Recording Soprano Sax

[obostic]

Hi Guys,

I need some advice recording soprano sax. This is my first major project recording a solo sax player and not as easy as I initially thought .

I have a pretty good room and a damn good player, but the recording sound is not as prominent as major releases. In fact, no matter what mic combination the recording is still thin sounding. I've tried multing, adding delay anywhere from 30ms doubling to 60ms slapback, and a nice hall reverb with just minor improvements. I've also checked for any phasing issues by rotating each mic position still no change. I know that there isn't much bottom below 160Hz, but there is plenty between say 200hz and 500hz to get a nice rich sound.

Here is the recording setup, which of course maybe the wrong mic selection, but this combination yielded the best results from my locker:

U47w directed at top keys about 12"-18" out in front of the player
C800g 8"-12" in front of the bell off-axis and this is because the player loves the reed noise. In fact that combination yields a gorgeous sound, but simply lack depth and richness.

I recorded both mics with no compression into a pair of Chandler LTD-1s->Lavry Blue A/D->Sequoia DAW. For those of you that have achieved that nice rich sound and don't mind sharing, I would be greatly appreciative.

Thanks in advance.

[Ricey]

most of the sound is going to be where you have the 47. i would try something there first. how is the player, as far as key noise? the better technique they have, the closer you can get... if you have access to a ribbon mic like the Coles 4038 ot RCA77 or Royer 121 - they're great for off-axis and softness(richness?)

[Musiclab]

you probably have a phase issue between the 2 mics. The fat sound will not be whats coming from the bell. try fooling with the phase and placement. If that doesnt work
just don't use the bell mic.

[Djembe]

You didn't mention if the soprano is straight or bent.

Coincidentally I did an informal mic shootout yesterday with a friend who has a very bright bent soprano. I used one mic pointing at the keys ( obviously with a bent one, a lot of sound is still coming from the bell) through a Grace 101 pre (so I could hear cleanly what the mic was doing).
We tried:
M69
M88
C414 BUL-S
TLM170
Rode K2

The K2 was the best (warmest) sound by far, followed by the C414.

When we tried the same on a very bright alto sax, the C414 was warmer (nicer).

I would agree that it's a good idea not to have too much bell sound in there.
Makes it sound too honky.

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by Djembe

You didn't mention if the soprano is straight or bent.

Coincidentally I did an informal mic shootout yesterday with a friend who has a very bright bent soprano. I used one mic pointing at the keys ( obviously with a bent one, a lot of sound is still coming from the bell) through a Grace 101 pre (so I could hear cleanly what the mic was doing).
We tried:
M69
M88
C414 BUL-S
TLM170
Rode K2

The K2 was the best (warmest) sound by far, followed by the C414.

When we tried the same on a very bright alto sax, the C414 was warmer (nicer).

I would agree that it's a good idea not to have too much bell sound in there.
Makes it sound too honky.

the reason why the bent soprano is bright is because the bell of the horn is pointed at you instead of the floor. The reason for the a mic on the bell is to get more top and so should only be used SPARINGLY. 414TLII is very nice on alto sax, or any bright horn.
But with a player with a BIG horn sound you can also use a U87.

[quincyg]

i'm a sax player. long time since i recorded soprano though. you probably only need on mic pointed at the fingers of the right hand. tlm103 with a ua610 with cranked input works great for tenor and alto. also try a u87. i think i did a session once where they used a ribbon mic and got a good sound. depending on the genre you could try a distant mic with a big reverb ala the old coltrane soprano recordings. sounds like he's across the room. the right reverb should fix u up in general with a solo sax.

[theblue1]

I need some advice recording soprano sax.


For heaven's sake, laddy, just don't do it!







I agree on giving the blame things some room, if you do, though, as others have noted. And recording a bent bell soprano (which I've never done) is probably something of a challenge, to be sure.


Want some real fun? Try an oboe sometime...

[quincyg]

Originally Posted by Musiclab

the reason why the bent soprano is bright is because the bell of the horn is pointed at you instead of the floor. The reason for the a mic on the bell is to get more top and so should only be used SPARINGLY. 414TLII is very nice on alto sax, or any bright horn.
But with a player with a BIG horn sound you can also use a U87.

the actual sound of the soprano becomes warmer and rounder the more bent the bell is. bent is warmer than straight, curved is even warmer.

50% of the sound of a sax is going to be mouthpiece and reed choice. make sure he sounds right in the room. it may be that the player needs to think about his recording setup.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by quincyg

the actual sound of the soprano becomes warmer and rounder the more bent the bell is. bent is warmer than straight, curved is even warmer.

