X/Y or ORTF?

[chris319]

X/Y or ORTF? Which do you prefer for orchestral recording?

[NorseHorse]

Pretty much anything BUT x/y.

I'll be sending an email your way in a moment, Chris...

[Corran]

I don't hardly do X-Y unless I'm spot miking a whole section. But perhaps I will try X-Y with a 130 degree angle, which supposedly gives a wider image.

[jnorman]

i have never found a good application for XY. ORTF (plus omni flanks, spots, etc as needed) seems to be the primary setup of choice for the majority of classical recordings. larger orchestras are sometimes miced with decca tree, plus flanks and spots. occasionally you will see a curtain array of omnis across the front.

[RobAnderson]

I will use XY only if it is in conjunction with a flanking pair and I need a narrow and precise center, otherwise, ORTF is generally the better way to go.

[boojum]

XY never? XY almost never? I use MS, another single point mic array, quite often for small groups like chamber or bluegrass or small jazz groups. Anything over four or five artists I think that ORTF is better. It is not as accurate in placing the artists in the stereo field but has a nice "sound" to my way of thinking, or hearing. I like MS over XY in its unobtrusiveness.

L8R

[jnorman]

remember to take boojum's comments with a grain of salt, as he is an admitted Schmoz kapop (bulgarian for "extremely large nose")...

[sonare]

TRUE X-Y (capsules in precise alignment-- esp vertical orientation of capsules) can be useful where you really wanted a stereo mic (but didn't have one), such as jazz drumset where you are likely folding it in and placing in the stereo spectrum. Experimentation with angles is useful, as the X-Y often sounds rather mono.

Aside from this application I almost never use it.

Rich

[mpdonahue]

I haven't put up an XY pair in almost 20 years....... But that's just me.
The stuff i record tends to want to capture the space, and XY at the far end of the spectrum when it comes to space.
Of course, I haven't put up an ORTF as a main pair in probably 15 years.... I haven't found a situation where I couldn't use a spaced pair of omnis or Subcardiods in recent memory.
All the best,
-mark

[chris319]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

Pretty much anything BUT x/y.

I'll be sending an email your way in a moment, Chris...

Thanks, Norse. I received the email but haven't had a chance to listen to the samples yet.

[vonrichter]

ORTF.

[boojum]

Originally Posted by jnorman

remember to take boojum's comments with a grain of salt, as he is an admitted Schmoz kapop (bulgarian for "extremely large nose")...

Nov schmoz kapop, "Not an extremely large nose."

[jnorman]

"nov" = "not" - got it. my bulgarian is little rusty...

[fallforward]

ORTF as main pair for ensemble style recording.

I use XY when I want a stereo spread on something I a micing relatively close. I was just doing a band that had a great deal of percussion including chimes. On the chimes overdubs, I put up an XY pair to get the chimes to go left to right. Natural? No, but it sounded great for the desired effect. I have also done XY with good results on solo instruments where the acoustics were less than ideal. I have gotten good results on solo acoustic guitar, and solo piano.

Good Luck guys!
Robby

[7rojo7]

MS when reduced to mono loses all side information. Good for FX. AB, XY. ORTF or its many variants
I always put up an omni and work from there, mono first
You get an idea of the critical distance before you start placing other mic
you may ask yourself
what does the omni miss? but your distance is nailed
It may get only the winds
but jimminy cricket if it doesn't almost always end up as a DECCA tree, for wide stuff, or an XY over omni, at least for smaller ensembles
I have 4 wheels on my car and 2 on my motorcycle but I'm looking for an alternative.
Any suggestions?

[chris319]

I have 4 wheels on my car and 2 on my motorcycle but I'm looking for an alternative.
Any suggestions?

Unicycle.

[Remoteness]

Originally Posted by chris319

Unicycle.

No, if we're talking Decca tree why not a tricycle?

[gareth.h.rees]

None:

[Plush]

Neumann SM-69 in xy (figure of eight) can be good on piano or where one needs to mic a soloist in stereo. Also nice for woodwind spot, or percussion spot.
Steerable soloist spot is a prime benefit. Expensive solution though.

ORTF is creating better depth, however.

We are using the Schoeps MSTC-64 for ORTF. This mic, made for French Radio, is the reliable way to set up "official" ORTF.

[Howie J]

I've been reading this and have basically been going, "Doh!!" I've used X/Y for recording all my concerts last year. I tried ORTF once, but I'm guessing I didn't pay enough attention to the nuances of angles/setup. I'm starting to plan out things for next year and ways I can improve my live recordings. Might have to revisit the ORTF. I love doing MS recording, but I erred on the conservative side with aesthetics.

