Metric Halo’s Gear Used on Blumlein Records, with New XYtri Surround Mic Technique

[Alex Specht]

AES eNews --- Metric Halo’s Gear Used on Blumlein Records, with New XYtri Surround Mic Technique

Has anyone experimented/produced with similar 5.1 or 7.1 mic techniques?
Seems interesting, as many concerts are now being sold on DVD which provides the opportunity for multi-channel (Dolby/DTS).

[Teddy Ray]

Music---no place for surround. Cannot stand it.

[matyas]

Originally Posted by Teddy Ray

Music---no place for surround. Cannot stand it.

You know, Teddy, I usually enjoy you posts, and I agree with you on an awful lot of things, but I have to disagree on this one. Have you heard Penta-Tone's discs, for example? There is definitely a lot of gimmicky and fake-sounding surround out there (and a lot of truly phony surround, created via reverb), but a well-produced surround disc can be a revelation. Think of how much classical music - from Gabrieli and Monteverdi to Mahler and Ives - uses space as an integral element. I do believe that a well-produced 2-channel recording can convey a realistic sense of space, but a good surround recording can go further, I think. There's certainly nothing wrong with stereo, but to say that there's no place for surround in music, is methinks, a little unfair.

[Ozpeter]

Perhaps the problem for surround classical recordings is that there's little agreement about what the surround channels should be providing. I believe at one point some releases were doing daft stuff like giving you a seat in the middle of the orchestra. Giving you an accurate reproduction of the original sound slapping back from the rear of the hall would seem more worthwhile, provided that the hall was good for that purpose. And of course there's debate over the placement of speakers, and how the recording should correlate to the anticipated speaker placement, and what happens if the speakers are not placed as expected - etc.

I have never seen a 'serious' surround setup in any home. Maybe I just meet the wrong people. But despite years of hype it seems pretty much a niche thing.

[7rojo7]

I sometimes use the audience mics a little for the little extra ambience it gives, then I crank them for the applause, but I've never done a surround project

[videoteque]

(Un?)fortunately technology goes always beyond!

It would be nice that some kind of standard was born for surround sound and sound for video production. This way you know what to expect before buying music!

[matyas]

True to all of these things. Of course, many people don't even know how to properly set up for stereo, but I haven't heard too many serious cries for mono delivery (outside of this forum!). Despite the years of hype, surround is pretty much in its infancy. It'll probably remain a niche format for audio-only delivery, but audio-for-picture still proves its relevancy in the music world (ever watched an opera DVD in surround? Fun times!)

Originally Posted by Ozpeter

Perhaps the problem for surround classical recordings is that there's little agreement about what the surround channels should be providing. I believe at one point some releases were doing daft stuff like giving you a seat in the middle of the orchestra. Giving you an accurate reproduction of the original sound slapping back from the rear of the hall would seem more worthwhile, provided that the hall was good for that purpose. And of course there's debate over the placement of speakers, and how the recording should correlate to the anticipated speaker placement, and what happens if the speakers are not placed as expected - etc.

I have never seen a 'serious' surround setup in any home. Maybe I just meet the wrong people. But despite years of hype it seems pretty much a niche thing.

[andrew.levine]

Hi there,

please check out the XYtri on my website (XYtri). You can also read the white paper if you eMail me.

Regarding surround for music, I have come to think of stereo as a window into a performance space, whereas a well produced surround rendition transports the listener into that space. There really is nothing mysterious about it. A quadraphonic approach (blumlein records) is a good starting point.

Regards,

blumlein records - Andrew Levine

[videoteque]

Andrew thanks for visiting, I heard the samples in your web and I like them very much!!!

whereas a well produced surround rendition transports the listener into that space

A well produced stereo record on a well tuned stereo system produces this too!!! Maybe the 3D part is more difficult to achieve, with any surround system you can achieve an easier 3D sound???

[7rojo7]

in 5.1 you would have 10 stereo mixes to play with plus the LFE, sounds like a lot of fun!

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by videoteque

A well produced stereo record on a well tuned stereo system produces this too!!! Maybe the 3D part is more difficult to achieve, with any surround system you can achieve an easier 3D sound???

- Stereo gives you a window, and you can certainly perceive depth through a (clean :-) window, but it does not enfold you.
- I have found the LFE very helpful for some types of music, e.g. organ recitals & big symphony orchestras, even for a cello solo production currently in the works. You need x.1 to achieve that.
- And then a well crafted surround experience allows the engineer to not only enfold, but expand the soundstage. There a few compositions that "require" surround: Britten's War Requiem, Mahler's #1, …

[videoteque]

Andrew, of course every technique has pros and cons!

I prefer good stereo to bad surround any day. And I never compared good stereo to good surround, so I still don't know!

But it seems obvious that well done surround should be more inmersive, the important thing is that it doesn't loose definition and that sound doesn't overpower music...

