Fig 8 for mid side recordings

[leddy]

I know a lot of M/S has been discussed, but I still have a question or two to clear up some conflicting info I have read here.

I recently sold off my Beyer M130's and I would like to get another figure 8 for mid side, with the future possibilty of getting a second for Blumlein.

Here's the thing - I really like using an omni mid. I would be using a single Avenson STO for that purpose. I've read that matching the mid and side mic is important, and I've also read it does not matter - which is more true? I've used the Beyer M130 with an Earthworks mid and was mostly happy with the results, but I have nothing to compare it to.

I was thinking of an AT4050 for the mid mic since I've read that it is pretty flat like the Avensons. Other posts seem to indicate that it is bright. Which would be more true?

Lastly, I am not opposed to spending more money on something like the Sennheiser MKH30, but is it going to be worth 3x's the money for just a side mic?
(Here's where it may also make a big difference if I eventually get a 2nd for Blumlein).

I mostly record my own jazz group. Thanks for any input.

[John Willett]

It is not important to match Mid Side mics like in a stereo pair and meny great recordings have been made withe very different mics for the mid and side.

Having said that, if the two are well matched then the resulting stereo "pair" would be very like the originals in character.

There are only three (that I know of) single diaphragm fig-8 condenser mics:- Sennheiser MKH 30, Neumann AK 20 (which is available in both KM 100 and KM-D series) and the Schoeps.

The Sennheiser MKH 30 is fully symmetrical, both acoustically and electrically (it has an active front plate).

The Neumann is acoustically symmetrical (it has a passive front plate).

The Schoeps is assymetrical in that it does not have a front plate at all.

Both the Sennheiser and Neumann have identical polar-pattrens front and rear. The Schoeps is slightly different at the rear at the higher frequencies.

Other condensers use back-to-back cardioids with the rear cardioid subtracted from the front to give the fig-8 response. These have two diaphragms, slightly seperated.

There are also several excellent ribbon fig-8s - the STC/Coles, for example.

[JEGG]

Hi Leddy-
I've only used a ribbon for a side mic on one occasion-and it was so long ago that I can't draw conclusions from it. Where I'm going here: I think you need a much higher output figure 8 mic, but others would be better equipped to verify that. There are now many figure 8 ribbons that have a purposely different front to back response. Those wouldn't be suitable.

Generally, if you listen to the side mic, it doesn't contribute as much as you think to the overall tonality of your recording. So, a neutral side mic can work with many different mic's. For example, a 414 B/ULS works very well with a bunch of different mic's, including the Neumann KM180's and so on. On a *good* dual diaphragm mic (multi pattern), MS works extremely well, without a huge tonal compromise. I wouldn't try it with an untested budget mic.

I always try hard to disagree with John whenever possible, but I have to say that the MKH30 is a very, very, very good mic! The MKH series has a somewhat identifiable sonic ID (including the new ones), and the MKH30 is perfect for those. It also makes a very good spot mic. I haven't "mixed and matched" the MKH30 with other (non Sennheiser) mic's. If your other mics have a big round mid range, the MKH30 will work very well. It's the only SD figure 8 mic with an extended range, but I'm sure you know all about that.

Generally, there aren't many MS people on this forum. And those that do use MS seem to be somewhat stuck on their preferred center pattern.

I use MS a great deal, with a variety of center patterns, and it is an excellent technique for those who like it...... That's about it. Just try to keep the side 8 in the same tonal family. Of course, you can EQ it separately if needed.

Edit: Actually John didn't recommend the MKH30 over the others, so I'll say that it's a unique and excellent mic. I haven't used the Neumann or Schoeps figure 8.

Edit 2: If you do mostly live recording, Blumlein may not be your friend. In a good acoustic with somewhat controlled conditions it can be holographic. (It can work live with a quiet audience-I've used it for classical in very nice rooms.) Maybe a couple of coincident SD hypercardioids. Also, stereo 180 with hypercardioids can be really good live-it depends on the geometry of the performers and room. SD hypercardioids really vary in their extension.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by JEGG

Edit 2: If you do mostly live recording, Blumlein may not be your friend. In a good acoustic with somewhat controlled conditions it can be holographic. (It can work live with a quiet audience-I've used it for classical in very nice rooms.) Maybe a couple of coincident SD hypercardioids. Also, stereo 180 with hypercardioids can be really good live-it depends on the geometry of the performers and room. SD hypercardioids really vary in their extension.

