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/)
-   -   piano and tenor recording (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-in-location-recording-amp-production/956068-piano-tenor-recording.html)

monitor 22nd September 2014 11:02 PM

piano and tenor recording
 
I'm to record a CD with a retired opera tenor. I've already made 4 cds with him using a soundfield in between him and the piano. Setup time was mostly less than a half our, unless we needed to bring in wooden panels. None of them was made in a ideal hall, but nevertheless he was always happy with the result. Mostly the difference with other engineers' cds was that I spend more time to edit out false notes. The best result i got from a very big & live church, where we needed to record close (70cm from piano and vox) so we had a nice long verb in the background, and warm vocal because of the proxymity effect.

This time to recording will be at a quite small chapel. Close recording will be necessary, as walls are too close to get open and relaxed spatial sound.

I 'd like to add more gear this time, i could rent mikes (schoeps mk2, senn 8040 eg)
but I have a DAV BG8 now and RME UFX. Mikes are Line Audio OM1 pair , CM3 pair 4 matched No Hype Audio LRM1 ribbons (golden age like, but imported and Q-checked and sold by the no hype audio brand.)

I like the OM1 as piano spot, I like the ribbons even more. I will have time to check the hall and piano to verify which option works best.

I also tried the ribbons on female vocals. it sounds very good, offering clean but warm sound.

It is the first project with my own multitrack setup.

I will place the soundfield (set to bidirectional pattern) 1,2m from the piano and position it so I get a good stereo picture. If the room sound annoys me, I'll put it closer, if it's OK, I'll put it further.

Next thing is to find a good spot for the vox. This should not take not more than 15 minutes.

Than I will add extra mikes.

but what and where?

I think about putting 2 ribbons 20 cm left and right from the Soundfield, and putting 2 ribbons very close to lid of the piano, 40 cm apart.

I can only think of putting the OM1 as piano spot mike. I see no use for the CM3 in this setup.

Is this going to work in your experience, or is it better to to do this recording with my trusted soundfield -> 2 channel recorder only, and practice a bit longer with the multitrack kit before working with it on client's time??

I have 1 afternoon- evening setup time, balancing, and first takes.
2 full days of recording and a safety day.

the piece (55') is written by a established composer, with whom I didn't work before, and he will play the piano part. He did like another live recording (SF only) of a work of his, with string ensemble in a superb hall.

But helas, we will have to record in a room that doesn't sound really well with the SF.
Last problem could be the piano. It is some 1920 piano. I will check it for squeaks tuning etc,... and insist on a superb piano mechanic/tuner, and if they refuse this, just blow up the deal?

I have a nice church at my disposal, can get a beautiful rental Fazioli there, but they don't want to change the venue. :facepalm:

monitor 24th September 2014 12:05 AM

no suggestions? maybe voice in concert position instead of facing the piano player?

boojum 24th September 2014 05:56 AM

I will suggest a Blumlein MS array with the ribbons. If the rear half of the array does not work you can drop the rear channel and run it as a card + fig 8 MS rig. I am saying have one ribbon pointing at the center of the sound field and the other at right angles. Use the other mics as spots. OM1's on the piano in AB. If the stereo doesn't swing, drop one channel and run it as a mono spot. You can mount the CM3's as an ORTF spot on your tenor. That's eight channels. You should be able to weave a good session out of that. You could even run the CM3 ORTF as your main and spot the tenor with a ribbon, that sounds even better. Or, stick with the Blumlein MS and still spot your tenor with a ribbon. If those ribbons are mellow and clear use them. Get a breath/pop shield for the ribbon if you spot your tenor closely. One plosive and the ribbon is toast. The only problem you could be facing with the ribbons is getting enough gain. I am sure you have thought of that.

Cheers

monitor 24th September 2014 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10432879)
I will suggest a Blumlein MS array with the ribbons. If the rear half of the array does not work you can drop the rear channel and run it as a card + fig 8 MS rig. I am saying have one ribbon pointing at the center of the sound field and the other at right angles. Use the other mics as spots. OM1's on the piano in AB. If the stereo doesn't swing, drop one channel and run it as a mono spot. You can mount the CM3's as an ORTF spot on your tenor. That's eight channels. You should be able to weave a good session out of that. You could even run the CM3 ORTF as your main and spot the tenor with a ribbon, that sounds even better. Or, stick with the Blumlein MS and still spot your tenor with a ribbon. If those ribbons are mellow and clear use them. Get a breath/pop shield for the ribbon if you spot your tenor closely. One plosive and the ribbon is toast. The only problem you could be facing with the ribbons is getting enough gain. I am sure you have thought of that.

