I recently recorded and early music group in an acapella performance of christmas music. (everything from medieval chant to modern).
The conductor hates the recording to put it mildly.
This is the first time anyone has ever really disliked what I gave them. The other recordings of his group were pretty bad, washed out, and noisy. But these were his complaints:
a) mics were way too close. (They were behind the conductor 9 ft up, and about 15 ft back from the ensemble)
b) he can hear individual sections and singers, and wants much more room.
c) the sections are not balanced correctly (keep in mind I was using a stereo array only, no spots)
after 5 redos of the mix, including one where there was about 60% church convolution reverb, he still thinks it is not enough. And wants it to sould like one of his recordings. (which sounds like it was miked in the back of a cathedral with a 12 second tail.)
Attached is a clip of the shortest song with the original mix. I personally don't think it sounds bad at all.
How do you approach directors who are unsatisfied with your work and expect something you disagree with?
Sounds ok.He must be an idiot.He probably have seen some movie or is going badly after exact sound replica of church.Why don't u go with them and record them in the church?
It's fine as is [edit - for that particular work - some "floaty" choral music intended to be heard in a large space would need a larger reverb]. If they sounded further back, I'd be wondering what they were afraid of me hearing.
However, there is no 'right' about this stuff so you may need to try to accommodate his particular taste. For instance, you could run it through a reverb with a longer tail, but with a fair amount of predelay and not too much of the reverb in the mix, so you'd have clarity with separated lushness. But of course he might want unclarity and mushness...
Was there no opportunity during (or even before, by checking existing recordings) the recording for him to check the kind of sound you were getting and try to adjust mic placement to suit his comments? Or was the acoustic not the kind where you'd want more of the room?
I had the same kind of problem with a prominent conductor of a prominent ensemble over here, who had a fixed idea of how his ensemble should sound and refused to clear for broadcast several recordings in a row - at which point I made let it be known that I wasn't prepared to try yet again. For me, live recordings in known locations should sound at least something like you'd hear if you were there - not how they would sound if they had been performing somewhere quite different.
Was there no opportunity during (or even before, by checking existing recordings) the recording for him to check the kind of sound you were getting and try to adjust mic placement to suit his comments? Or was the acoustic not the kind where you'd want more of the room?
That is the frustrating thing, I recorded some of the sound check, he listened to it and approved the balance. I thought I was in the clear.
It was a rather noisy audience, so I tried to explain that recording far away from the source would be a rather bad idea. It WAS a great room though, and if I thought it would be more ideal with a more distant setup, I would have done that.
Quote:
some "floaty" choral music intended to be heard in a large space would need a larger reverb
Very true, there was some of that on the concert, but alot of it was very intricate counterpoint also, and that turned to mush with the excessive reverb.
Quote:
This sounds great but I'd give him what he wants and move on.
I've been trying, but nothing seems to satisfy him. There is only so much reverb you can wash it out with before it sounds completely fake, and I've taken it there and beyond.
I wanted to make him happy because I would like the repeat business, but not if it will make me grind my teeth to the roots.
Oh, and to add insult to injury, he also mentioned that he might just take the audio from the camera that someone was walking around with, because it was further away.
Oh, and to add insult to injury, he also mentioned that he might just take the audio from the camera that someone was walking around with, because it was further away.
Tell him to shove it and move on tbh. Way more trouble than it's worth imo. I've worked with people like that before, never missed the repeat business after telling them to pull their ears out of the sock in their asshole. There's always more clients.
Posted via the Gearslutz iPhone app
__________________
Dust. Wind. Dude.
Progs - Reason 7, Live 8
Synths - Minibrute, Evolver, Blofeld, MoKeys
Drums - Korg EMX1, MaM ADX1
Guitars - LTD EC100, Hohner L75 Pro, Yamaha RBX375
Effects - Blackstar HT Dual, Aphex Acoustic Xciter, TCE Flashback, Red Witch Ivy, VFE Blueprint, MI Audio Tubezone, Boss ODB3, SPX 990
Tell him to shove it and move on tbh. Way more trouble than it's worth imo. I've worked with people like that before, never missed the repeat business after telling them to pull their ears out of the sock in their asshole. There's always more clients.
Posted via the Gearslutz iPhone app
This is probably not a good idea. Just throw a crap ton of verb on there, tell him it's te best you can do, be cordial, and that's all you can do. Don't let your ego get bent though man, you're a pro, you get good sounds, you know it, move on a you'll be ok :-)
__________________
Kevin Bourassa
Peridot Sound Mobile Recording Service www.peridotsound.com
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush
Eventually you should deploy the most expensive and best Mic you can get. It should be hideously expensive.
