Can you find the mics?

[npulsipher]

Every six months, I record a concert for a local church choir. And every single time, someone in the church leadership makes a comment about how they really dislike have people know that the concert is being recorded, they feel that it takes away form the spirit of the evening. So I normally end up sitting with the mics down in the audience and use my fat head to block them from the rest of the audience. As you can imagine, this does not sound very good, and people can still see the mics anyways.

This time, tried something new. Can you find the mics? (ignoring the "clever" tenor of course.) First one who can tell me where they are gets a cookie.

More importantly, how do you think it sounds? http://soundcloud.com/npulsipher-music/jesus-savior-pilot-me-greeley

Cheers

[Rick Sutton]

Are they placed at the very tip of the light fixtures? Or at the top of the podium (the little silver dots)?
Of course, glued to the right thumbnail of the tenor would have worked but you said to ignore him.

[leddy]

Is the guy in the picture named Mike? If so, I found one of them.

[NorseHorse]

On the podium, pointed away from the ensemble?

[npulsipher]

Well Rick, you got it right out of the gate, here's your cookie.

I decided to try stepping into the unknown realm of boundary micing and taped 2 Naiant X-S omnis to the podium, 40cm apart. It wasn't ideal by any means, when soloits and narrators step up to the podium, you can hear them move all over and turn their pages, and like I said before, I've never done a setup like this before. I noticed right away that there are phasing issues from either spacing or comb filtering or both. But still, I think it came out much better than it has in the past. Especially considering that those little Naiants are only $40 each.

[npulsipher]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

On the podium, pointed away from the ensemble?

Norse, just curious what the benefit would have been if I had them pointing the other direction.

Cheers

[mikeg09]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

"Well Rick, you got it right out of the gate, here's your cookie.

LOL

[Rick Sutton]

Me like cooooookie!

[mikeg09]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

Norse, just curious what the benefit would have been if I had them pointing the other direction.

Cheers

hahahaha

[philper]

If that kind of works for you, how about two boundary layer type mics on either side of the surface the podium is sitting on, and then one in the middle (to separate tracks)? Voices sound nice, piano is a bit distant. You have more options stealthily micing a piano....

phil p

[npulsipher]

@philper, Pianos are the bane of my existence. That piano especially. It's way to mellow and has no attack. But I have a really hard time getting pianos to sound closer than a mile away anyways. Any tips? I have a 2 channel rig and little cash flow to by a mixer/higher input rig (still in college) so spots aren't yet possible.Which is also why I used 2 closer together rather than a wider 3.

Thanks for your response!

[JEGG]

Hello OP:
I am quite surprised at the amount of side (if it is that) information in your recording, and in its lack of center and the swimmy rendering of the piano, especially if the mic's were placed as you described.

Have you checked them to see if they are both wired the same way? Sometimes they aren't. Have you tried reversing the polarity of one mic in this recording?

The image is too diffuse for me, and the choir is terribly sibilant. Is it the mic's or the room?

If it were me (after trying the polarity reversal of one mic), I might convert the recording to mid side and equalize M and S so they both sound right in themselves, and then put the thing back together in proper balance and see what happens to the image. In addition to the sibilance issue, I'd look toward some subtractive EQ to deal with the odd room presentation. You might add some lower midrange EQ to the side element to see if that warms up anything.

The sound is a bit of a mess for me, but at this point I am in a minority of one!

[npulsipher]

Jegg, thank you so much sharing your thoughts and ideas. You may appear to be just one here. But if you feel like it's a mess, then I'm sure that there are others that feel the same way.

I think the swimmy-ness and odd room sound you hear may be me being a little to generous with the reverb.

Switching polarity didn't seem to make a difference, so I'll give your M-S conversion a try. It didn't occur to me to try that with 2 omnis.

I don't know how I missed the sibilance, but your right it is really intense. Thanks.