[Suda Badri]

Hi there,

Way cool idea!!! on the subject of new surround techniques, when i was back in SAE australia, I used an OCT surround but instead of using 5 cardioids i opted for using five jecklin discs with two Audio Technica omnis to each disc and just for the centre jecklin disc set up i used an extra jecklin disc to accomidate a AKG 414 inbetween the two baffeled Audio Technica... if that makes sense and then spent nearly an hour getting the levels and pan (matrixing) on the SSL-K correct to my ears and then printed onto 6 mono chanells (even though at this stage there is no LFE output at all, had to use plug-in at a later stage to pull a LFE).

I was recording a chello player who played along with a guitarist and cahon (dunno how to spell) and the resulting recording although very quiet, (was dealt to with some surround plug-ins) was one of the most immersing soundfields i have experienced. The musicians were not very impressed with the downmix after listening to the recording in 5.1.

Now i am out of SAE, i have no 5.1 set up at home and no multi million dollar studio. So i am saving up to buy an OCT surround set up using sennheiser or neumann AES 42 mics and have them feed directly into my RME AES 32. But i think it is going to be a long time before i hear my variation of the OCT again.

OH WELL, sorry for the rant im off to the work shop to build my self an XYTri, THANK YOU MR LEVINE!!!! I will get a chance to hear how it sounds by the weekend.

Oh i just imagined an XYTri with three AEA R88's or OCT with 5 of them in MS. maybe thats too far...

[just.sounds]

Originally Posted by 7rojo7

in 5.1 you would have 10 stereo mixes to play with plus the LFE, sounds like a lot of fun!

Not 10 but a lot more that is the HUGE difficulty with surround.


You have stereo between L-C C-R L-R LS-RS L-LS etc etc etc.

Double imaging is IMHO the biggest problem to avoid in surround recording.

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by just.sounds

You have stereo between L-C C-R L-R LS-RS L-LS etc etc etc.

Double imaging is IMHO the biggest problem to avoid in surround recording.

I have not had issues with double imaging with the XYtri.

One of the central ideas behind my design is to enable the location recordist to audition separate stereophonic perspectives--that integrate into one enveloping stage in the 7.x- / 5.x-mix! The XYtri is a system, as is e.g. the DECCA-tree.

[Suda Badri]

And that is precisely why I am so interested in this technique, it seems like it could give me enough accurate clues within the stereo domain (even mono), to make confident decisions on the sound field I am creating in the surround domain.

Mr. Levine, have you or would you consider using a set of Dolby 5.1 Headphones to audition your mix while recording....?

[Hic&Nunc]

Originally Posted by matyas

Think of how much classical music - from Gabrieli and Monteverdi to Mahler and Ives - uses space as an integral element.

Note to mention contemporary music ... Stockhausen and Boulez (among others) have written piece for multiple ensembles placed around the audience.

Also more and more present composers use ambiophonic electronics parts in their works.

Hello every one by the way.

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by Suda Badri

And that is precisely why I am so interested in this technique, it seems like it could give me enough accurate clues within the stereo domain (even mono), to make confident decisions on the sound field I am creating in the surround domain.

That's the idea.

Originally Posted by Suda Badri

Mr. Levine, have you or would you consider using a set of Dolby 5.1 Headphones to audition your mix while recording....?

I have not used any 5.1 cans yet. A while back I had the chance to try a 4.0-prototype by Ultrasone that seemed promising, but so far it has stayed a prototype.

The thing with any 5.1 headphone system is that it can only work by psychoacoustically (Blauert et al) altering the discrete channels before combining them to 2.0. I have done some experimenting with it and feel it must necessarily be a compromise.

[Suda Badri]

Originally Posted by andrew.levine

I have done some experimenting with it and feel it must necessarily be a compromise.

Oh good, i did have my doubts...


Well thanks for your time and great work on the technique, I work at a location audio company in rentals dept, I'm sure all the HD recordists will be happy to hear about a compact yet affordable solution...

[andrew.levine]

Hi Suda,

Originally Posted by Suda Badri

im off to the work shop to build my self an XYTri, THANK YOU MR LEVINE!!!! I will get a chance to hear how it sounds by the weekend.

Any feedback yet? ;-)

Regards,

Andrew Levine

[JonesH]

I really should try this out sometime soon. I'm not usually impressed by X/Y, but it'll be interesting.

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by JonesH

I really should try this out sometime soon. I'm not usually impressed by X/Y, but it'll be interesting.

I have occasionally used XY as a main setup (mainly because nothing else would have worked ;-), but always in combination either with a farther AB (@ 51.5 cm) or omnidirectional ambient outriggers. That works nicely, and you can also use it as a base for a quadraphonic mix.

BTW, two coincident cardioids angled at +-60° give you a more usable recording angle of 158°. [http://bit.ly/9nkz9k]

Regards,

Andrew

[muziekschuur]

Just looks like a DECCA TREE to me with some variations on what you can do with the three signals....

Am I right?

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

Just looks like a DECCA TREE to me with some variations on what you can do with the three signals....

Am I right?

