Conductor not happy with choir performance listening back in CR(psychoacoustics?)

[Ward Pike]

Recording choirs always leads to subjective results. If you're only using two microphones, then that snapshot of the sound is all there is and there's no changing it.

I would consider recording the choir with 8 to 12 channels and try to decide afterwards what is the most desirable sound to the conductor and then using that as your method from thereon in.

for example, 2 wide-cardiods in front of the choir, Left and Right facing inwards at about a 150º angle. Then try to get a center mic, normal cardioid directly in front of the conductor - this will best represent (albeit in mono) what she is most used to hearing.

Next, 2 or 3 LDC microphones "above" the choir, angled down, and again I would use wide-cardioid on those if available. This will more represent what the singers hear when in ensemble.

if you have the choir centered in the room, put an ambient microphone in each corner in omni, or ribbons in bi-directional (naturally)aimed at opposing walls for ambiance.

Then try playing back each element for her, and ask her to assist you 'building the right combination' to capture the performance she hears when conducting.

I would add no EQ whatsoever in recording, nor any compressing/limiting but would have a master buss compressor/limiter engaged for the playback/test-mixing with the conductor to allow the sound toe gradually fill in.

As for ambiance, be careful with "dwell" times. Too much ambiance with choral always makes it cold and sterile. Best to have your direct mics positioned to yield a dry sound and having the ambiant microphones provide variable ambiance in the mix will allow the end of each phrase to "bloom". This will be further enhanced using a master buss compressor/limiter as ambiance will rise during rests and thus ... "bloom".

Best of luck,

Ward

[Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by andrebrito

Meaning that she is not used to listen to an ensemble in a dry environment like a tracking room ...

Ah.. Thanks. I understand what you're saying now. I'll ask her what kind of place they're normally practising in.

[Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by A4722

Yep.

The conductor could be slightly blocked and not hearing the "out of tune" singers (maybe they placed those singers in that spot for that very reason !). The out of tune voices might dissolve into the room and not be a big deal from certain angles, yet the accurate mics can pick it all up equally.

Get her into the booth during rehearsals to sort it out (good luck with that) if she really cares about it...

We did actually switch around on some of the female singers who she suspected was causing the pitch problems. And it helped to a degree.

Since this is more of a amateur choir she obviously didn't want to offend anyone or kick the bad singers out.

[avebr]

[considering that you did a good recording at least...]

Conductors tend to hear 'music' parameters while performing - when you put them on an 'audience position' (ie. not performing/conducting) to hear "sound", there's always a shock - specially when they are not used to this. The same happens with classical musicians not used to record.

It really takes time (and your good work) so the conductor/musician will really trust on you, maybe from the second CD or so...

Most of the time conductors are a p.i.t.a... (very few exceptions), so it's a complex relationship to build.


all the best,
ave.

[BadOrange]

sounds like an inexperienced conductor so focused on not getting lost and cues that she/he forgets his/her role. Sure little things that engineers notice, I understand but a conductor should be able to tell you exactly what instrument from which chair is not doing it right.

Does she have the score memorized ? Reading and listening is a pretty impossible task.

Honestly, there are only so many ways to record such a simple setup. The rest is performance. Unfortunate that she is blaming the engineer.

[RKrizman]

Originally Posted by Zeppelin

We did actually switch around on some of the female singers who she suspected was causing the pitch problems. And it helped to a degree.

Since this is more of a amateur choir she obviously didn't want to offend anyone or kick the bad singers out.

The last time I recorded a choir there was a soprano who was sticking out that we just couldn't find. Finally I came out of our makeshift control room into the church and pulled up a chair halfway between the conductor and the choir and asked for another take. Amazingly the offending soprano disappeared. But the real miracle was that I was transported by the singing in a way I didn't think imaginable. We called it a "chorale lap dance". I realized that it was hopeless to think that we could get that coming out of two speakers. But we kept trying, if only so I could have an excuse to keep sitting in that sweet spot.

Choirs can be very sensual and sexy, but it seems few people go for that. I guess exhibit A would be the gospel tent at JazzFest.

-R

[Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by wardpike

Recording choirs always leads to subjective results. If you're only using two microphones, then that snapshot of the sound is all there is and there's no changing it.

I would consider recording the choir with 8 to 12 channels and try to decide afterwards what is the most desirable sound to the conductor and then using that as your method from thereon in.

for example, 2 wide-cardiods in front of the choir, Left and Right facing inwards at about a 150º angle. Then try to get a center mic, normal cardioid directly in front of the conductor - this will best represent (albeit in mono) what she is most used to hearing.

Next, 2 or 3 LDC microphones "above" the choir, angled down, and again I would use wide-cardioid on those if available. This will more represent what the singers hear when in ensemble.

if you have the choir centered in the room, put an ambient microphone in each corner in omni, or ribbons in bi-directional (naturally)aimed at opposing walls for ambiance.