As a note, Blumlein himself often used two fig-8s as MS rather than crossed in the "standard" Blumlein pattern.

This method has the advantage of being able to "steer" the mics. The two fig-8s don't change shape as you steer them as happens with other mid mic. patterns and, personally, I would rig fig-8s as MS rather than the X patern to get the Blumlein layout.

[David Rick]

Gee Larry, since I took your last figure-eight off your hands, the least I can do as a fellow Gearslut is help you replace it with something more expensive.

The MKH 30 is without a doubt the best figure-eight I've ever used. A pair of them work just fine in Blumlein, although it's a pain to arrange with the standard shock mounts. I really love them spaced wide and aimed sideways for hall pickup. But a MKH 80 or MKH 800 is almost as good, and a lot more versatile. (Also a lot more expensive!) Since you dig M/S, a very cool setup would be one MKH 30 and one MKH 800 Twin, a dual-M/S setup which will give you control over the front/rear ratio and the ability to do single-point surround.

For less money, a 414 works quite well as a side mic. (Sometimes I use it with another 414 for the mid, but more often I use something else: a Schoeps MK4, a DPA 4006, or even my Brauner Valvet Voice. Mine's an old 414EB P-48, complete with battle scars from being used on toms. I haven't tried any of the newer versions).

I've tried the 4050 as a side mic, but I didn't like it at all -- its random-incidence response is very colored-sounding. It might be ok if you're up close to a single player, but I didn't like what it did to the hall sound. Same comments apply to the Rode NT-2A. I really wanted to like these mics because they're cheap and well-made, but they didn't work for me.

I haven't tried Neumann's small-diaphragm figure-eight. Someday I'll probably pick up a MK8 capsule, since I already have Schoeps preamps, but Schoeps' US pricing is currently over the moon.

Cheers,

David L. Rick
Seventh String Recording

[leddy]

Thanks everyone.

That MKH30 seems to be calling my name. I really like the single-diaphragm design. Just seems like the best way to do it. It's hard to justify the expense since I don't make a living recording (though I am a professional musician and can still write off expenses like this). I would eventually like to hold myself out as a professional location recording service, so equiping myself professionally when I can seems appropriate.

I thought about the 414 route. Not being familliar with them, it's a little intimidating with all the different versions and opinions out there...They would be handy because I would not mind having something that can do wide cardioid sometimes.

It's tempting to look at the Schoeps for their modularity, but I can't believe the pricing either. I have been looking at the Neumanns. I'm also happy with my other patterns at the moment: Beyer MC930 cards., Avensons for omnis. I really like those mics. I just need to get a figure 8 or two back in my locker.

The only other thought was something like a Royer SF12. I could use half of it with one of my omnis for MS, or use all of the Royer for MS or Blumlein. That's even more cash, but at least it offers more options. I let go of the M130's because I thought I wanted to go with condensers - but I'm keeping an open mind.

David - hope you enjoy the M130!

[Jim vanBergen]

Personally, I find the MKH30 with an MKH40 to be the finest M-S pair ever invented. While I ADORE the sound of ribbons, the Mid & Side always differ too much in a ribbon/condenser MS recording to me. When I have done this, it provides too much HF content in the center and not enough on the sides, leaving an indistinct (maybe this is the wrong word- I mean darker, or slightly muddy) L/R image for anything that does not have a strong center position.

[Ozpeter]

It's hard to justify the expense since I don't make a living recording

I suspect my Sennheiser MS pair (plus Sennheiser MS preamp) must be 20 years old now, or more. I've used that outfit on every recording I've done in that period, without problems, in the UK, Holland, France, Spain, and Australia (those mics have clocked up some miles!). And apart from reliability and flexibility, the design has proved to be hard to better - I've never given any thought to purchasing something more recent as a main pair (and in my semi-retired state, they'll have to see me to my grave!).

So while of course you have to be able to come up with the capital in the first place, if you divide the cost by 20 years, it's not so much per annum.