Cheers

Hi Boojum,
thanks for sharing your thoughts :)
I agree with a MS pair with (hyper) cardio center mike. I have a Soundfield for this. I don't know if the ribbons are as good for this purpose.

I will make a quick check if the ribbon spots work best in AB or MS.

I could still put the main mikes in between the piano and vox, but use a hypercardio pattern, so the piano isn't in opposite polarity to the vox.

I think I will put spots to the vox no closer than 3 feet /0.91 meter.

how far should I put the main mikes then, at more than 9 feet/2.74 meter?
or is this 3/1 distance rule irrelevant?

I would flank the Soundfield with CM3, if that doesn't yield a good result, I could also use the CM3 pair as a distant pair.

I could also record the Soundfield in B format, and play with patterns in post.

boojum 25th September 2014 02:03 AM

I think your best bet is to figure out what sound you want to achieve. From there you can decide on mics. Otherwise it is just throwing out ideas. First decide where you are going, them you can figure out how to get there. Between the DAV and the RME you have 38 channels.


However,

omnis are usually used on pianos, you have a pair. That leaves the tenor. A ribbon, a CM3. You can put ribbons by the piano, too. Use just the front side and use them as if they were a pair of wide cardioids, NOS. Now you have four mics on the piano, two on the tenor. How about an NOS with two CM3's for the whole group? NOS is reported as a better array than ORTF for CM3's by folks on this board who have tested this. Bingo, the DAV is full. You can also test the other pair of ribbons as wide cards in NOS against the CM3's. You will be getting the best front end around for your mics, they are unrivaled for sweet sound and touted by the folks on this board "who knows their onions."

You can run the Soundfield through the RME, or all your feeds, and play with the B format Soundfield in post. If you want to indulge your naughty pleasures, rent the CMC62's for the piano.

You have an abundance of choices. If you want to indulge all of them run the with RME. Otherwise I would stick with the eight through the DAV. Hopefully someone with experience will chime in and add their ideas.

king2070lplaya 25th September 2014 05:59 AM

I make voice and piano recordings pretty much every week, for singers audition tapes. I sometimes take the "close" approach, mic'ing each instrument/performer with a 1" spaced pair and adding ambience in post.

I have the singer stand in the crook of the piano, and place their pair a few feet I front, in a spot where I'm mostly getting the singer, but the piano sound that inevitably leaks in is balanced and clear. Then I place my piano spots in a close "Decca" position, from the tail looking at the hammers down the spine of the casting. These mics are about my hight, maybe a bit less (5'10").

One must take care in placing both pairs though that they will blend well. I've sometimes had to delay my piano spots when the singer mics were too far away.

I don't prefer this technique, but in smaller rooms with bad ambience I find it is necessary to go this route vs using my normal technique, a 2.5ish-foot spaced pair and a floor mic underneath. Ideally when using this technique you would turn the singer around, or place them on the other side of the piano, behind the lid, but with the young singers I work with I find that they don't perform as well out of their comfort zone in the crook. So I want to accommodate this so they get their best performances.

My mics I use in this setup are usually Schoeps CMC621 on the voice and either CMC62S or Josephson c617/mk221 omnis on the piano.

Yannick 25th September 2014 08:48 AM

In a smaller space with probably too much reverberation (is is probably the case), the biggest problem is to have clear sound, especially on higher voices (the vibrato can sound really awkward).

I propose two options:

a flexible main pair with separate front/back control between the piano and voice. Careful soundcheck, but afterwards you still have some control over the balance.
This avoids the double tenor/triple vibrato effect.

or

a (again) close main pair for the piano. This time quite directional.
Try to position the voice in such a way there is good communication with the pianist, but the voice is much to weak in the main mic.
Then spot the voice with a good ribbon (narrow stereo, preferably MS) and mix in the voice.
This also avoids the double tenor/triple vibrato effect

But maybe we will meet before you take off ? Then we can discuss this further.
Probably the SOundfield does not work optimally on voice at such close distances.
A double MS with MKH800twin and MKH30 does.