Then try playing back each element for her, and ask her to assist you 'building the right combination' to capture the performance she hears when conducting.

I would add no EQ whatsoever in recording, nor any compressing/limiting but would have a master buss compressor/limiter engaged for the playback/test-mixing with the conductor to allow the sound toe gradually fill in.

As for ambiance, be careful with "dwell" times. Too much ambiance with choral always makes it cold and sterile. Best to have your direct mics positioned to yield a dry sound and having the ambiant microphones provide variable ambiance in the mix will allow the end of each phrase to "bloom". This will be further enhanced using a master buss compressor/limiter as ambiance will rise during rests and thus ... "bloom".

Best of luck,

Ward

Earlier I usually put up a lot more mics, just in case.
But I found myself generally just muting them because I preferred the sound of the main stereo pair.

I'll put up some ambience and over choir mics this time. At the very least for having fun experimentating a bit.

The stereo configuration you are talking about with 150 degrees angles and so on. Is that some kind of ORTF with a mono mic?
How long between the side mics then?

I don't have access to wide cardioids though I could try something similar to this with some Milab DC-196's or some Gefell M300's. If I keep these a bit close to the choir, due to the wide pickup area, I can pull the DPA omni A-B pair a bit away from the choir.
At least this would give me two good options to pick from. And within the same take you can hear how the different pickup patterns exaggerates certain voices as some have mentioned.

Regarding client handling/relationship, I think I have it handled as both the choir and the conductor specifically demanded that I should be booked for their sessions. This issue was the only thing that kind of bugged me.

I am hoping to do more choirs in the future. I think it's great to do some high quality work sometimes with just a few microphones. I think it gives you perspective of what's important. Especially when you go back working with full band productions, with lots of mics, editing and processing.

[BadOrange]

Originally Posted by RKrizman

The last time I recorded a choir there was a soprano who was sticking out that we just couldn't find. Finally I came out of our makeshift control room into the church and pulled up a chair halfway between the conductor and the choir and asked for another take. Amazingly the offending soprano disappeared.

-R

see that is something the conductor should deal with. YOu shouldn't have to do their job. But nice job scaring the soprano. Good conductors are hard to come by. They are basically the mixing engineer and you are at their mercy. I can imagine tho a volunteer choir and all the problems that ensue from those old church ladies with that huge semi tone vibrato that just sounds awful but they think it is the beez kneez.

[Jim Kerr]

Autotune it!








kidding. Well this has been an interesting thread. Have you tried playing back in mono only?

[Zeppelin]

Originally Posted by Jim Kerr

Well this has been an interesting thread. Have you tried playing back in mono only?

No,
but next time I think I'll put up a separate mono mic, right over the head of the conductor.

Btw, anyone tried to tune choirs with the Melodyne DNA?

[NorseHorse]

Originally Posted by Zeppelin

I was working with a mixed choir last year and I am going to do another session with them this year too...

Interesting post, Zeppelin. Some questions:

- What genre of choral music was this? A classical choir in the "Nordic" singing tradition? A pop choir? Something else?
- Do you frequently record choral music? Are you familiar with the aesthetics of that particular choral genre?
- Are you familiar with the asthetics of the director? Do you know what sound she wants?
- You mentioned she was thrown off at the session. But what did she think of the final product?
- Had she ever recorded before? The "I-sound-different-than-I-thought-I-did effect" is common, especially with performers or conductors who are new to the recording process.

I don't think playing things back in mono would help. From your description, it sounds like she was refering to the tonal balance of the recorded sound, not the pitch.

[Boschen]

Originally Posted by u b k

I'm definitely in the camp that favors the psychological explanation. It strikes me as the same thing as the singer (or drummer, or lead guitarist) who comes into the CR and, on hearing their performance played back, is shocked and horrified. "I sounded like *that*?"
Reminds me of a scene from Lost Highway, when Fred is asked to explain why he hates video cameras.
Fred: "I like to remember things my own way."
Cop: "What do you mean by that ?"
Fred: "How I remembered them... not necessarily the way they happened."
It seems the conductor is getting a bit lost in the moment, reveling in an idealized version of the performance that only exists in her mind as she's swinging her baton. My guess is she may start to pendulum swing the other way now, second guess and over-analyze the performance as it's happening, possibly lose her groove getting mired in the technical. Or not, my predictions are often as erroneous as they are fanciful.
Let us know how it goes!
Gregory Scott - ubk

(In growly repair-guy voice):

Yup; there's your problem.

How many times have you played a take that you thought was the bomb, until you actually got in the control room and heard it? And that's perhaps one or two folks playing together. Now add an orchestra.