Thanks again for your comments. I really love it when I post a recording to gearslutz and it gets ripped to shreds. It really helps me to learn how to improve my work. I really do appreciate it. Thanks again and keep it coming!

Cheers!

[rcrowley]

Do you have a "dry" (original) version you can post? I was pretty impressed with the separation from a pair of omnis so close together. But maybe that was "diddled" by your synthetic reverb? Interesting arrangement.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

I think the swimmy-ness and odd room sound you hear may be me being a little to generous with the reverb.

Sorry, I missed the mention of that. That might explain a lot, including part of the sibilance issues and some room issues.

Originally Posted by npulsipher

Switching polarity didn't seem to make a difference, so I'll give your M-S conversion a try. It didn't occur to me to try that with 2 omnis.

I suggested that (reversing polarity of one channel-I was too lazy to do this myself) only because your mic's were a proper distance, one to another, and thought that might be a useful diagnostic device. However, it is odd that it didn't make a noticeable difference. (Maybe this points again to the reverb.)

Originally Posted by npulsipher

Thanks again for your comments. I really love it when I post a recording to gearslutz and it gets ripped to shreds.

I didn't mean my remarks to come off that way, but I do understand why they could be taken that way. I think you're in a situation where a number of factors conspire to make it difficult to do a good job, and I was mostly thinking aloud about what I might do after the fact, if I were in your shoes-and the event recording was the one we heard here with the reverb.

Again, mine is a minority opinion. If they're happy with it, and you are, I wouldn't be too concerned.

[npulsipher]

Do you have a "dry" (original) version you can post?

Sure do. 2 quick clips. Both are 100% raw, one with polarity flipped on the left channel. (there is a noticeable difference, just not an improvement in my opinion)

@Jegg, "Ripped apart" may have been an exaggeration. I only ment to say that I appreciate it when slutz, like yourself, aren't afraid to tell me when something doesn't sound good, and give suggestions on how I can fix it.

So please keep it coming! It makes my customers happy and also makes me happy.

[philper]

With just 2 chan and no mixer you are kind of stuck, unless you go for making a mono recording (blending a piano mic and a choir mic). The PZMs might help you a bit with the choir, but nothing will help the piano unless you get a mic closer to it. You can make other small tweaks, but if they are determined to make your life this miserable (no vis mic) then you are doing ok, barring spending some more $$.

phil p

[JEGG]

Hi again:

I have listened to your dry files-thanks!

There are really some pieces of the puzzle missing here.

First of all, your mic's seem to be wired the same way. That's good to know.

If the choir is standing in a centered and symmetrical to the podium arrangement *in the chairs we see in the picture,* we should be getting a much better image. Even the piano should be much better.

I did check this out with a stereograph, and as I suspected, there is a lot of side information in this recording.

You can quickly improve things by simply attenuating the side information (via a "software matrix" like the free mda "image," or simply panning the stereo channels inward by a relatively small amount. (Roughly 5-10%.) As I suspected, the recording responds very favorably to low midrange shelving EQ-somewhere from 150-300 Hz downward. That makes the sibilance more tolerable, too, but it still should be reduced.

Just for your information, you might place the omni's about 1/3 (or a fraction more) in from boundary edges. And FYI, on a rectangular boundary, you have two 3dB shelving points-one relative to the short dimension, the other long. Guessimatingly, 2 ft is about 80Hz and 1 ft is........you guessed it already.

I really don't understand why the recording sounds as it does, but it can be significantly improved by the above procedures. (IMO, of course.) Is there a PA on with an open mic, or something? As I said before, some piece of the puzzle is missing.

