big band live recording...

[JazzYoda]

Pete Rugolo?

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

...in a medium size club, only solo and pno on the PA system.
what do you slutz think about different approaches:
(A) close-miking every instrument, including clip-on mics for brass & winds (and some of them changing their instruments - so four mics per player...), plus at least 2 audience mics
(B) close-miked piano, bass, gtr, solo - 3 mic drum setup (2OH/BD) - 2 or 3 for saxes&woods, 2 for four trombones, 2 for four trumpets - room/audience mic
(C) borrowed from classical: main mic setup plus a few spots (pno, gtr, bs, bd, solo, sub-main pair for the whole brass&wind section)
(D) borrowed from hardcore classical: main mic plus sub-main pair for rhythm section plus sub-main pair for brass&wind

Just for thought. No need to have THE ONE AND ONLY setup by tomorrow morning

ANSWER:

A-will never work. Sound like sh#t and be phuqu'd up. besides, who can make mute changes or use a plunger with a clip-on?

B-the winner!

C-second best. this should do nicely in a good room with musicians that know how to blend properly.

D-what is this 1946? Need to close mic at least piano and bass.

Bass direct if for stool-sittin'-amp jockeys, don't even think about it.

[pkautzsch]

Sorry, Yoda, it's not Pete R.

Nobody else guessing...?
Hint: 5 saxes, 5 bones, 5 trumpets. g/b/p/dr/perc (maybe that last one will help too...). One piece is only rhythm section plus 5 saxes.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

Oh, BTW: The concert I recorded was named "A tribute to (xyz)" and it was only the original arrangements. Who guesses (NOT by listening to the mp3, just by horns lineup please) the name of the composer?

Bill Holman?

[pkautzsch]

Yoda, of course it *was* Pete R. who composed many of the pieces played that evening. I don't know why I wrote "composer" when I actually wanted you to gess the band leader this concert was dedicated to.

[JazzYoda]

Originally Posted by pkautzsch

Yoda, of course it *was* Pete R. who composed many of the pieces played that evening. I don't know why I wrote "composer" when I actually wanted you to gess the band leader this concert was dedicated to.

Aha...Stan Kenton

[pkautzsch]

right

[pkautzsch]

...of the finished product.
Pics from the show can be found on the band's website - last pic is a good overview. Note the 3ft spaced MK21 in front of the stage which ended up nearly as a classical main pair.
the 3 MK4 over the pets were used mainly for the percussion (shake eggs, claves, ...) the trumpet players played in one piece. Had enough pets on the bone mics.

[matyas]

Okay, so how would you guys do this if you had only 8 channels to work with. I might be recording a big band soon and that's all I'm going to have. (And the bandleader specifically requested a more "roomy", less-closed miked sound.) I'm thinking a main pair (like I would do with an orchestra), solo mics for trumpet, trombone, and saxophone, mono piano and drums, and bass DI. Yeah, not ideal, but as I said, I have only 8 channels.

[JazzYoda]

I've done lots of big band recordings with few mics. With 8 mics I would do this:

Brass section playing into 4 mics...trumpets on risers behind trombones playing into 2 RCA 44-BX mics, placed above them so that soloists will sound louder when they stand up. Trombones: Identical setup, 2 44s only slightly lower because they are below the trumpet riser, and more forward .

Saxophones in a circle around a U-47 on omni, above them so soloists will be louder standing.

Drums: U-47 on cardioid, right in front of the set, pointing at the drummer
Bass: Schoeps M-221b or Neumann KM-54 on lower bout, possibly with a foam windscreen. Small baffle if separation needed.
Piano: Schoeps M-221b or Neumann KM-54 above soundhole area, or in soundhole if more separation is needed.

This is the way that countless classic stereo big band records were made when 8 channels was "a lot" and in my opinion, sounds way better than the modern multi-mic setups. Let the musicians create their own blend.