Considering the technical role of the conductor, and the degree of concentration involved in directing the sections, etc, I'd be surprised if they were able to devote energy to an objective analysis of the piece they are directing as a whole, and the details of how that actually sounds in the room at the time of performance. Perhaps really talented conductors can do this effectively. It's sort of like asking a band onstage how the mix sounds out in the audience.

[charles maynes]

its the issue of multi-tasking- she cant give 100% attention to analysis while performing.

It's one of the reasons you do performance tapes to check performances- you just cannot tell at the time you are doing it.


I dont really know what to suggest beyond having another set of mics going to discreet tracks from a greater distance- if you a/b them, and she hears the same issues, hopefully she will recognize that it is the performance not the recording.

unless maybe you used a Tchad Blake sort of treatment.....

[bdenton]

I think the obvious is being overlooked here...

No person's hearing is exactly the same in both ears!

However, within certain tolerances, two identical microphones of decent quality offer close-to-identical recording ability.

So, with the conductor, the mics were hearing different things from what she was.

The left channel of Pro Tools did sound better.

Between the drums and the guitars and my early radio days when I wore 'phones with only one earpiece, I have a quite profound difference in hearing between my two ears.

I can compensate for the differences to some extent by positioning my head or adjusting the balance in my headphones, but I can't make it go away completely. So, I always have someone else listen for any "bad stuff" I might have missed in my tracks and/or mixes.

But I know that I have a hearing problem and the extent of it...do you?

[u b k]

Originally Posted by bdenton

But I know that I have a hearing problem and the extent of it...do you?

Yes, I too know that you have a hearing problem and the extent of it. thumbsup

But seriously, my ears hear differently, I just don't label it a 'problem'. Same with my eyes, they see color and contrast a little differently, and one focuses better near while the other focuses better far.


Gregory Scott - ubk

[mixedupsteve]

Originally Posted by charles maynes

its the issue of multi-tasking- she cant give 100% attention to analysis while performing.

It's one of the reasons you do performance tapes to check performances- you just cannot tell at the time you are doing it.


I dont really know what to suggest beyond having another set of mics going to discreet tracks from a greater distance- if you a/b them, and she hears the same issues, hopefully she will recognize that it is the performance not the recording.

unless maybe you used a Tchad Blake sort of treatment.....

Yup,
I get this sometimes only they know it's them and not the recording. When you're sitting in front of monitors intently listning to playback it's very different than performing. It's even happened to me. Sometimes I record and do FOH and after doing what I feel was a great show I start to mix and quickly realize that more rehearsals are in order. If she somehow thinks that mics cause timing and pitch issues then you have a tough problem.

[12ax7]

Originally Posted by mixedupsteve

If she somehow thinks that mics cause timing and pitch issues then you have a tough problem.

.

[tourtelot]

Reminds me of an orchestral conductor who, upon listening to a playback, said "not enough strings." This is after spending the whole performance standing and working IN THE MIDDLE OF THE STRING SECTIONS.

D.

[Hannes_F]

I would place the main mic pair behind the conductor, not besides her. You probably need more air between the singers and the mics since that eats up some transients.

[philper]

My small advice is to listen very carefully to what the conductor is saying. She hears this ensemble far more often that you, and it may just be that your technique has not yet found what she would consider to be the "right" way to capture what she is trying to do. I think the best suggestions here so far have to do with changing mic positions. If you record this group again I would opt for a multitrack approach, so you can try several different positions/combinations at once and then see if any of them satisfy her.

phil p

[12ax7]

Originally Posted by philper

My small advice is to listen very carefully to what the conductor is saying. She hears this ensemble far more often that you, and it may just be that your technique has not yet found what she would consider to be the "right" way to capture what she is trying to do. I think the best suggestions here so far have to do with changing mic positions. If you record this group again I would opt for a multitrack approach, so you can try several different positions/combinations at once and then see if any of them satisfy her.

While that's very good advice, I seriously doubt that this would address the conductor's concerns in this case (as stated by the OP):

"But when she listened back in the CR she always thought the timing and pitch issues was worse than she experienced when in front of the choir conducting."

"Timing and pitch issues" are not really functions of mic placement or tracking schemes.

Surely this has more to do with the differences in perception with respect to her two different mindsets (when conducting vs. reviewing the tape) than with anything the mics might do to pitch and timing.

.

[Plush]

You can only capture what is being presented.

I would go in to the hall or room or church and listen to the group. Then I would set up the mics to portray the same sound that is in the room. (most likely two mics)
I do take for granted that you can offer the same sound as your ears are hearing.

Then, when you are confident that what you are picking up is the same sound as what is being presented, there is nothing more to say. (and no one to convince of anything.)

Forget the multi-mics, forget trying to please her, forget it all because you are simply capturing what is there. You have modeled an idealized sound for her.