VillageOp 25th September 2014 05:18 PM

Hi Monitor,

I just got back from doing a very similar session! I'm in the process of writing up a gig report (and getting permission for samples) so I'll keep it brief here. We used A-B omnis on the tail of the piano for both hall and piano sound [dry/non ideal hall, so mostly just piano] and A-B ribbons on the tenor, with the nulls aimed at the hammers on the piano.

The tenor was parallel to the strings of the piano, with his back to the omnis at the tail.

Both sets of mics had bleed, and both were effective at recording their intended targets.

Cheers,

VillageOp

monitor 26th September 2014 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10435121)
I think your best bet is to figure out what sound you want to achieve. From there you can decide on mics. Otherwise it is just throwing out ideas. First decide where you are going, them you can figure out how to get there. Between the DAV and the RME you have 38 channels.

I want to expand my previous setup i.e, use the soundfield as "in between mike" in hypercard pattern.

The ribbons I bought give better sound than the CM3 and OM1.
only the OM1 gives omni bass sound at a distance.
not nearly as good as MK2 though.

so: my plan:
-------ribbon--------------------------ribbon
diddlydoo--------------soundfield------------:synth:
--------ribbon-------------------------ribbon
--------------------------------------------OM1 AB at tail

I could add a CM3 ambient pair, or flank the Soundfield with NOS.

I think the ribbons I have sound best in AB, and that the soundfield is a better MS option.



Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10435121)

However,
omnis are usually used on pianos, you have a pair. That leaves the tenor. A ribbon, a CM3. You can put ribbons by the piano, too. Use just the front side and use them as if they were a pair of wide cardioids, NOS. Now you have four mics on the piano, two on the tenor. How about an NOS with two CM3's for the whole group? NOS is reported as a better array than ORTF for CM3's by folks on this board who have tested this.

Thanks for the NOS tip. didn't know this yet.
Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10435121)
Bingo, the DAV is full. You can also test the other pair of ribbons as wide cards in NOS against the CM3's. You will be getting the best front end around for your mics, they are unrivaled for sweet sound and touted by the folks on this board "who knows their onions."

it is definitly high quality vs price.

now a couple of high quality mikes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10435121)

You can run the Soundfield through the RME, or all your feeds, and play with the B format Soundfield in post. If you want to indulge your naughty pleasures, rent the CMC62's for the piano.

I could rent MK2H. Would it be terribly different as a spot compared to OM1
mixed at -15dB - 10dB?

recording the b-format is maybe a good idea, but I already know from previous jobs that SF in hypercardio pattern works best as in between pattern at close distance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10435121)

You have an abundance of choices. If you want to indulge all of them run the with RME. Otherwise I would stick with the eight through the DAV. Hopefully someone with experience will chime in and add their ideas.

thanks

boojum 27th September 2014 06:22 AM

Look, there are a few real heavyweights who have responded to your questions. KP's approach is great; Occam's razor. The simplest approach is the best. Yannick, too, has some serious chops. They have way more experience than I. My ideas are conjecture and experience. Theirs are experience. ;)

I do really like using the front half of the figure-8 as a wide cardioid in a NOS array. I will experiment with that, hopefully Monday. The CM3 has been flagged in the CM3 thread as better as NOS than ORTF. As it is a wide cardioid it cannot truly be used in an ORTF as ORTF specs cardioid. You can use the spacing and angles but to be Kosher it is not ORTF. Call it "duck" if you want.

Good luck with the gig and let us know how it went. Post a track or two. We like stuff to cluck over. kfhkh

Tom McC 27th September 2014 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10439316)
I do really like using the front half of the figure-8 as a wide cardioid in a NOS array.

Boojum, besides the alarming number of mics you and Monitor had been considering throwing at this gig, I'm a bit puzzled by the above statement.
My understanding is that the LRM-1 mic is a single ribbon Fig8 mic, so it's simply impossible to disentangle and repurpose the individual "front" and "back" portions of its response pattern. Or were you thinking of a placing a huge sound-absorption panel close behind the mic?