This is probably not a good idea. Just throw a crap ton of verb on there, tell him it's te best you can do, be cordial, and that's all you can do. Don't let your ego get bent though man, you're a pro, you get good sounds, you know it, move on a you'll be ok :-)
Definitely not a good idea but a nice sentiment, I still have to work with the guy in a professional setting at my radio job. (They advertise). You are right, I gave him my final try, and said that is the best I can do with it. I'm done. My ego was in the crapper though, thanks for rinsing it off.
This sounds great. Any further "back" and they'll loose all diction. FWIW, I've dealt with the reverb obsessed choir director before. I walked into a hall once and the conductor said that the back row sounded the best and that is where I should put my mics!
You should ask which recording he's trying to imitate. Did he listen to a take before the session started?
__________________ www.symphonicsound.com
"The secret of life, though, is falling down seven times and get up eight times." Paulo Coelho
Sounds fine to me. Is this a different room than the conductor usually works in?
I feel for you man. I just went through the same thing with a 'friend' I used to play with. I recorded her acoustic set and IMHO nailed it on the first mix. Her instructions were, "make it sound just like it sounded in the room, I want to know what the people were hearing."
Once she heard it she complained that the upright bass wasn't prominent enough (you couldn't hear it at all in the room), the drums were too loud (which they were in the room) and that her guitar sounded tinny and not the way it sounds when she plays it (crappy internal pickup, came across the PA in the room with that annoying, tinny, clicky Nashville singer/songwriter sound). I did one remix for her and told her if she wanted anything else changed, hourly rates applied. She ended up liking the second mix, LOL!
But yeah, it gets awkward when it's someone you have to work with on an ongoing basis, particularly when you think you understand what they want or what they're looking for going in.
a) mics were way too close. (They were behind the conductor 9 ft up, and about 15 ft back from the ensemble)
Nobody is going to tell me where to place my mics! He should mind his own damn business. Your placement was probably fine all things considered. Going a bit close makes sense when recording in less than ideal halls.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumleymusic
b) he can hear individual sections and singers, and wants much more room.
The mix you posted is IMO rather dry. It sounds fine but could use some reverb tail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rumleymusic
c) the sections are not balanced correctly (keep in mind I was using a stereo array only, no spots)
The balance is ecsactly how they sang it and how he conducted it.
But this is such a typical discussion. They can't get enough reverb can they. And not the natural ambience, they want big lush Lexicon-type...
Ahh this is all too weird sounding to be just a diff of opinion. This guy has an agenda and you've run afoul of it. You've given him your mix, now give him as much of HIS mix as you can, and hand over an invoice. If he wants the sound from a moving handheld video camera for his show, he can have that no matter what happens with you. Disagreement at this point will just hold up your payment and get you trash-talked in the music community. Surely you've had someone disagree with your techno-musical decisions before? It sucks but just be glad it doesn't happen more often. You can disagree and both be right in this case....
phil p
I liked your recording. But sometimes 'fi' can be a little too 'hi,' especially if it reveals issues that may not (probably don't) have anything to do with the recording.
A fairly simple reverb with a 'Mega Hall' preset followed by a multitap delay yields some 'churchy' sounds that could be the starting point for a mix that might please your client. Here's a screen shot of what I'm talking about.
__________________
doggedly determined contributor to the song glut
I feel your pain, the only thing more dangerous than stupidity is the appearance of intelligence.
One of the above suggestions, about giving the client the mix he wants and using a more 'acceptable' version of the mix for your reel / site.
I have had a few experiences recording primary and secondary school choirs and orchestras. One in particular was done in an basketball auditorium, complete with creeking tin roof expanding as the sun heated it up.
In this situation I used mic'd it fairly close to remove the 'natural' sound of the room and put my own verb on it in the mix. The biggest tool I used though in turning this into a 'great' sounding recording (the client loved it and in their naivity told me they thought I had made primary schoolers (8-12) sound like a professional orchestra) was multiband compression - I used it effectively to balance the groups and ensembles, then added my reverb (it was about 6-7 years ago and I think i just used a stock reverb from Steinberg Nuendo, the mulitband was definitly the stock steinberg mulitiband compressor)
Anyways, long story short - Multiband Compression with Reverb saved the day!
Hope that helps
(now bring on the gearslutz haters that are gonna complain about using stock plugins, just for them I want to add I used a MOTU 896HD MKII and plugged the U87i straight into the stock pre-amps...ewwwww...lol)
Is it possible that he is intentionally trashing your work so he can welsh on paying your fee?
The check is in the bank, I'm not worried about that. I just don't like unhappy clients.
