Gearslutz

Gearslutz (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   Remote Possibilities in Location Recording & Production (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-in-location-recording-amp-production/)
-   -   Modern pipeorgan (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-in-location-recording-amp-production/1112156-modern-pipeorgan.html)

heva 13th September 2016 12:49 PM

Modern pipeorgan
 
2 Attachment(s)
Recently visited an organrecital where music by Siegfried Reda was performed. I made a recording for the archives.

Opinions?

boojum 15th September 2016 05:45 AM

Pretty nice. I think I would prefer Bach but we are not talking about that but the recording. Wish I could have something like that to record.

heva 15th September 2016 11:52 AM

Thanks, the recording was a real stab in the dark (no time for try out).
Anyway, the setup was 2 matched mrp01 ribbons about 3m up in MS 'rolo46 array' (mics side-by-side: Side.mic left, Mid,mic right), matched MartiAudio boosters, Audiofire4, laptop(linux). Tiny bit of high shelf eq.

GeekNote: Siegfried Reda worked in this church, and designed the organ specifiation.

Richard Crowley 15th September 2016 01:17 PM

Sounds great. Thanks for sharing the recording and the photo and the gear details.

How nice to have a proper venue for a pipe organ. The room is actually the "sounding-board" of the instrument. Many modern churches here in the "New World" tend to be wide, short and dead. Hardly proper spaces for a pipe organ.

TMetzinger 15th September 2016 05:43 PM

The recording is quite good. The music is not at all to my taste.

boojum 16th September 2016 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12137846)
Thanks, the recording was a real stab in the dark (no time for try out).
Anyway, the setup was 2 matched mrp01 ribbons about 3m up in MS 'rolo46 array' (mics side-by-side: Side.mic left, Mid,mic right), matched MartiAudio boosters, Audiofire4, laptop(linux). Tiny bit of high shelf eq.

GeekNote: Siegfried Reda worked in this church, and designed the organ specifiation.

I have the MRP01's also and would like for you to post a photo of what your interpretation of Roger's array looks like. Thanks!

Ulrich 16th September 2016 08:55 PM

Nothing wrong at all with this music.
I have the impression the organ would have been more balanced by using a higher stand (e.g. higher than the Rückpositiv). And I don't really can judge on the pedal only by this extract. It's not very prominent here. I read the organ has eight 16' stops...
I didn't know this organ before, thanks for sharing.
Greetings from the Ruhr valley,
Ulrich

heva 16th September 2016 10:12 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 12139254)
I have the MRP01's also and would like for you to post a photo of what your interpretation of Roger's array looks like. Thanks!

To my ears, this way the MS is better than when used on top of each other (the regular way).

TMetzinger 17th September 2016 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12140920)
To my ears, this way they MS is better than when used on top of each other (the regular way).

If in your picture the mic with the red cable is the Mid mic, I guess it would work. I've always placed them vertically though.

boojum 17th September 2016 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12140920)
To my ears, this way they MS is better than when used on top of each other (the regular way).

I would rotate the mics 90° counter-clockwise on their vertical axis. In that position the "M" would have a clear shot ahead and the "S" a clear shot on each side. That is, the mic bar would be at right angles to the sound source. I meant to ask Roger about this as the mics will still be in the same relation to each other (i.e., occupy the same amount of space and present the same amount of visual obstruction) but have each more direct access to what they want to "hear."

The recordings sound good and I am itching to get the MRP-01's out working again. The Oktava Shop was not listing this mic the last time I looked. NoHype would have been a better choice for me, I think, as JP seems to have a more steady inventory. Just my bias, perhaps.

Thanks for the photo posting.

voltronic 17th September 2016 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 12141305)
I would rotate the mics 90° counter-clockwise on their vertical axis. In that position the "M" would have a clear shot ahead and the "S" a clear shot on each side. That is, the mic bar would be at right angles to the sound source. I meant to ask Roger about this as the mics will still be in the same relation to each other (i.e., occupy the same amount of space and present the same amount of visual obstruction) but have each more direct access to what they want to "hear."