Here's something to try-it will seem counter intuitive, but it does often work. Assuming the side walls out in front of the choir are "square" with the choir, or are angled slightly toward the choir, try placing you omnis out there on that wall, pointed upward, about 8-12 ft in "front" of the first choir row (in your case, maybe on the shorter end of that) and high enough to see the whole ensemble. Then place a center mic somewhere, say on the podium, or maybe even EQ and use the podium mic. Then mix creatively:
1. Flip one mic in and out of polarity and choose the best option.
2. Pan toward the center *if needed.* Use your ears or look at a stereograph.
3. Then bring up the center mic. Very little of this should be needed, and of course it's arrival time will be shorter-so-again-it needs only a very low level. Don't be afraid to really EQ this mic! You'll need lots of low mids and not its elevated highs. Point it above the piano lid about face height, or a little above. Put a cloth or something absorbent on the reading desk.

(You could also point the omni's back toward the choir-see the next thing to try-below)

There is lots to find wrong with this approach until it is tried and it works-then one can explain why it does work. (often, but certainly not always).

Here's something else to try:

Put your omnis on the main surface of the podium and not on the reading desk portion. Put them about 1/4 (I know, not 1/3) of the way in from the sides, and do EQ and use the podium mic for the center of the mix-no doubt it is a directional mic. If you're working directly to two track, you should know ahead of time how to EQ your omni's.

Since you will be EQ'ing the omnis anyway-for sibilance-I would point them toward the choir and EQ downward. This has two advantages:
1. It will lower much of their noise- though you'll have already gained 6 dB by putting them on a boundary.
2. The hot side will not be pointed toward the audience, where it gets everything you don't want. In fact, the HF will be attenuated toward the audience. You'll get a warmer room sound. And then you might not need the lower midrange EQ, because you'll have already turned down all of the top end.

Good luck with the flock! (There's gotta be something messing with the sound here-ru sure there's not a hot mic with a hot PA on?

Oh, and thanks for letting us all savage your recording! You must have a thick skin. I wish I did.

[chris319]

I think it's a clever solution given the restrictions placed upon you: a) that the mics must not be visible, and b) that you don't have the funds for a more elaborate setup. I think you can do with a bit less reverb in the final mix, but overall the recording sounds OK given the limitations you faced. Yes, the piano sounds distant but it comes through OK in the mix, and in your situation with just two mics/channels there's not much more you can do.

try placing you omnis out there on that wall, pointed upward, about 8-12 ft in "front" of the first choir row

You're forgetting his mandate: the mics must not be visible. Affixing mics to the wall makes them visible, violating that mandate.

I don't understand the objection to people knowing it's being recorded. If the choir members are accustomed to performing before a live congregation then a recording should present no problem, either real or imagined.

[Lazerface]

Originally Posted by chris319

I don't understand the objection to people knowing it's being recorded. If the choir members are accustomed to performing before a live congregation then a recording should present no problem, either real or imagined.

I've run into that problem before, and it mostly stems from an audience enjoyment perspective. To the average congregation member, a mic stand is a tall black unsightly blemish in front of a nice looking choir and stage, and cables are a nasty tangled mess everywhere! So it can purely be a crowd sight line issue. Also, not knowing the event is being recorded gives people a subconscious feeling that this is a special event, and can never be relived again. Knowing you can buy the recording on the way out runis that effect.

Lastly, it can also be a safety issue. A mic stand in a church, no matter how short or tall, weighted, flagged, taped off, or even gated, will always have a little old lady trip over it, even if it seems impossible. (In my experiences anyways...) Its almost a law of physics!

[npulsipher]

@Jegg - Lots of great information here! Like I said, I haven't had any experience with this technique, and I had never seen that 1/3 rule before for boundary mics. If you could suggest some reading on the subject, that would be awesome.

It's entirely possible that the weirdness if from the podium mic being left on. I was in the hallway during the performance, and it didn't occur to me that they wouldn't think to turn it off when nobody was using it. I also didn't think it was that hot. I could barely hear a speaker's voice talking directly into the mic, coming through the PA. But next time, I will be sure to remind them to turn it off.

Attached is roughly the same clip as before, no added reverb, panned in slightly and eq'd. Improvement?