In any case, the front portion of a Fig8 mic actually has a pattern tighter than that of a cardioid mic, let alone of a wide cardioid:

deg. relative dB
(off axis) Fig8 Cardioid
00° 0.00 0.00
15° -0.30 -0.15
30° -1.25 -0.60
45° -3.01 -1.36
60° -6.02 -2.50
75° -11.74 -4.02
90° -inf. -6.02

Apologies if I've misread your description.

monitor 4th October 2014 10:10 PM

thank you everybody for your responses. I did a bit of testing in the venue today. They have put carpets and curtains all over the place. This improved the acoustic dramatically. abduction

I put up Cm3 30 cm spaced, Om1 flanking this , and putting ribbons 70cmfrom piano lid. I also recorded soundfield's WXYZ and checked the best patterns in post. that was really cool.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/vuqsibubl...5Y7LV7Eta?dl=0

emonteirobr 4th October 2014 11:29 PM

May be it can serve as a reference too. It's no tenor, but ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WdcDWZm4NY#t=77

boojum 5th October 2014 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom McC (Post 10439574)
Boojum, besides the alarming number of mics you and Monitor had been considering throwing at this gig, I'm a bit puzzled by the above statement.
My understanding is that the LRM-1 mic is a single ribbon Fig8 mic, so it's simply impossible to disentangle and repurpose the individual "front" and "back" portions of its response pattern. Or were you thinking of a placing a huge sound-absorption panel close behind the mic?

In any case, the front portion of a Fig8 mic actually has a pattern tighter than that of a cardioid mic, let alone of a wide cardioid:

deg. relative dB
(off axis) Fig8 Cardioid
00° 0.00 0.00
15° -0.30 -0.15
30° -1.25 -0.60
45° -3.01 -1.36
60° -6.02 -2.50
75° -11.74 -4.02
90° -inf. -6.02

Apologies if I've misread your description.

Tom, you read it right, I thought it wrong. I wrote another board member about this awhile ago and his answer was essentially the same as yours. But you can't blame a guy for trying. :facepalm:


Tom, what led me to this is that the Mk8 can be separated by phase inversion into left and right in MS. And, if the two sides can be differentiated by phase inversion in MS, why can they not be separated the same way for front and back? I will defer to "the guys who know" on this one, but I am still curious. When I run a Mk8/Mk8 Blumlein MS and leave off the back of the fore and aft mic I am doing just this, am I not? If I am out in the weeds on this please explain it to me, explain it as if you were talking to a grade schooler as I am not too technically hip.

Thanks


OK, don't bother with an explanation. I ran an MS and muted one side: fine. Muted M plus one side: no difference between left and right. OK, I guess you guys are right, after all. ;o)

Flute-Picc 6th October 2014 08:48 AM

I echo the MS suggestions. To my ear, it is really quite superior when recording a solo instrument or solo voice with piano. I'm also a sucker for ribbon mics, so yeah...go for it. :)

monitor 6th October 2014 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emonteirobr (Post 10457013)
May be it can serve as a reference too. It's no tenor, but ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WdcDWZm4NY#t=77

this is a real nice recording!!

Tom McC 6th October 2014 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10457208)
Tom, what led me to this is that the Mk8 can be separated by phase inversion into left and right in MS. And, if the two sides can be differentiated by phase inversion in MS, why can they not be separated the same way for front and back?

You have to be clear in your mind on the distinction between a "real" Fig-8 (that utilizes a single ribbon, or a single capsule, such as Schoeps MK8) and the Fig-8's that are indirectly emulated by the expedient of combining the electrical output of two separate capsules.

With the former, the Fig-8 polar response pattern is "V = cos(theta)" - but that's an intact, inviolable maths expression; you can't chop it up by cherry-picking and throwing away the V values when the angle theta lies in the rear hemisphere. Managing such a feat would be as ridiculous as, say, recording a 440Hz sine wave but only using the +ve bumps above the horizontal time axis...or inheriting some genes from your parents, but getting your dad's hairy right arm, and your mother's smooth left arm! (<- unsure if those tortuous analogies were helpful :-) )

With the latter, combining-capsules case, the output may of course also be a pretty decent V= cos(theta) fig-8 pattern. But since you did start out from two separate transducers, you then generally have the freedom to not employ them equally, thus deriving a unidirectional pattern by switching off the rear capsule, or perhaps by mixing it in at a different ratio.

During the MS -> XY matrix manipulation, the intermediate step of phase inverting the signal of a hard-left-pointing Fig-8, effectively converts it to a hard-right-pointing Fig-8 - but in no way does anything to separate the individual +ve and -ve blobs of the cosine pattern.