Quote:
I walked into a hall once and the conductor said that the back row sounded the best and that is where I should put my mics!
Had the same thing told to me by a know-it-all production assistant. He said I should hang it from the balcony because the sound will have time to "meld"
I like the recording as is, but it seems the director wants it to sound as if it was recorded further back. And, just adding reverb isn't satisfying the director.
Here are some other things that might be worth a try to increase that "back row" sound:
1. Reduce the stereo channel separation. Bleed about half the right channel into the left channel, and vice versa.
2. Roll off the highs, perhaps 12 dB per decade from 100 Hz to 10 kHz.
This may or may not be what the director wants, but until you try it, who knows?
I listened and you got a good balance of direct:room and the choir's not shabby either. There is quite enough reverb for me, any more and those end-of-phrase resolutions that go ay-ay (heaven cay-ame) or ee-ee (Mair-ee-ee) will disappear in the mush.
The male(?) alto at one o'clock is a bit prominent and the basses not enough but you can't influence those unless you did retakes and shuffled the mics/singers around a bit. Was this mid-side?
I suppose you could mellow out the director's camera mono with EQ and then try adding a little as a "room" mic. See if that might feed his need for celestial ambiance.
There's never enough time beforehand to hammer these things out unless a record company sends out a producer - you did well as it was. It could serve you better to be credited as "recorded by" and your man as "mixed by" on the CD but keeping his confidence in your work is job one.
BRgds,
WalterT
I believe that if individual voicings stick out/can be heard, it is an issue of the choir learning to blend better - but who am I to argue?
Yes, if you were micing further back it would blend more, however, there's limitations due to the room size and the optimal place for the mics you've already figured out.
Explain to him that the room/hall may be a little "small" if you wanted it way back.
I've designed a custom long reverb that trails out for 6 secs... Hope you don't mind me having a go.
Most choir directors like lots of hall ambiance/ reverb - a fact of life.
Sometimes they obsess about it to the point where it doesn't make sense or sound good.
One of the community colleges near here does all there recording from the back of the hall using two shotgun microphones on either side of the audio console. It really sounds bad but I am sure there are people who love the sound since it has a lot of hall ambiance/reverb.
Not sure what is the best advice to give the OP except do what the client wants and cash the check. If they don't want to be "educated" then don't try.
YMMV
__________________
-TOM-
Thomas W. Bethel
Managing Director
Acoustik Musik, Ltd.
Room with a View Productions
Oberlin, OH 44074 www.acoustikmusik.com
Doing what you love is freedom.
Loving what you do is happiness.
Celebrating 18 years in the mastering business in 2013
I believe that if individual voicings stick out/can be heard, it is an issue of the choir learning to blend better - but who am I to argue?
Yes, if you were micing further back it would blend more, however, there's limitations due to the room size and the optimal place for the mics you've already figured out.
Explain to him that the room/hall may be a little "small" if you wanted it way back.
I've designed a custom long reverb that trails out for 6 secs... Hope you don't mind me having a go.
Please have a listen.
I prefer the original, very lifelike, nice performance ,balance and room.
I like your processing but its presence band brings up too much detail,I can here a camera shutter firing.
The customer is always right it seems
Give him a echo return feed only
Possibly from Wells Cathedral
8 seconds of limestone and velvet heaven
Angels in the Architecture should do him .
Does the conductor understand that the performance isn't really that good?
This...
A good conductor can adapt the performance to the ambiance/sound of the place where performing. If he not even took the time to do a "soundcheck" himself standing in the back of the church/cathedral/what ever place, you KNOW he don't understand 100% his job.
A conductor isn't just a rally driver thats on full "powwaaa" and turning the steering wheel, he also needs reading the map before driving.
But up a AUX channel with a big church delay. Drown it, pull a bit back to make it not to crazy.
And give him 3 versions... less reverb, normal and to much. Let him choose and say that your did your best and are done. Because just saying to you as insult that a even a camera recording is beter while MOVING when they performed... that's just first class fresh BS from the arena's in south of Spain.
Try using 2 reverbs, 1 with everything below 400 and everything above 4k rolled off (even 2k, play with it), no early refections, long, 100% wet and followed by a simple stereo delay (you could also adjust for tempo); the other a nice large church. Don't return reverb 1 to the mix but feed it to reverb 2. Mix the 2 sounds with reverb 2 to create depth without losing clarity. I agree that the stereo width could be decreased to achieve a far away perspective, main at 9;30 and 2:30, reverb 1 at 9 and 3 and reverb 2 hard left and right. The recording has its own ER signature, I would disactivate it on the verbs as these will undoubtedly be reverberated also...
New Reply 
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
