings.

But... I like choir voices a little more "in my face" rather than too blended with the room. It allows the full range of vocal color that a choir is capable of, to be heard instead of muddied by a bad room. (That sometimes can be a problem depending upon the performance level of the group.) Perhaps mic the choir a little closer and add a pair of room mics to give more control of the acoustic. You can add reverb to the room mics and blend as desired. The piano needs to be close mic'd -- not to make it any louder, but mixed-in just enough to place it with the choir instead of sounding somewhat "out in the room."

Go to the iTunes store, do a search and check out this track...

Brahms: Ein deutsches Requiem (A German Requiem), Op. 45
Cambridge King's College Choir & Stephen Cleobury

Track 4: Wie Lieblich Sind Deine Wohnungen (Mässig Bewegt)

You'll hear what I mean about a little more "presence" in the voices and piano placement, even in a large room.

[butterfly]

Tend to agree with richs on this haven't checked the second piece. The first is a Gershwin piece right? Recording is quite muddy but also since it is obviously an amateur choir there a certain lack of focus to the sound which they make, so close miking might just reveal futher lack of blending. tonal finesse etc.

[mrsteaks]

Originally Posted by butterfly

Tend to agree with richs on this haven't checked the second piece. The first is a Gershwin piece right? Recording is quite muddy but also since it is obviously an amateur choir there a certain lack of focus to the sound which they make, so close miking might just reveal futher lack of blending. tonal finesse etc.

Yes, this is indeed an amatuer choir! The first piece is from Harlem Songs, by Gwyneth Walker. Yes, it is muddy, but, you hit on what the music director wanted in the recording - not a lot of focus, because of the level of expertise of the choir. As he put it, "I want blend". The piano DOES need to be close miced, no doubt. I screwed up there. To do it over again, I'd use the SF-12 as a room mic, where it was placed, and put some mics up in front of the choir (as Rich suggested) to try to get some color, along with spots on the piano. I do worry, though, as Rich at Sonare has said, about getting vowel "crunch", and with this choir, it can be devastating!

I'm a live sound guy who transitioned to recording a few years back. Old habits are hard to break, and I've not had a mentor. Improving gear only improves the recordings to a point. If one doesn't understand how to use the gear, well you're stuck in a rut. That would be me!

Thanks for the input, guys! I'm going to run with it.

Still looking for more comments and suggestions. Like, how to fix what is already recorded?