Sorry, no :-)

As I detail in my white paper I was inspired by the DECCA-tree, but my main concern was to have an integrated setup for surround that I can monitor via headphones.

DECCA-tree: 3 x Neumann M50 (diaphragm mounted on a spheroid to achieve HF-attenuation with higher frequencies) mounted in a variable setup specific to one recording

XYtri: 3 XY-pairs with 2 coincident cardioids each (6 channels of audio) -> 3 XY- & 2/3 AB-perspectives as a fixed integrated setup

Regards,

Andrew

P.S.: On another note, a deviation from the DECCA-tree that I (and others) came up with and that I like to employ when recording orchestral music uses two bidirectional ribbons flanking the conductor and a central stereo pair (I haves used AB, XY and M/S) within the orchestra. You can find some (quite old) samples here: blumlein records - spot

[muziekschuur]

When a frame has fixed distances between the microphones then the height is not fixed so you allways need to check for reflections in the microphones.

So allthough there are now 6 signals wich would mean more ambience. But is it as controlled as it is with a DECCA tree.

Well, I'll check for myself when I have a chance.

Thanks for your hard work and the great PDF...


Frans
Muziekschuur

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

When a frame has fixed distances between the microphones then the height is not fixed so you allways need to check for reflections in the microphones.

Yeah, don't we all want clean signals :-)

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

So allthough there are now 6 signals wich would mean more ambience. But is it as controlled as it is with a DECCA tree.

For me the XYtri has it's uses, as does the DECCA-tree in various variants. I personally do not have three Neumann M50's and usually no place to set up a near-field monitoring environment, and without the latter you are flying more or less blind (or rather deaf ;-).

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

Well, I'll check for myself when I have a chance.

Please do so and let us (me :-) know what you think. It is a work in progress which can only go places when there is critical feedback.

Originally Posted by muziekschuur

Thanks for your hard work and the great PDF...

Frans
Muziekschuur

Thank you for checking it out!

Regards,

Andrew

[DannyL]

There are very exact specifications published by Dolby, relating to proper surround mix standards vis a vis channel routing and content, relative and absolute levels, metadata and so forth. You can find them on line in the Dolby Document Library. Broadcast mixers, DVD authoring labs, film mixers and other professionals have been using and contributing to these standards for over 10 years.

Regards;
Danny

Originally Posted by videoteque

(Un?)fortunately technology goes always beyond!

It would be nice that some kind of standard was born for surround sound and sound for video production. This way you know what to expect before buying music!

[Suda Badri]

Originally Posted by andrew.levine

Hi Suda,



Any feedback yet? ;-)

Regards,

Andrew Levine

No sorry I dont have 3 XY capable mics or monitors yet, we did try it out though, more so in the fashion of your first trials having three XY's in a large triangle with the source in the middle... I was really happy with that sound, we were even able to steer the signals after the fact which was really cool so we could focus in on certain things without messing with the tonal balance... I did build an XYTri rig, but it broke when I tried to fit three NT4's on it... true testament to my workshop skills... those mics dont even weigh much

I still dont have any surround rigs at my house to try things out... would love to try it out for real...

Have you had feedback on this from other sources? If so what do they say?

Thanks!

Suda

[Reiner]

Originally Posted by andrew.levine

P.S.: On another note, a deviation from the DECCA-tree that I (and others) came up with and that I like to employ when recording orchestral music uses two bidirectional ribbons flanking the conductor and a central stereo pair (I haves used AB, XY and M/S) within the orchestra. You can find some (quite old) samples here: blumlein records - spot

This sounds interesting to me. But I´m a little bit confused about the way you´d set up the royers, because here you telling they were flanking the conductor (something like the DECCA-tree, so I imagine they were flanking the conductor left-right, didn´t they? If so, where did they on- and off-axis pointing to?) BUT on you page your linke sends me to, there you telling the royers where set up in a blumlein position, which is coincident and in this way contradictory to "flanking the conductor" (L-R). Or did I missunderstood you? Please tell me, because I´d really like to try this idea on one of the next recordings.

[andrew.levine]

Originally Posted by Reiner

This sounds interesting to me. But I´m a little bit confused about the way you´d set up the royers, because here you telling they were flanking the conductor (something like the DECCA-tree, so I imagine they were flanking the conductor left-right, didn´t they? If so, where did they on- and off-axis pointing to?) BUT on you page your linke sends me to, there you telling the royers where set up in a blumlein position, which is coincident and in this way contradictory to "flanking the conductor" (L-R). Or did I missunderstood you? Please tell me, because I´d really like to try this idea on one of the next recordings.

Ah, my bad ;-) This recording happened so long ago… I'll have to check up on my notes that I always take down on the original printed programs but if I listed it as Blumlein then that's what it was. Sorry!

In the case of the flanking fig-8's I do place them left & right of the conductor, angling left/right as well as down by approximately 45° so I cover the violins and (most often) cellos while keeping the conductor on the attenuation-axis.

Regards,

Andrew