[And I'm not so semi-retired that I'm ready to sell mine, sorry! ]

[leddy]

Originally Posted by Jim vanBergen

Personally, I find the MKH30 with an MKH40 to be the finest M-S pair ever invented. While I ADORE the sound of ribbons, the Mid & Side always differ too much in a ribbon/condenser MS recording to me. When I have done this, it provides too much HF content in the center and not enough on the sides, leaving an indistinct (maybe this is the wrong word- I mean darker, or slightly muddy) L/R image for anything that does not have a strong center position.

Thanks for articulating this. I was thinking the same thing - especially listening to something like an Earthworks mid and a ribbon side.

[Martin Kantola]

Don't understand either how mixing a couple of completely different types of microphones wouldn't matter in a M/S configuration? The resulting left and right channels are always both a mix of the two microphones. Of course we can blend microphone types as long as we like the sound, but in this case the resulting polar patterns could get very odd to begin with. Not very smooth, uniform or accurate. Have a feeling this might be a contributing factor to why some people dislike M/S.

Martin

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by Martin Kantola

Of course we can blend microphone types as long as we like the sound, but in this case the resulting polar patterns could get very odd to begin with.

Mixing tonal familes may not be a good idea, but the polar patterns will remain entirely intact.

I don't understand why so many people have bad experiences with MS, either. I do believe them, but I also believe they're making some fundamental mistakes somewhere.

[Baithak]

Originally Posted by leddy

The only other thought was something like a Royer SF12. I could use half of it with one of my omnis for MS, or use all of the Royer for MS or Blumlein. That's even more cash, but at least it offers more options. I let go of the M130's because I thought I wanted to go with condensers - but I'm keeping an open mind.
!

Dear Leddy:

I use the SF12 in MS and Blumlein but please be aware that the lobes on the fig-8 on the Royer are not symmetrical (the back side is brighter) so you won't get a perfect stereo image. You should try it out before you spring for it ...

I have the Schoeps Fig8 and other than a restricted low-frequency response it is a superb capsule. I cannot use it with MK41 hypercardiod because it too has a restricted low frequency response but when used with either MK2 or MK4 the Fig8 just does a great job.

I haven't used either the Senn or Neuman Fig8s so I can't comment on them.

Best,
Baithak

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by Baithak

Dear Leddy:

I use the SF12 in MS and Blumlein but please be aware that the lobes on the fig-8 on the Royer are not symmetrical (the back side is brighter) so you won't get a perfect stereo image. You should try it out before you spring for it ...

Sounds like some problem with your mic. The SF12 should sound same both front and back. Royer does have some other mics that are voiced differently front/back, but not the SF12.

Regardless, the Royer mics are lovely things but I did sell my SF24. My experience is that it made too much demands on the room and positioning to be useable for me (remember, more of a shadow on me than on the mic). I managed to make totally fantastic recordings about once a year, lackluster ones the rest of the time. My fallback setup today generally is ORTF.


// Gunnar

[ghellquist]

Originally Posted by Baithak

I have the Schoeps Fig8 and other than a restricted low-frequency response it is a superb capsule. I cannot use it with MK41 hypercardiod because it too has a restricted low frequency response but when used with either MK2 or MK4 the Fig8 just does a great job.

(Sorry Baithak, not picking on you, but this is of general interest)

To me there is not really a problem with the low-frequency response of the fig 8 mic in MS. Instead, the M mic should give a full mono sound, including all that is needed of low frequencys. The S mic then only adds the stereo information. It is often even an advantage if the really low frequencys stays mono, remember that often loudspeakers comes with a single sub for the low frequencys.

// Gunnar

[David Spearritt]

I have both the MK8/MK4/MK41 and the KM184/KM120 mics. Don't have the Sennheiser's, not a fan of the sound. The Schoeps pairs in MS are superior to the Neumann 184/120 to my ear, but the KM120's on their own in Blumlein are fantastic.

[Baithak]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

(Sorry Baithak, not picking on you, but this is of general interest)
// Gunnar

Dear Gunnar,

I always appreciate your comments. And thanks for the correction on the SF-12. I naturally assumed that the voicing on the 12 was similar to the R122 where the front and back behaviour is very obvious.

Re. the MK8 capsule "clarification" you will notice that I was warning Leddy about combining with the MK41 - because of its low-frequency response - and recommending it with the MK2/4 capsules. So, I agree with you that the lack of LF in the MK8 capsule is an advantage in MS config unless the M happens to be the MK41.