[matyas]

Thanks, O Jedi Master of Jazz! I never would have come up with that set-up in my head, but it makes perfect sense, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. It makes sense not to treat a jazz big band like a small symphony orchestra with soloists (which is kind of how I was approaching it), and more like a (duh!) big jazz band. I don't have anything as cool and exotic as a U-47 (much less two) or RCA-44BX (much less four!), but I think I may be able to scare up four ribbons, two SDCs, and 2 multipattern LDCs, so I should be able to approximate the basic idea with much humbler mics.

Originally Posted by JazzYoda

I've done lots of big band recordings with few mics. With 8 mics I would do this:

Brass section playing into 4 mics...trumpets on risers behind trombones playing into 2 RCA 44-BX mics, placed above them so that soloists will sound louder when they stand up. Trombones: Identical setup, 2 44s only slightly lower because they are below the trumpet riser, and more forward .

Saxophones in a circle around a U-47 on omni, above them so soloists will be louder standing.

Drums: U-47 on cardioid, right in front of the set, pointing at the drummer
Bass: Schoeps M-221b or Neumann KM-54 on lower bout, possibly with a foam windscreen. Small baffle if separation needed.
Piano: Schoeps M-221b or Neumann KM-54 above soundhole area, or in soundhole if more separation is needed.

This is the way that countless classic stereo big band records were made when 8 channels was "a lot" and in my opinion, sounds way better than the modern multi-mic setups. Let the musicians create their own blend.

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by matyas

Thanks, O Jedi Master of Jazz! I never would have come up with that set-up in my head, but it makes perfect sense, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. It makes sense not to treat a jazz big band like a small symphony orchestra with soloists (which is kind of how I was approaching it), and more like a (duh!) big jazz band. I don't have anything as cool and exotic as a U-47 (much less two) or RCA-44BX (much less four!), but I think I may be able to scare up four ribbons, two SDCs, and 2 multipattern LDCs, so I should be able to approximate the basic idea with much humbler mics.

This was a standard way to record big bands in the '50s and '60s. There are a couple of variations on this but Yoda's method is my favourite. Must have a good room.

variation : Trumpets around 1 LDC in omni mode, Trombones around 1 LDC in omni, 1 sdc( cardioid) for tenors, 1 sdc( cardioid) for altos, 1 sdc( cardioid) for baritone. 1 mic each piano, bass, drums. This was how Phil Ramone recorded Thad Jones/Mel Lewis orchestra back in the '60s at A&R in NYC. The advantage to 1 mic for each section is that they balance themselves in the room. The advantage to 3 mics in the saxophone section is more control of doubles (flute, calrinet, bass clar. etc...). If the music only calls for saxophones go with the 1 mic in omni.

[rosswmc]

It is very intreasting to get advice on mic layouts for Big bands. Very Intreasting posts in this thread.

I record Big bands for a youth group in Kansas City, Each week I record Five different Jazz Big bands, The recordings are mostly used for performance review, and two to three times a year we produce CD's of the best recordings.

I have a limited number of input channels ( 16 ) so I find two patterns that work well,

The bands are typical big bands,

Piano, Bass, Guitar, Drums
2 Alto sax, 2 Tenor Sax, A Bari
3 Tenor Bones, 1 Bass Bone
4 trumpets
1 Vocal

I Mic in the following way,

1 Bass,
1 Guitar
1 Piano
5 Drum, 1 Bass, 2 Overhead, 1 Floor tom, 1 Tom ( Pointed at Snare)
2 Trumpets (1 Between 1&2nd , 1 Between 2nd & 3rd)
2 Bones ( 1 on First, One on Bass Bone)
3 Sax ( 1 between 1st Tenor and 1st Alto, 1 Between 2nd Tenor & 2nd Alto, 1 on Barri)
1 Vocal ( If I do not have a vocal I use a figure 8 centered up front to get the room)

The second pattern is

Right Front, left front and Center

This pattern leaves no way to post mix. But gives a very true Big Band sound.