Tom McC 6th October 2014 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10457208)
OK, don't bother with an explanation. I ran an MS and muted one side: fine. Muted M plus one side: no difference between left and right. OK, I guess you guys are right, after all. ;o)

FWIW, a few further comments, Boojum, to help with your visualization tussles:

Take two identical mics, not just cardioid but of _any_ first-order directional pattern: V = b + (1-b)cosX
where b = ca. 0.7, 0.5, ca 0.35, ca. 0.25, 0.0 , for subcard, card, supercard, hypercard, Fig-8 respectively.

When placed coincident and opposite-pointing, giving "mic 1" and "mic 2":

(a) Their (equal level) sum signal always generates an omni pattern
(b) Their (equal level) difference signal always generates a Fig-8 pattern

The only changes through the series is the intensity of the output signal

mic............................ pattern
mic1.......................... b + (1-b)cosX
mic2.......................... b - (1-b)cosX
_______________________________________________
sum........................... 2b ..............................i.e. Omni..............(no cos term)
difference................... 2(1-b)cosX ..................i.e. Fig-8...............(cos term only)
___________________________________________________-

(c) Combination of different levels of mic 1 and mic 2, whether by sum or difference, will deliver other new resultant patterns - but not in the case of starting from the symmetric bipolar Fig-8! There you only finish up with the sole cosine term.

That is, no amount of juggling different instances of a Fig-8 with itself can generate a different shape. If you can manage that, you can stand in a bucket and lift yourself into the air :-)

(Apologies for munged formatting)

emonteirobr 7th October 2014 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monitor (Post 10459871)
this is a real nice recording!!

Thank you

monitor 14th October 2014 09:46 AM

I have a first sample of the recording

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mi6jigmac...8iqdTFDqa?dl=0



it is a mixture of Schoeps MK2H 73cm AB (0dB), Schoeps MK4 30cm 90°(-5dB), 30 cm AB ribbons(-10dB), Soundfield(-7dB), in varying heights, 2 meter from piano + 2 ribbon spots on piano(-17dB).

What do you think about it?

emonteirobr 14th October 2014 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monitor (Post 10478708)
I have a first sample of the recording

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mi6jigmac...8iqdTFDqa?dl=0

I buy it. Very good indeed kfhkh

boojum 14th October 2014 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monitor (Post 10478708)
I have a first sample of the recording

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mi6jigmac...8iqdTFDqa?dl=0



it is a mixture of Schoeps MK2H 73cm AB (0dB), Schoeps MK4 30cm 90°(-5dB), 30 cm AB ribbons(-10dB), Soundfield(-7dB), in varying heights, 2 meter from piano + 2 ribbon spots on piano(-17dB).

What do you think about it?

I think you did it. Good one. That's a lot of mics and they all get along well with each other.

monitor 14th October 2014 08:55 PM

3 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by boojum (Post 10479602)
I think you did it. Good one. That's a lot of mics and they all get along well with each other.

couldn't have done it without the valuable info provided by the forummembers kfhkh

anyway I put all mikes at the same distance of the performers.
otherwise it gave a lot of strange phasing issues.

jimjazzdad 15th October 2014 11:34 AM

Nicely done! And a mic locker worthy of a true Gearslutz! kfhkh
My small but orderly brain would have a hard time mixing that many mic pairs and a Soundfield so seamlessly...

monitor 15th October 2014 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimjazzdad (Post 10481354)
Nicely done! And a mic locker worthy of a true Gearslutz! kfhkh
My small but orderly brain would have a hard time mixing that many mic pairs and a Soundfield so seamlessly...

Actually some of the members gave me a clue about mixing pairs.
so I kept the omni main pair at 0, and the others at-6, -12 or less.
the soundfield was recorded in hypercard, so it can be used as a zoom for the vocal.
the ribbons provide some warmth.
apparently it works.

Fridberg 28th December 2014 01:27 PM

Hi,
I did this live recording this fall. Not a tenor but a soprano. The church is big with big acoustic, approx. 5-6 sec.
My main microphone is a Pearl DS60 (4-channel microphone) in MS. If I remember correct the M is modified omni, more to cardioid for less ambience.
2 Pearl TL4 (2-channel microphones) for the piano in modified blumlein. Less signal in the back capsules for less ambience. Very little in the mix. Most of the sound is from the DS60.
The DS60 approx. 3-4 feet from the soprano and approx. 7-8 feet up. The blumlein setup for the piano approx. 4-5 feet away to the right of the grand piano (Decca setup?).