In Blumlein config however two MS8s would be bass restricted :-)

Baithak

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by ghellquist

(Sorry Baithak, not picking on you, but this is of general interest)

To me there is not really a problem with the low-frequency response of the fig 8 mic in MS. Instead, the M mic should give a full mono sound, including all that is needed of low frequencys. The S mic then only adds the stereo information. It is often even an advantage if the really low frequencys stays mono, remember that often loudspeakers comes with a single sub for the low frequencys.

// Gunnar

When recording "big" sounds in a nice room, such as an orchestra or organ, it is extremely helpful to have an extended range side mic. It makes a huge difference!

Going a bit OT and back to Jecklin and his infamous disk, even that is recommended to be used with a shuffler (to have a more stereo presentation of LF material), and LF shuffler kinds of EQ/image "enhancement" are often applied to recordings made with any technique; and this is a feature in many mastering boxes; as well as being mentioned in more than a few books on mastering.

[Corran]

I might have said this before, but I've used an Earthworks QTC-1 and a B&O ribbon in M-S on orchestra and it worked very well. The hard part though is getting enough gain on the ribbon. Since the ribbon is sideways it's doubly important.

If I had a choice I probably would get a condensor for the side mic to eliminate the hassle of the ribbon. But the tone really worked for me.

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by Baithak

I always appreciate your comments. And thanks for the correction on the SF-12. I naturally assumed that the voicing on the 12 was similar to the R122 where the front and back behaviour is very obvious.

The voicing of the SF-12 is closer to the SF-1, not the R121/122 where there is an asymetrical pickup. The SF-1 is a more "traditional" ribbon that they designed to come out with a more acceptable sound for classical and acoustic music pickups.

Going one step further, the SF-12 is based on the old Speiden stereo ribbon mics and the SF-1 grew out of the development of the SF-12.

--Ben

[Martin Kantola]

Originally Posted by JEGG

Mixing tonal familes may not be a good idea, but the polar patterns will remain entirely intact.

Especially at higher frequencies there are usually lots of irregularities in polar patterns, and when mixing or summing these into the resulting ones the outcome could be unexpected. Has anyone measured the matrixed polar response of a typical real-life M/S setup?

The other thing I had in mind with mixed transducers was that if they respond differently, the resulting polar pattern would vary slightly with both frequency and possibly level, but I'm not sure about this. Ribbon fig-8 + condenser omni as an example. Anyone?

Martin

[David Spearritt]

My experiments mixing and matching SDC, LDC, condensers and ribbons in MS, showed that the factor most strongly correlating to a decent sound was always minimising the proximity of the capsules. I think this is one of the reasons the Schoeps MS pair sounds so good, the capsules are so close together.

[leddy]

Just pulled the trigger on the MKH30. I look forward to getting it.

[leddy]

I will be putting the MKH30 to use this weekend. So far in just comparing it to my other mics I have to say it sounds really good. I kind of wish the low end was not boosted. I don't need to hear ruler flat down to 20hz. OTOH, having some extended low end on the side mic might add some depth to mid-side use. The top end seems perfect. I'm so sick of mics that sound bright. This one seems natural.

[rufus13]

Originally Posted by David Rick

For less money, a 414 works quite well as a side mic.

I've tried the 4050 as a side mic, but I didn't like it at all -- its random-incidence response is very colored-sounding. It might be ok if you're up close to a single player, but I didn't like what it did to the hall sound.

There have been a lot of variations of 414 through the years. I've used 414b's, so I'm no expert.

There seems to be at least 3 variations of AT4050's, also. I've managed to only own only the oldest type, that has all through-hole construction: AT4050/CM5.

There are electrolytic cap's in microphone circuits that need the same attention as on an aging mixer. They affect the overall sound.

This is GS, so a person can't go wrong spending plenty for the best European models, as long as they don't borrow the money and expect to make payments!

Cheers.

[leddy]

Just to report back in - I really love the MKH30. I used it with an omni mid (Avenson STO) and got a really nice recording of my jazz group.

The image is so much more spacious than I got using the Beyer M130. Given the MKH30 is so flat, and the Avenson is also - they really match up nicely. If I want a cardioid mid, I can use one of my Beyer MC930's. That will probably sound nice as well.

Thanks to all - I am quite happy.