50% of the sound of a sax is going to be mouthpiece and reed choice. make sure he sounds right in the room. it may be that the player needs to think about his recording setup.

Interesting!

[obostic]

Originally Posted by Djembe

You didn't mention if the soprano is straight or bent.

It is straight.

[pegleg]

I have a hard time imagining a U47, in that position, not yielding excellent results. One thing - what's a U47 'w' - or was the 'w' a typo?

Last time I recorded soprano (a few weeks ago) I had an M49 in more or less that same position, but about 2 or 2 1/2 feet away, and the tone is excellent. Full, balanced, everything. I tried a C-800 as well, which was fine, but lacked the think mids I like to hear...

I would wonder if the two mics are causing phase issues - personally not a fan of the dual-mic scenario (on much of anything...). I've had many happy soprano players with one mic only.

[obostic]

Originally Posted by pegleg

I have a hard time imagining a U47, in that position, not yielding excellent results. One thing - what's a U47 'w' - or was the 'w' a typo?

Wagner U47w!

[obostic]

OK here is a sample with a disclaimer:

1.) It's not mixed I just want to eliminate your imagination.
2.) You're listening with no eq or compression on the sax.
3.) It aint about the player, I could care less about the playing.
4.) It's only about the two mics mentioned earlier.
5.) No jokes. Please.tutt

www.earlystars.com/music/saxtest.mp3

[pegleg]

OH! I've never used one, so I don't know how it compares to a U47...

Re-reading your original post; perhaps try backing the mic off a little more - sometimes the 'tone' needs a little more room to develop.

Beyond that, I might suggest that the tone this player achieves is not the same as what you're trying to match it to. I recall a wide variety of both tenor and soprano 'tones' that different player's I've recorded achieve. Some are deeper and thicker, some 'cut' through the mix more...

Is the artist happy with it?

OK heard the mix now, and it does seem to lack a lower mid fullness (bigness?) that I would like - again, the above statement may apply - ? Does the Wagner 47 have a more 'scooped out' sound?

[obostic]

Originally Posted by pegleg

Beyond that, I might suggest that the tone this player achieves is not the same as what you're trying to match it to.

I'm not quite sure what you mean can you explain it bit more. Thanks.

[obostic]

Originally Posted by pegleg

Does the Wagner 47 have a more 'scooped out' sound?

No, it's quite similar to my original U47, but without the noise. In fact, the bottom is nice round and full sounding.

Yes, what I meant was low-mids sorry for not being more specific.

[pegleg]

I mean that the tone coming out of almost any acoustic instrument is partially dependent on the player. Likewise, every different acoustic instrument has a different sound. So, the soprano player you're recording, and those 'major releases' you're comparing it to, are likely getting very different sounds acoustically. And, while you can do your best to capture it, or improve upon it, the sound that's coming out of the instrument is going to be, largely, what you end up with on disc.

I work regularly with two tenor sax players - I don't know what makes and models of sax they play, but I'd bet they aren't the same (they look quite different). Their playing styles, phrasing, intensity, 'feel' - all quite different. If I tried, AT ALL, to match the recorded tone between the two, I would probably fail miserably - they just don't sound anything alike. So, I work with what they're giving me, and make sure I'm achieving 'their tone' on record...

My comments on mic distance, and questions about the Wagner still stand...

[pegleg]

Originally Posted by obostic

No, it's quite similar to my original U47, but without the noise. In fact, the bottom is nice round and full sounding.

To me, the sound of a 47 is (more or less) all about the midrange / lower mids.
Many of the U47 clones I have heard have a similar sweet top end, with a full (perhaps 'fuller') low end, but less midrange 'chunkiness' or thickness, which, to me , is what the M7/KK47 capsule excels at...

[quincyg]

man that was like watching a bloody car crash. i wanted to stop listening but i just couldn't stop myself. the real kenny g is bad enough but mini g? ok so...

i believe what the previous poster is alluding to is that the player is not producing such a great tone. as pathetic as kenny g is, he still gets a round kenny g kind of nauseating tone. part of it could be this guys set up. a plastic mouthpiece or plastic reed can give you that one dimensional sound. although based on his lack of rhythm i am thinking that it is probably the player more than anything. boo boo in, boo boo out.

what does he sound like in the room?

sorry if i am out of line with the comments, but i wasn't mentally prepared for that.