Originally Posted by chris319
...but overall the recording sounds OK given the limitations you faced.

Thanks for your kind words. With this group, "OK" is a major victory!

Originally posted by Lazerface
I've run into that problem before, and it mostly stems from an audience enjoyment perspective.

That's exactly what it is in this case. They feel it will distract the audience from the performance, because it isn't something they are used to seeing. And stand is really ugly to as it is getting old and held together with duck tape and zip ties.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

@Jegg - Lots of great information here! Like I said, I haven't had any experience with this technique, and I had never seen that 1/3 rule before for boundary mics. If you could suggest some reading on the subject, that would be awesome.

The 1/3 rule isn't a rule, as a general practice it can reduce some edge effects till you get a feel for things.

There was a guide to using boundary mic's published many years ago by Crown. In it, they cover everything! Everything about boundary shapes and sizes and multiple boundaries. It is a great thing to have-it's full of technical information presented in a very clear and concise way that can be understood by anyone. It's not a product sales brochure-I'm not sure they even mention a product.

Originally Posted by npulsipher

It's entirely possible that the weirdness if from the podium mic being left on. I was in the hallway during the performance, and it didn't occur to me that they wouldn't think to turn it off when nobody was using it. I also didn't think it was that hot. I could barely hear a speaker's voice talking directly into the mic, coming through the PA. But next time, I will be sure to remind them to turn it off.

As I suspected! You really get to know this signature sound (effect). And I am certain this is a big part in why the piano sound is strange. Your omni's really weren't badly placed, at all, not even for the piano. It takes very little(!) of the PA to create these effects-as you can see while canceling side information and looking at a stereograph. With the PA out of play, you should not need to reduce the amount of side information-if your mic's are reasonably placed.

Originally Posted by npulsipher

That's exactly what it is in this case. They feel it will distract the audience from the performance, because it isn't something they are used to seeing. And stand is really ugly to as it is getting old and held together with duck tape and zip ties.

Well, it needn't be said that the stands should look good and professional-perhaps their ugliness is a part of why they are distracting. (or not....)

They haven't removed the one on the podium.

Sorry, I don't have time to check your revised files, but it sounds like you have sorted a few issues.

I hope they have some other repertoire. Hearing this stuff could be injurious to health and safety.

[NorseHorse]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

Norse, just curious what the benefit would have been if I had them pointing the other direction.

Cardioids pointing away from the ensemble would help record less of the direct sound and more of the room, hopefully creating an even better blend. Given the placement and pattern of your mics, I'm surprised the blend is as good as it is. I would have expected them to highlight certain voices even more.

JEGG mentioned there was too much side information in the recording, but looking at the placement, we should expect the recording to have lots of side information. Given how close the podium array is, most of the ensemble is on one side or the other, with only a few people directly in front.

Sure, it could use a little tweeking, but for what is it, it ain't that bad. Keep on experimenting and let us know how the next one turns out.

I recorded at a church recently, and I placed a small 6" stand on the lip of the balcony in the back of the hall. I did it for sonic reasons (150' away sounded better than 15'), but it also meant most of the audience had no idea the concert was being recording. Perhaps you should try mics placed on the back wall of your venue?

[hbphotoav]

If it was me, I'd see if the powers-that-be would mind a couple of very thin, black rods (carbon fiber would be best, but with the weight of the Naiants being so little, a 1/8 or 3/16 3' dowel sprayed flat black would likely work) with the mics at the tip, black E-taped to the rods by the cable, and gaff-taped to the choir side of the wooden shield, maybe at 1/3 and 2/3 across. If the robes are dark, the rods and mics would virtually disappear, the negative boundary effects would be minimized and you might get a better "wide field" of the small choir with very little additional expense.