That's a very interesting suggestion. If one were using MKH 30s as in Rolo's picture here, you're suggesting that you take the side mic (green) and position it directly behind the mid mic (red), correct? That would present an even smaller visual obstruction to the audience!

It would also satisfy people who have seen this setup and raised concerns that the side mic is not exactly centered, and that the side mic's rear lobe is being shadowed by the mid mic. No comment on if those concerns are justified or not, but it seems your suggestion would address both issues. Although now, the rear lobe of the mid mic would be shadowed by the side mic behind it. You can't please everyone, I guess. jkthtyrt

boojum 17th September 2016 02:45 AM

VT, the back of the figure-8 is not used as much as it is used. I would "guess" in those instances where it was used it would be as unaffected as the side channel is in Roger's original idea. It "seems" a moot point but the visual image is unsettling and as a result I have more faith in the rig after it has been rotated the 90°. Color me cranky. cooge

voltronic 17th September 2016 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 12141360)
VT, the back of the figure-8 is not used as much as it is used. I would "guess" in those instances where it was used it would be as unaffected as the side channel is in Roger's original idea. It "seems" a moot point but the visual image is unsettling and as a result I have more faith in the rig after it has been rotated the 90°. Color me cranky. cooge

Good point. If nothing else, having everything more visually symmetrical satisfies my OCD tendencies. yingyang It probably has a negligible effect on the sound, though.

heva 17th September 2016 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TMetzinger (Post 12141228)
If in your picture the mic with the red cable is the Mid mic, I guess it would work. I've always placed them vertically though.

The left mic (white label) is mid and facing the music. The choice for this setup was portability, less bulky than two spiders rigged on top of each other. Also, i do miss some 16foot oomph you get with omnis. Not sure if a 3rd omni channel is convenient (it does work), a low shelf at 30Hz also seem to help. Work in progress ...

Rolo 46 17th September 2016 10:11 AM

Good recording Hev
Sounds very real, many organ recordings do not, the room is well rendered.
That array is quite chunky and ribbons are more opaque than MKH 30 teflon capsules ,but it works
Wether you go side by side or tandem is academic, I prefer the rear unobstructed, but dont have to pan the side to resolve S , it just works.
Well done
Roger

TMetzinger 17th September 2016 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12141713)
The left mic (white label) is mid and facing the music. The choice for this setup was portability, less bulky than two spiders rigged on top of each other. Also, i do miss some 16foot oomph you get with omnis. Not sure if a 3rd omni channel is convenient (it does work), a low shelf at 30Hz also seem to help. Work in progress ...

OK, thanks. I'd expect some artifacts by having the - of the side mic shadowed by the mid mic. Like boojum, I think that rotating the whole pair 90 degrees and tucking the "side" mic behind the "mid" mic would give you "better" results, though technically you'd have some phase issues because of the difference in arrival to Mid and Side.

For reference, when I say "technically", what I generally mean is "something that disagrees with theory/physics or that you might notice on an analyzer or oscilloscope; but is either unnoticed or pleasing to the ear". cooge

boojum 17th September 2016 09:36 PM

Ahah! That crafty Roger. Yes! Phase issues outweigh any possible shadowing efftct(s). It seems Roger does "know his onions", again. kfhkh

Rolo 46 17th September 2016 11:04 PM

The beauty of the eight is its clarity ,this comes from an open rear, much as an omni sounds better than a card.

Matti 19th September 2016 04:05 AM

Thanks, I enjoyed

Matti

heva 19th September 2016 12:21 PM

Thanks all. It was a first try with ribbons on a big organ, and I'm pleased with the result, though not sure about the really low bass [eq. might be an option, it *is* there, just (too) quiet].
Choosing the sidebyside micsetup was indeed as rolo46 says to have MID as 'free' as possible (and for portability), that SIDE doesn't seem to be bothered with it is a nice suprise.

Richard Crowley 20th September 2016 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12145309)
...s to have MID as 'free' as possible (and for portability), that SIDE doesn't seem to be bothered with it is a nice suprise.