[pegleg]

quincy - ouch, man. but... ok...

obostic - check this out;

http://www.chrisgreenejazz.com/music.html

check out the first tune "4.23" (for crying out loud, the broadband version)

is that closer to what you're asking for?

[obostic]

Originally Posted by quincyg

man that was like watching a bloody car crash. i wanted to stop listening but i just couldn't stop myself. the real kenny g is bad enough but mini g? ok so...

i believe what the previous poster is alluding to is that the player is not producing such a great tone. as pathetic as kenny g is, he still gets a round kenny g kind of nauseating tone. part of it could be this guys set up. a plastic mouthpiece or plastic reed can give you that one dimensional sound. although based on his lack of rhythm i am thinking that it is probably the player more than anything. boo boo in, boo boo out.

what does he sound like in the room?

sorry if i am out of line with the comments, but i wasn't mentally prepared for that.

You violated number 3 and 5! NO MORE POSTS FOR YOU!

[blaugruen7]

Originally Posted by quincyg

the actual sound of the soprano becomes warmer and rounder the more bent the bell is. bent is warmer than straight, curved is even warmer.

interesting.
where did you get this opinion?
i have studied tenor jazz saxophone and so i am used to hearing the saxophone sound.
i have once heard a straight conn soprano saxophone from the 30ties and this was the most warmest, roundest soprano sound i ever heard.

[studjo]

Soprano sax is easy : I keep a Roede Classic I around only for using it on soprano - that mic doesn't see much use but when pointed at a soprano everybody is laughing (musicians and mic included)


Jo

[NesNeedsGear]

how bout recording through a Beyer M160 ribbon or AEA (R84 or R92), then having a great omni mic (earthworks?) to capture some room sound. compress the room mic track, and mix to taste.

just throwing it out there.

[TanTan]

the Beyer 160M is my favourite soprano sax mic into a 1064\1073

[Yannick]

I had best results with:

a. a great player
b. the same great player with a better reed
c. a Royer SF1 a bit to the side (NOT in the bell ), above the instrument. Mostly tends to be closer to the right hand, or even further down the instrument. If you want some brightness back, you can still point to the mouthpiece from this position (do I like figureofeights)

I'm not convinced you did not have a good player, but it shure sounds as twomicsphasing to monohellshwishhhshwishh. I would cut the bell mic.

IMO there are only two ways to record a (smaller&moving) solo instrument with two mics:
a. a stereo mic (coincident)
b. a close and a distant mic.

[blaugruen7]

Originally Posted by Yannick

IMO there are only two ways to record a (smaller&moving) solo instrument with two mics:
a. a stereo mic (coincident)
b. a close and a distant mic.

just curious.
why do you think this?
why no stereo mic technic?

[Musiclab]

Originally Posted by quincyg

the actual sound of the soprano becomes warmer and rounder the more bent the bell is. bent is warmer than straight, curved is even warmer.

50% of the sound of a sax is going to be mouthpiece and reed choice. make sure he sounds right in the room. it may be that the player needs to think about his recording setup.

Actually I find what comes out of the bell is the brightest part of the soprano's sound.
It may be that the overall sound is warmer on a bent sax, although I kind of doubt it since most soprano players tend to point the bell at the floor with a straight soprano, you're never really getting the direct sound from the bell.
It also maybe it's warmer with some distance from the horn. As far as what makes up the sound, I find its at least 50% player and the rest mouthpiece, reed and and horn. I'm sure you know you can put 2 players on the same horn and get a VERY different tone with the same mouthpiece and reed.

[pegleg]

Originally Posted by TanTan

the Beyer 160M is my favourite soprano sax mic into a 1064\1073

Interesting; with a hypercardioid mic, the player can't move around too much. How close?

I agree with Yannick; a pair of close, spaced mics will cause great problems if the player moves. As will miking too close. That's why I back off 2 - 3 feet, whenever possible. This allows the cardioid pickup pattern enough reach, so if the player moves, they're not getting 'off - axis'.

It's not necessarily conducive to good performance to say "stand perfectly still".

[rwhitney]

Although I only use this for classical music, a pair of omnis spaced about a foot (or 18 inches) apart and about 3 feet away (and slightly above) can work well for solo instruments in general. I suppose this might not work so well in some "bad" sounding spaces, though.

Although it's pretty standard when using one mic to point a cardioid just above the bell about a foot away, I prefer more space, something like middle of the instrument, 2 to 3 ft above. I think that sounds more natural.