No post at all except a delay for the piano setup.

RME XTC
RME UFX

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRSWFhUL4oU

Pär

Fridberg 28th December 2014 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emonteirobr (Post 10457013)
May be it can serve as a reference too. It's no tenor, but ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WdcDWZm4NY#t=77

Very good! Can you tell us more about the recording? Microphones, postproduction?

Regards
Pär

monitor 28th December 2014 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fridberg (Post 10671790)
Hi,
I did this live recording this fall. Not a tenor but a soprano. The church is big with big acoustic, approx. 5-6 sec.
My main microphone is a Pearl DS60 (4-channel microphone) in MS. If I remember correct the M is modified omni, more to cardioid for less ambience.
2 Pearl TL4 (2-channel microphones) for the piano in modified blumlein. Less signal in the back capsules for less ambience. Very little in the mix. Most of the sound is from the DS60.
The DS60 approx. 3-4 feet from the soprano and approx. 7-8 feet up. The blumlein setup for the piano approx. 4-5 feet away to the right of the grand piano (Decca setup?).

No post at all except a delay for the piano setup.

RME XTC
RME UFX

Pär

excellent church acoustic and performers. I like long tails.

Beautiful !!! even my wife likes it (and she's over-severly critical (mezzo-soprano singer...)

emonteirobr 29th December 2014 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fridberg (Post 10672230)
Very good! Can you tell us more about the recording? Microphones, postproduction?

Regards
Pär

Dear Pär,

First of all, congratulations on your soprano/piano recording. It sounds really good. Your solution to tame the excessive reverberation of the church worked like a charm.
As for my recording, thank you for your compliment. It was done in a studio that has great equipment. It is the best in Rio de Janeiro, and one of the best in Brazil: Visom Digital.
It was chosen by the client, because no other venue was available during the time the singers could stay in Rio. One lives in Denmark and the other in Italy. Although it is fantastically equiped, (they are dealers for Schoeps, AEA, API and Merging, etc in Brasil) the acoustic is very dry. This and the opportunity for me to work with AEA mics and pres led me to choose an old german technique (at least I learned it from old german recording books) that is to put the singer(s) perpendicular to the piano and record them with fig. 8 microphones. So, it was done the way the video shows. It's a real take.
Besides the 2 R44C, I used two TLM 193 and 2 C 414 (Omni) on the piano. On the session after this one on the video, we added 2 Royer R 121 on the piano, only for testing. All 4 ribbons were amplified with the fantastic AEA double pres.
We also had a pair of Schoeps ORTF for ambience. All non-ribbon mics got into Pro-Tools, operated by Fabio Guimarães who supported all my crazy ideas ..., through Millenia pres. Recording was 24/96.
I then loaded all the material into a Pyramix (then 8.1) workstation, where I edited, mixed and mastered everything. Reverb was Waves RVerb, with a pinch of limiting.
Plenty of eq was necessary to tame the tendence of the band not to sound like in a concert hall, because of the acoustics. Both eq and limiting were from Pyramix strip and bus tools.
Hope it describes well the way it was (and had to be) done.
Piano is a Yamaha Grand.
Thank you for your interest.

Best Regards

Edu

Maestrostudios 13th October 2019 03:25 AM

Hi everyone, I'm new to Gearslutz (though I've been reading posts for years as a non-member).
I really appreciate this thread as I'm getting ready to record my first Schubert song cycle in a beautiful recital hall.

Here's the setup I'm thinking:

Main pair: Schoeps MTSC 64 (these are the mics we've permanently installed in the hall, approx 9' above stage, 6' into audience)

Tenor: MS pair using C414s (vocalist will be behind piano)


Piano pair: Schoeps Mk5 (Omni) ...I'm still not sure where I want to place these. I'd like to have some articulation clarity in post. We'll put the piano at half stick

Do I need mics in the hall? I've got plenty of channels, but the remaining mic pairs I have are not of the same caliber.
- 2 pairs of LA120s with switchable cardiod/Omni capsules
- a stereo pair or sE 4400s (muti-pattern)

Thanks for any guidance you are willing to offer!