Maybe it's just me, but that seems like an oxymoron.

I would think that the side (L/R) microphone would have much higher priority at having an unobstructed, symmetrical "view" in order to preserve the proper stereo field. And if the polar response of those mics truly aren't bothered by adjacent mic bodies, then I would certainly prioritize the side mic for the best "view". If it is really that important for the mid mic to have a "free view" then stack them vertically, head-to-head.

heva 20th September 2016 08:30 AM

What I meant was my surprise in this case that the SIDE mic [next to MID as opposed to above it] didn't seem to be obstructed by the MID mic.

Rolo 46 20th September 2016 09:46 AM

Vertical stacking is visually obtrusive for a public concert ,thats why I went for side by side ,and surprisingly it made no discernible difference, a look inside a SoundField array confirms geometry is not absolute
Roger

heva 30th September 2016 08:11 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Anyway, my purpose was to find out how these ribbons work out on a large instrument like a pipe organ, and I think they're useful.

Then, I took 'm to St.Ouen, Rouen (F). rockout

heva 12th October 2016 10:52 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Then, I took 'm to St.Ouen, Rouen (F).
Input level was set just a bit too high, some adc clipping fixed in post (with linux tool 'postfish').

studer58 12th October 2016 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12190612)
Input level was set just a bit too high, some adc clipping fixed in post (with linux tool 'postfish').

The bass is unpleasant in the early section, on my HD600's...more like a pressure wave than audible...however it all integrates itself in the final seconds.

It sounds like the building can't support that level of low bass, but that's more likely the recording, and not reality.

Perhaps the organ's location in that alcove is behaving like a big Klipschorn speaker flare ?

heva 12th October 2016 12:08 PM

To my ears the bass in there IS big (and seems to 'roll' through the building) and the organ 'darker' then commercial cd's tend to show.
It's a also huge gothic building (130m length).

(recorded on Fostex FR2LE)

monitor 14th October 2016 12:00 PM

dear Heva

I once heard the Cavaillé-Coll organ in Le Mans, what a sound:
the sound is indeed darker than the Cds we're used to, and in reality it has really lots of bass, just like in your recording.
I don't have any recording in my collection that even comes close to that experience.

well done!

BTW This proves that fig 8 pattern is not bass-shy, as a lot of people think.
The ribbons I have offer more bass then my omni condensers.

studer58 3rd August 2019 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heva (Post 12145309)
Thanks all. It was a first try with ribbons on a big organ, and I'm pleased with the result, though not sure about the really low bass [eq. might be an option, it *is* there, just (too) quiet].
Choosing the sidebyside micsetup was indeed as rolo46 says to have MID as 'free' as possible (and for portability), that SIDE doesn't seem to be bothered with it is a nice suprise.

Doing a little cross-comparison and guesswork, the MRP-01 mic looks a lot like the CAD D82 ribbon. The form factor is very reminiscent of the Sennheiser dynamics aimed at hanging over the front of guitar amps. The following review very much supports that usage contention, and it's built to withstand the high SPL's you'd expect to find there. A significant reason for this is the ribbon thickness: 8 microns. That's a whole lot thicker than the typical 0.8 to 1.8 or 2.5 microns of the medium to higher priced ribbons.

Given the low street price of both the MRP-01 and the CAD D82 I'd guess they're both identically Chinese sourced ? The review mentions that the sound when used at the front grille of an amp is very thick and bass heavy, and becomes acceptable either a few feet away, or with considerable bass roll off, which is not unexpected.

If the 2 mics are indeed virtually identical, this bass heaviness-proximity effect might explain how the MRP-01 can operate at typical classical concert distances and still be praised for sufficient bass 'weight' These "ruggedness characteristics" could go quite some way to explain why the MRP is praised for its performance in an acoustic concert (or organ recital) setting ?

Are there any specs published related to the MRP's ribbon thickness, which might confirm or refute these guesses ?

Oh yeah....that CAD D82 review: https://www.mixonline.com/technology...e-sound-369582
Specs:http://cadaudio.com/images/uploads/D...or_website.pdf