Then it is up to her to change the performance based on the tape---not the other way around.

[Larry Elliott]

Originally Posted by Plush

You can only capture what is being presented...

Forget the multi-mics, forget trying to please her, forget it all because you are simply capturing what is there. You have modeled an idealized sound for her.

Then it is up to her to change the performance based on the tape---not the other way around.

Wise words... thumbsup thumbsup

[philper]

Originally Posted by Plush

You can only capture what is being presented.

I would go in to the hall or room or church and listen to the group. Then I would set up the mics to portray the same sound that is in the room. (most likely two mics)
I do take for granted that you can offer the same sound as your ears are hearing.

Then, when you are confident that what you are picking up is the same sound as what is being presented, there is nothing more to say. (and no one to convince of anything.)

Forget the multi-mics, forget trying to please her, forget it all because you are simply capturing what is there. You have modeled an idealized sound for her.

Then it is up to her to change the performance based on the tape---not the other way around.

With all due respect, this way you would find the sound that you liked best, that you thought was the most accurate recording of that ensemble in that space, and your choice would probably be agreed with by most folks here. But he's trying to satisfy the conductor, the client, not himself, which is why I suggest trying to parse her words enough to find out if there is anything that the recordist can do to produce a result more pleasing to the client. You very well be right that the OP has already done that and that the real issue is the reality of the performance heard after the fact. But in that time might be very short and chances to record the group possibly very limited, I think trying a few mic positions/types at once would at least eliminate the possibility that the recording is at fault in the client's mind. Due diligence, perhaps.

There is also the strong possibility that what we have here is a "perceived" problem rather than a "real" problem. "Perceived" problems are often very hard to address since they don't really exist.

phil p

[hbphotoav]

Pardon my saying so, but this sounds a lot like someone who is looking for a technical excuse for a poorly prepared choir. If it was mere sibilants or too much room sound or a weak (for whatever reason) stereo image/soundstage... yes. Recordist is at fault. But pitch? and timing (which I take to mean attacks and releases)? Conductor (and, of course) choir at fault. Something comes to mind about a sow's ear...

As to emphasizing or de-emphasizing such lax prep, I might suggest less critical mics (from my locker, I'd put up a Blumlein pair of Fat Heads as well as the Gefells and/or Sennheisers)... perhaps move them back a bit farther than normal for some more room smear to de-emphasize the timing issues, and, perhaps, play through some less-than-stellar nearfields in the CR (my M-Audio Bx5As instead of the Tannoys)... or low-end cans (instead of the UltraSones) back at the record rack.

However... if you heard intonation ("pitch") or timing problems in a section as it was being recorded, to let it pass without mention is foolhardy. Were it me, I'd call a halt after the section, ask the conductor to come have a listen (in case he/she was truly so wrapped up in the score that it "slipped past" without notice), and ask if it was a satisfactory PERFORMANCE. The recording you can (within broad limits) fix. The performance is up to conductor and singers.

My $.02US.

Better luck this time... psychoconductor... oops... psychoacoustics notwithstanding.

HB

[Sheikyearbouti]

Originally Posted by Zeppelin

No,
Btw, anyone tried to tune choirs with the Melodyne DNA?

On a choir not. Yes, on a guitar duo with a singer. There were only one or two notes to correct though. For anything more than that it would become very, very obvious. It really changes the sound and you can hear the artifacts.

[pkautzsch]

Originally Posted by Zeppelin

The eq-ing was mostly an attempt to make the lyrics come through clearer.

This sounds to me like it's more of an amateur choir.

Originally Posted by Zeppelin

Since this is more of a amateur choir she obviously didn't want to offend anyone or kick the bad singers out.

Here our job changes from "accurately picking up the performance with all details" to "picking up the emotion and leaving out all the annoying details".
Boosting the typical "intelligibility" range in a choir will ALWAYS only make the imperfections stick out even more.
EDIT: if you want intelligibility, you need to spot mic a group of a few singers that are well-timed. You could then even cut a little of the intelligibility range in the main pair.
One might set up a few more mics in order to stop the not-so-tight singers from thinking "oh, these folks are more important".

Originally Posted by 12ax7

"Timing and pitch issues" are not really functions of mic placement or tracking schemes.

Unstable pitch is something you can't really get rid of by means of mic placement or any other technical solution. You need the offender to either shut up or sing in tune. The latter can be helped a lot by having them sing in a more reverberant room (so everyone in the group can better hear the group as a whole).
Timing issues can be smeared by moving the mics farther away (quick solution) or by careful rehearsing (better solution). When I and the client don't have lots of time to spend, I usually opt for moving the mics.
VERY few choirs do have a really tight timing.

Originally Posted by Plush

You can only capture what is being presented.

You can capture it in different ways, see above.