Ultimately, and this need to be stressed to your client, they have the "A" choice, or the "B" choice: "invisible" mics and a seriously compromised recording... or slightly visible/highly visible and a much better document of the performance. Rather simple, though never easy. While the sounds may be magical, their acquisition is pure technique. Unfortunately, the laws of physics are not mere suggestions, adaptable by committee.

Good luck!

[Rick Sutton]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

I recorded at a church recently, and I placed a small 6" stand on the lip of the balcony in the back of the hall. I did it for sonic reasons (150' away sounded better than 15'), but it also meant most of the audience had no idea the concert was being recording. Perhaps you should try mics placed on the back wall of your venue?

If I did that at the churches I typically record at the traffic noise would be a real problem. Especially with children's choirs.
Harley Davidson at 6 O'clock! BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[npulsipher]

Originally Posted by hbphotoav

Ultimately, and this need to be stressed to your client, they have the "A" choice, or the "B" choice: "invisible" mics and a seriously compromised recording... or slightly visible/highly visible and a much better document of the performance. !

I have had this conversation with them on many occasions, and invariably they choose invisibility over sound, which is what brought me to this experiment.

However, your e. taped wooden dowels idea is a keeper for other gigs! Thanks!

Originally Posted by NorseHorse
but looking at the placement, we should expect the recording to have lots of side information. Given how close the podium array is, most of the ensemble is on one side or the other, with only a few people directly in front.

I always appreciate hearing from you Norse. You have a way of writing that makes it easy to understand exactly what you're saying, which is a skill that I envy. Thanks for your insight.

[JEGG]

Originally Posted by NorseHorse

JEGG mentioned there was too much side information in the recording, but looking at the placement, we should expect the recording to have lots of side information. Given how close the podium array is, most of the ensemble is on one side or the other, with only a few people directly in front.

No. By side information, I was not referring at all to the sides or width of the performing ensemble-I was referring to an unnatural and and somewhat frequency specific component in the difference information, which could not be explained by the photo and the OP's information on the distance between the mic, the location of the mic's which we see in the photo, and where performers were located. Less of that anomaly also appears in the monaural element, but it simply doesn't damage as much in the middle. Perhaps I've become sensitive to PA effects now that there are PA's on with open mic's everywhere, but I suspected something like this from the first moments of the first file posted. It's almost a signature sound.

Again, nothing to do with the width of the ensemble. Yes, of course it would have been nice if the omni's were further out-but this is not a mic placement effect. It's an interesting subject, and it was quite interesting to hear the OP's recording precisely because it was puzzling.

I have to bow out of this thread for now. Perhaps the subject will surface again elsewhere.

[chris319]

OP: Is it possible to position yourself some place where you can open and close that mic on the podium?

[hbphotoav]

Originally Posted by npulsipher

I have had this conversation with them on many occasions, and invariably they choose invisibility over sound, which is what brought me to this experiment.

However, your e. taped wooden dowels idea is a keeper for other gigs! Thanks!

Hmmm... so the mic on the pulpit is OK (and does not diminish the spirit of the evening), but yours are somehow not OK. Hard to figure people's reasoning, sometimes.

Maybe replace the pulpit mic with a NT4 or a VP-88 or some other single-point stereo mic...? Or, perhaps tape the Naiant cables (let the elements "dangle" by a half-inch or so to decouple from mechanical noise) to each side of the lectern, toward the front and below the desk, so as to diminish the paper rustling and contact thumps? Kind of a large, wide, wooden Jecklin...? Ah, well. Seems you have six months to come up with your next "best" thing...

Good luck!

HB

[chris319]

Maybe replace the pulpit mic with a NT4 or a VP-88 or some other single-point stereo mic...?

What's that going to do when someone has to use that mic to address the congregation through the house P.A. system? At the very least he would have to split those mics and send one feed to his recorder and the other feed to the P.A. system. He says he doesn't have the funds for something like that. With his Naiants he has a pseudo-boundary mic thing going. A stereo mic in place of the pulpit mic will likely pick up reflections from the lectern surface.