loud *ss big band micing help, please?

[Thebassist]

Howdy y'all.
As always, thanks for your time and wisdom. I thought I'd tackled em all, from orchestras to gospel choirs, but this is a new one for me and by golly, I just can't figure out the best way to do it, and don't want to f this up.

Loud as hell 13 piece big band to track. The room has a sound man, and I can split pre-console to DAW. Rhythm section is loud as hell. Saxes are on the floor, brass and rhythm on stage.

Here's what I got:

16 inputs

blue kiwi pair (would honestly rather leave these at home but just maybe...)
peluso ribbon pair
older 414 pair
earthworks omni pair
shure ksm 32 pair
km 184 pair
mxl silicone valve pair (surprisingly good on tenor but questionable on flute)
pile of dynamics- 4x57, 2x421, 2xbeta 52's, SM7
adl stereo tube di
avalon u5


Here's what they got:

e bass
e guitar
synth (stereo mix)
drums
3 tpt
2 tbn
4 saxes w doubles (flute for alto, bass clarinet for bari)


I'm leaning towards:

e bass-Avalon
e guitar-57
synth (stereo mix)-ADL
drums-earthworks spaced pair, K/S 52/57
3 tpt-Peluso solo
2 tbn-Peluso solo
4 saxes w doubles-32's and 414's depending on doubles.
+ neumann 184 main stereo pair


Better options from guys with fusion big band insanity experience? Think Rush meets Kenton...

I promise to post mp3's when it's done.

Thanks!
J

[Corran]

I got a ridiculously good big band recording once when I was recording a choir right afterwards.

I used two ribbons in Blumlein and two flanking LDCs in cardioid (C3000Bs). Sounded big and full and was great!

However the rhythm section was a tad bit distant, other than the drums.

So with your mics I'd say:

Peluso's in Blumlein
414s flanking in card
1 Earthworks omni on piano, one on drumset (So you can pan them accordingly, unless they want a stereo image for them)
Probably the 32s for the bass/guitar (I personally always use a dual ribbon Oktava ML-52 for bass and a B&O ribbon for the guitar, but you don't have more ribbons so...)
Synth - DI'd

Just my opinion, I'm sure they'll be others thumbsup

[pkautzsch]

Did a big band w/ loudish drummer a few times, and it turned out the best way to control these drums was to use fig-8 and hyper mics all around.
So the saxes got Beyer 260 ribbons and MD441s (tenors), the bari sax sitting closest to the drums got a TLM 170 in fig-8, with the null towards drums. Bass 'bone got another 170, also fig-8, and I'd have liked to use a pair of ribbons for trumpets too if I had had one. The way it was, they got Schoeps cardioids.
For flute doublings I used hyper SDCs, but I'd rather have used those small clip-on mics especially made for flute. The hypers came out as drum room mics...
All these mics complemented a nice main pair of MK21s.

So, with your mic choice, I'd use the 414s and any other fig-8 you might have for the things you need most clean. These usually are the low registers. Plus you need to be close, so give each instrument a mic. If you're that close, I think dynamics should do well enough as spot mics for brass.

[Corran]

I really disagree that you have to mic each instrument, especially if it is such a loud band.

[pkautzsch]

Originally Posted by Corran

I really disagree that you have to mic each instrument, especially if it is such a loud band.

If the whole band is balanced in itself, you don't need to close-mic, I agree.
But when the rhythm section, for example, is way louder than the horns section, there will be a need to either lower the rhythm section level or raise the horns level. And to raise the horns level, you don't want too much bleed in the horns mics. That means you need to either use mics with the pattern best suited to not pick up much rhythm section, or to be close to the instruments.
Usually it will be a mixage of both, so: very directional mics and small distances. And that means, you need lots of mics. Same goes for musical directors wanting to be able to control every single player in the mixing stage.

Again: if the band is balanced in itself, a nice main pair plus very few spots can work fine, no doubt. I do prefer that way too, not only because it means a smaller number of heavy things to lug around.

[JohnReelsound]

For me it always depends on the room. If it's good then definitely try to get a good stereo pair to work as the main focus. Then listen to see what's missing and try and help them. Try not to mic too close though. With big jazz bands I hardly ever multi mic the drums but just use a nice small diaphragm condenser pointing at the kit about 2feet away. It's always hard at a live performance but if you are making a recording don't be scared to ask people to move around a bit to help the balance. Use the back wall to help with the bottom end if you can but as I said it is down to the room and a bit of self control from the band.

[Corran]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

If the whole band is balanced in itself, you don't need to close-mic, I agree.
But when the rhythm section, for example, is way louder than the horns section, there will be a need to either lower the rhythm section level or raise the horns level. And to raise the horns level, you don't want too much bleed in the horns mics. That means you need to either use mics with the pattern best suited to not pick up much rhythm section, or to be close to the instruments.
Usually it will be a mixage of both, so: very directional mics and small distances. And that means, you need lots of mics. Same goes for musical directors wanting to be able to control every single player in the mixing stage.

Again: if the band is balanced in itself, a nice main pair plus very few spots can work fine, no doubt. I do prefer that way too, not only because it means a smaller number of heavy things to lug around.

Well yeah, I just assume that they will balance relatively well...hopefully the case.

On another note, next time I do a big band recording I'm planning on using a main pair, and then a pair on the saxes and a pair on the brass, and then single-miking each rhythm section instrument. I think that will give enough control on the balance.

[Thebassist]

OK-

The room is not the best, so a main stereo pair isn't going to cut it. Also, the drummer is rock drummer loud, as is the bass and guitar. I normally wouldn't close ic like a rock gig, but for all intents and purposes, this is a rock gig with a bunch of horns.

Oh yeah. Set up time and sound check are minimal, so I pretty much have to put the mics up where I think they should go (better more than not enough later,) and hope for the best.

More ideas?
J

[pkautzsch]

Originally Posted by Corran

Well yeah, I just assume that they will balance relatively well...hopefully the case.

...and I was just assuming they won't...

On another note, next time I do a big band recording I'm planning on using a main pair, and then a pair on the saxes and a pair on the brass, and then single-miking each rhythm section instrument. I think that will give enough control on the balance.

I tried an MS pair KM184/CMT56 about 2 ft in front of and 4 ft above the saxes, pointing to the 'bones. Sounded great for me. Leader wanted more control over the 'pets, so we ended up using just the close mics we had put up - and room pair for oomph and fullness.
- I'm getting him towards a less-mic approach now, as we did a lo-budget DVD shoot with just an ORTF pair and soloist mics. Think he's finding out that this sounds better...

Originally Posted by Thebassist

OK-
The room is not the best, so a main stereo pair isn't going to cut it. Also, the drummer is rock drummer loud, as is the bass and guitar. I normally wouldn't close ic like a rock gig, but for all intents and purposes, this is a rock gig with a bunch of horns.
Oh yeah. Set up time and sound check are minimal, so I pretty much have to put the mics up where I think they should go (better more than not enough later,) and hope for the best.

So, have enough people to set up like 16 mics quickly and reliably.