We have also tuned the recording room to get the best possible sound with Acoustic treatments,

I think I would choose what you call "B"

I do not claim to be a professional but with well over 100 recording sessions, I have tried a lot of different ways of recording the big Bands in a very fixed acoustic environment. The youth are very tallented yet untrained Musicains, these recordings teach the kids how to Record and how to project and play to Mics. It has become a wonderful learning experence for both me and the youth. It also gives a living history of there progress, from beginning to Advanced for the kids. It is really exciting the first time someone hears themself for th first time.

www.myspace.com\kansascityyouthjazz

[ajfarber]

Originally Posted by rosswmc

It is very intreasting to get advice on mic layouts for Big bands. Very Intreasting posts in this thread.

I record Big bands for a youth group in Kansas City, Each week I record Five different Jazz Big bands, The recordings are mostly used for performance review, and two to three times a year we produce CD's of the best recordings.

I have a limited number of input channels ( 16 ) so I find two patterns that work well,

The bands are typical big bands,

Piano, Bass, Guitar, Drums
2 Alto sax, 2 Tenor Sax, A Bari
3 Tenor Bones, 1 Bass Bone
4 trumpets
1 Vocal

I Mic in the following way,

1 Bass,
1 Guitar
1 Piano
5 Drum, 1 Bass, 2 Overhead, 1 Floor tom, 1 Tom ( Pointed at Snare)
2 Trumpets (1 Between 1&2nd , 1 Between 2nd & 3rd)
2 Bones ( 1 on First, One on Bass Bone)
3 Sax ( 1 between 1st Tenor and 1st Alto, 1 Between 2nd Tenor & 2nd Alto, 1 on Barri)
1 Vocal ( If I do not have a vocal I use a figure 8 centered up front to get the room)

The second pattern is

Right Front, left front and Center

This pattern leaves no way to post mix. But gives a very true Big Band sound.

We have also tuned the recording room to get the best possible sound with Acoustic treatments,

I think I would choose what you call "B"

I do not claim to be a professional but with well over 100 recording sessions, I have tried a lot of different ways of recording the big Bands in a very fixed acoustic environment. The youth are very tallented yet untrained Musicains, these recordings teach the kids how to Record and how to project and play to Mics. It has become a wonderful learning experence for both me and the youth. It also gives a living history of there progress, from beginning to Advanced for the kids. It is really exciting the first time someone hears themself for th first time.

www.myspace.com\kansascityyouthjazz

Way too many drum mics. Other than that, you're good.

[markr041]

I am not sure I liked the finalmix excerpt above; it sounded compressed and with little imaging. Maybe I just didn't like the piece.

Here is big band sound, appropriately miked for the period piece (recorded this month), that has I think imaging, dynamics and excitement. Maybe because it's a 1940's sound.

[Shadow_7]

Maybe it's the performer in me. But in college, we had to REDO a couple of sessions because the recording needs DIDN'T gel with our presumed / expected performance setup. As far as us performers, we expected (stage left, piano, drummer, bass guitar, acoustic guitar, auxiliary percussion). From back to front Trumpets, Bones, Saxes. To screw with that to ANY degree spelled failure from even the most experienced / well intentioned professional. Especially if we were tracking to pre-recorded tracks.

There was more than one session where I was concerned about playing the written track versus the embellished track(s) based on more than one on a part / layering. Given that the booth only accommodated 2 at a time. (or one drum set). And the ensemble entailed two on a part (most of the time). IMO the group would be better served with just a stereo capture, than trying to present an interpretation of an interpretation, of an interpretation. Just my take.

[rosswmc]

Mark R, You 40's sounds is what I'm trying for, can you give your setup

I have attached My latest attempt, hope you can listen, These are 12 to 18 year old kids

Thanks

[markr041]

To be clear, the 40's sound refers to the style of playing and orchestration, not the recording! The recording takes advantage of modern technology (24-bit ,48k) full frequency range and uncompressed dynamics.

Re: your recording - it seems to be mono, with limited frequency response and some distortion for the band, although I liked the vocal recording.

The recording I attached differs from the other examples because it eschews the close-miked, multiple mike, mix it in the lab approach, which gives, to my ears in the examples, a totally artificial sound, in favor of a tried and true stereo technique that gives good imaging: ORTF. You can tell almost exactly the placement of each sax, the bones, the trumpets and the drum kit and piano. And there are no compressed dynamics (which has nothing to do with mic placement, of course).