Howie J

[7rojo7]

Hovercrafts are amazing and don't use wheels, but how do you mic it?
This would be a reason for me to use MS
an SM69 can do MS
xy with figure 8, do you point one capsule at the performer or have them inbetween the overlapping lobes? isn't this called something else too?
In NY we had a C24 that to me only sounded good in blmlein, I used it for OH and it was easy to stick in the piano when we had to blanket it, we had a 422 also but that had a little more headroom and got OH duties often, one day a producer comes in and wants to do xy and the piano sounded dull, the capsules were reversed on the C24, the engineer on that session told me and then I told him, I've only used it in B. Since then I've lost my fascination with B, but I like it for BKG VOX with a reflective (glass usually) gobo behind the mic and a non reflective gobo behind the singers, I recorded the Roches once like this. nice effect

[NorseHorse]

Originally Posted by 7rojo7

xy with figure 8, do you point one capsule at the performer or have them inbetween the overlapping lobes? isn't this called something else too?

Yep, Blumlein. Most folks use "XY" when referring to two cardioids and "Blumlein" when referring to two figure-8s at 90 degrees to each other and the performer is in between the lobes. "MS Blumlein" refers to two figure-8s at 90 degrees to each other, but the source is ON axis of one of the mics and you'll need to matrix the two sources to get your stereo image.

Sometimes people say XY Blumlein - I used to - but it's really redundant: Blumlein Pair - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Also, I don't like to confuse Blumlein with XY. They sound Different. Because of the much larger overlap of XY cardioid lobes, the image is heavily weighted to the center. The sound of Blumlein is more open.

[fifthcircle]

For the large enemble stuff I do, I find that I get my best results with near-coincident or spaced pairs with flanking omnis. Why? The images are similar enough that they don't compete with each other. I love a decca tree or a moderately spaced pair of subcardiods. ORTF can work very well also...

I have had some fantastic results with Blumlein or M-S pairs in the center, but it is usually a lot more difficult. A blumlein pair has pinpoint imaging while a pair of omni flanks have anything but. Trying to make those two sounds work together can be tough. A M-S pair can work well especially when you have a wider pattern in the center because you basically get a spaced array across the front of your ensemble with a bit better imaging (from the sides).

When I'm planning the mic rigs for various jobs, I try to think of the large picture with the full image of the group taking my attention. This includes left-right as well as front to back. When the system has parts that contradict or compete with each other, then you can have difficulties getting a great recording.

I use X-Y very rarely. The occasional use is with spot pairs and the occasional drum recording (in jazz work).

--Ben

[boojum]

We seem to be covering alternatives to XY and I am interested. I am very new in this but have found that a close AB (~40cm) with spots or MS works very well. I get the bottom end of the omnis with some localization plus the panorama of omnis. The MS is fine for a group of soloists. Fiddling with the delay gets my MS back into the mix about where it sounds right in timing.

I had not realized it but the post above by Ben brings out the differences between ORTF, say, and flanking omnis and their different imaging and the hassle of getting it to work. I wonder if an ORTF plus the 40cm AB would be a workable solution. Has anyone experimented with this???

[Corran]

Originally Posted by boojum

I wonder if an ORTF plus the 40cm AB would be a workable solution. Has anyone experimented with this???

I've done this quite often, yes. Works great! Before I had a pair of omni mics I'd often just put one in the center of the ORTF pair and that worked well, an actual stereo pair was that much better.

[fifthcircle]

Originally Posted by boojum

I had not realized it but the post above by Ben brings out the differences between ORTF, say, and flanking omnis and their different imaging and the hassle of getting it to work. I wonder if an ORTF plus the 40cm AB would be a workable solution. Has anyone experimented with this???

Sorry if I wasn't clear... I actually find that ORTF is a really good compromise between the precise image in a coincident pair and the space created by spaced omnis. I use my Sennheiser 8040's in an ORTF pair regularly. More spaced pairs I find work even better- hence the 14" (or so) subcardiod pair and the decca tree with large ensembles.

I will preface this by saying I haven't done this exactly, but I'm not sure the ORTF plus the 40cm A-B would work that well... My inclination is that the overlap of patterns of mics will result in an image build-up in the center that ends up being a bit much. In a large ensemble setting, both can make a good main pair, but both also benefit with the use of flanking mics.

--Ben

[Corran]

That reminds me, I do usually ride one or the other pairs 6 or 12 db below the other. That seems to give the best balance, depending on the source, for me.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by fifthcircle

Sorry if I wasn't clear... I actually find that ORTF is a really good compromise between the precise image in a coincident pair and the space created by spaced omnis. I use my Sennheiser 8040's in an ORTF pair regularly. More spaced pairs I find work even better- hence the 14" (or so) subcardiod pair and the decca tree with large ensembles.

I will preface this by saying I haven't done this exactly, but I'm not sure the ORTF plus the 40cm A-B would work that well... My inclination is that the overlap of patterns of mics will result in an image build-up in the center that ends up being a bit much. In a large ensemble setting, both can make a good main pair, but both also benefit with the use of flanking mics.

--Ben

My understanding is that ORTF + omni outriders works very well - I did a test with MattD in an Oxford college - ORTF MKH 8040 with MKH 8020 outriggers.

MattD did the actual final mix and I understand that you only need a tiny touch on the outriggers to fill things out, most of the sound coming from the ORTF pair.

Now I have my Nagra VI and the new Grace SpaceBar, I plan on using this method myself when I next get the chance.