ORTF Microphone vertical angle

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by loujudson

Oh, and the guy who makes his mics parrallel to the floor instead of pointing at the source? What are you reasons for that, seems it would be sub-optimal for almost anything except visual symmetry! It could be pointing at the mucisans , though the floor is under them why point it at the backstage wall? The logic escapes me.

L

Hi-I'm "the guy" whom you reference.

In the majority of circumstances in which I record, it sounds better. When it doesn't, I point them differently.

How does the logic of this approach escape you?


Most often, I want to hear what you call the "backstage wall." I also prefer in the majority of cases to have the reflections from the ceiling as well. The floor is the least interesting source of reflections, and especially that portion which lies between performers and microphones. Often I am accorded some degree of control over where musicians (even in large ensembles) are placed in the room.

It shouldn't be surprising-but yet it often is-that an ensemble "placed" for a recording often looks better and sounds better to listeners in the hall (or gallery, museum, or church).

I most recording arrays, some portion of the floor will be recorded, no matter where the mic's are pointed. The question is whether the rear ("stage") and side walls, and the ceiling-as well as the rear wall of the space-is wanted. That is very much a product of where the microphones are pointed. Pointing mic's at the floor often means the rest of the room is not recorded. When using directional mic's, the good portion of the pattern is significantly large that it makes no difference at all whether it is pointed directly at a performer or not. Otherwise, we would have to put a mic on each stand (at least). Omni's, in a way are more selective, though they have better "off axis" performance-if one can say that about an omni mic.

Perhaps your idea is to remove the physical architecture from the recording. That is not my idea of a good recording, unless the room is fundamentally unsuited for the project.

A recording which "features" floor reflections to the exclusion of others is a recording that I would not want to make.

If I want to include the room, then I must exercise some logic about whether or not the mic's are pointed in such a way that they render the environment in the intended way.

[loujudson]

Originally Posted by JEGG

Hi-I'm "the guy" whom you reference.

In the majority of circumstances in which I record, it sounds better. When it doesn't, I point them differently.

How does the logic of this approach escape you?

Doesn't escape me at all. Your orignal post implied you kept the mics level no matter what. If that is what sounds best, more power to you! And perhaps you do have more ideal rooms than I do - generally my classical recordings are local semi-pros in less than ideal halls. In fact, some of them request reverb being added!

Not a problem, "JEGG" or guy, whichever you prefer.

Lou Judson

[DCtoDaylight]

Originally Posted by JEGG

Most often, I want to hear what you call the "backstage wall." I also prefer in the majority of cases to have the reflections from the ceiling as well.

This is a very informative response, and an interesting comment, and gets at a question I've been meaning to post here.

I'm pretty new to classical recording, and (as noted earlier) have been sticking with just a stereo pair while I get my act together. I've mostly used NOS or DIN setups, behind and above the conductor's head to one degree or another, with the mics pointing more or less in the middle of the ensemble, depending on instrumentation and position and usually some trial and error (sometimes there's no opportunity for a check).

I, and the music director I've been working for, have been quite happy with the captures I've gotten so far. But I notice that my recordings tend to have more of a "direct" sound than many of the classical recordings I've listened to for comparison. In other words, mine sound warmer and woodier, while the ones I'm comparing to are cooler and airier, with more hall sound and ambience. Mics and pres and all play a role in this, of course, but I think the effect is much more a function of positioning.

My sense is that the technique you're describing would probably result in more blending of the individual instruments, and perhaps an airier, more ambient sound, more like I'm hearing in the comparison recordings, correct?

And - is it your sense that the "wall" technique could help achieve a better mix between the ensemble and soloists? Especially in piano concertos, I tend to get a bit more soloist that I would want, and have been looking for ways to smooth things out a bit.

Thanks for sharing your comments here - they're *extremely* helpful to someone in my position!

[rumleymusic]

but I think the effect is much more a function of positioning.

At close range, I think it is a function of pattern more than anything. A good majority of recordings use omnis, not cardioid for the main pair or array. This not only provides a more realistic sound stage when played through speakers (at least in my opinion) but more obviously captures greater embience. I suppose pointing cards at the back wall would change the direct/reflective ratio, but the group had better have a good shell.

Personally I would be worried about capturing too much of the rear of the orchestra, where the brass and percussion usually sit on risers. I would think that would throw off the balance considerably, but then again, I have never tried it that way.

[Piedpiper]

Originally Posted by DCtoDaylight

This is a very informative response, and an interesting comment, and gets at a question I've been meaning to post here.

I'm pretty new to classical recording, and (as noted earlier) have been sticking with just a stereo pair while I get my act together. I've mostly used NOS or DIN setups, behind and above the conductor's head to one degree or another, with the mics pointing more or less in the middle of the ensemble, depending on instrumentation and position and usually some trial and error (sometimes there's no opportunity for a check).

I, and the music director I've been working for, have been quite happy with the captures I've gotten so far. But I notice that my recordings tend to have more of a "direct" sound than many of the classical recordings I've listened to for comparison. In other words, mine sound warmer and woodier, while the ones I'm comparing to are cooler and airier, with more hall sound and ambience. Mics and pres and all play a role in this, of course, but I think the effect is much more a function of positioning.

My sense is that the technique you're describing would probably result in more blending of the individual instruments, and perhaps an airier, more ambient sound, more like I'm hearing in the comparison recordings, correct?

And - is it your sense that the "wall" technique could help achieve a better mix between the ensemble and soloists? Especially in piano concertos, I tend to get a bit more soloist that I would want, and have been looking for ways to smooth things out a bit.

Thanks for sharing your comments here - they're *extremely* helpful to someone in my position!

I found his comments interesting as well but I can't help but want to state the obvious that if you want more hall and blend, you need to get back further and/or up higher. Personally, I prefer a well positioned ORTF to spaced omnis or other manipulated ambience arrays. Obviously, what mics you use and their off axis characterstics figure in to that preference.

[Elk]

Originally Posted by rumleymusic

At close range, I think it is a function of pattern more than anything. A good majority of recordings use omnis, not cardioid for the main pair or array.

I started this asking about pointing an ORTF pair. I am delighted that the responses have been so varied and thoughtful.

So to follow up with using omnis, where (distance from orchestra, height) would you place omnis at close range? A spaced pair, or spaced pair with a center channel?

This has been a great, helpful thread.

[rumleymusic]

I personally like to hang a spaced pair no more than a couple feet behind the conductor. How high depends on the balance, if the orchestra has strong strings but not winds, higher placement is preferable. For richer strings in relation to the winds, go lower. For a well balanced orchestra, I shoot for 9-11 feet above the floor, 2-3 feet apart depending on the frequency separation desired. (since omnis create a stereo pattern based on delay, the length of the waveform is important to consider. If the mics are too close, you will get the shorter high frequency separation, but the lower frequencies will sound centered, if they are too far apart, you will separate the low frequencies but also create a "hole" in the center. DPA recomends 40-60 cm for omnis, but when recording a large orchestra you can go up to 3ft without noticing a hole.)

This of course all varies from setup to setup, so some guessing is involved.

At this close range with omnis, I do like to use outriggers, either omnis or cards depending on how good the hall sounds, audience noise, etc.

[Corran]

I think you mean 40-60cm is what DPA suggests.

[Elk]

Thanks!

[rumleymusic]

I think you mean 40-60cm is what DPA suggests.

Oops, yes. Darn that metric system.