The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Stero pair to record classical music Condenser Microphones
Old 5th June 2018
  #151
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by esldude View Post
So where and how would you use a pair of figure 8's?
Prime use of figure-of-eight mics is Blumlein technique. I use it in the form of an AEA R-88 stereo mic or with a Neumann USM-69 stereo mic.

Individual figure-of-eight shows real benefit when one uses it to exclude unwanted sounds by orienting the null of the mic towards the sound to be minimized.

For example using them on a wind section when percussion or timp. is right behind the section. Using two or three figure-of-eight mics looking length-wise along the line of winds with the null pointing towards the perc.

Also consider using figure-of-eight as a spot on violin to highlight that instrument while minimizing the piano accompaniment. (because you are capturing the piano with a separate set up)
Old 5th June 2018
  #152
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush View Post
Individual figure-of-eight shows real benefit when one uses it to exclude unwanted sounds by orienting the null of the mic towards the sound to be minimized.
The orchestra holds much potential for such selective exclusion (or at least reduction) of adjacent sounds via fig 8 mics....not to mention amplified music like jazz or rock...surprising it's not used there more often.

One aspect to keep in mind is the rear lobe, which is just as active as the front...so you need to ensure it's being pointed towards something benign
Old 5th June 2018
  #153
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
The orchestra holds much potential for such selective exclusion (or at least reduction) of adjacent sounds via fig 8 mics....not to mention amplified music like jazz or rock...surprising it's not used there more often.

One aspect to keep in mind is the rear lobe, which is just as active as the front...so you need to ensure it's being pointed towards something benign
'you need to ensure it's being pointed towards something benign' is the critical aspect!

here's a pic from a recent situation (jazz quarett plus a small orchestra) where this was clearly not the case (and hence more typical for a live situation): ca. 22 strings downstage, jazz quartett at center stage, ca. 9 wind instruments upstage, pretty dense seating, live mix in l/c/r/lfe, monitor mixes (ca. 12 wedges in between the musicians, so lots of spill) AND recording - i went with an (almost) all cardioid setup, lots of low cuts, sections/mics delayed (mics are not yet positioned in this pic!)

stereo mains were x/y (but could almost not be used in mixdown - as expected: way too much 'noise' from the band, wedges, pa, the winds too far away and the seating too wide) - so i had to rebuild the mix from the close mics, like the live mix. stage ambis were shotguns in (medium) wide a/b, foh ambis were ortf, rear ambis were omnis in (very) wide a/b.
Attached Thumbnails
Stero pair to record classical music-20180506_121920.jpg  

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 5th June 2018 at 03:55 PM.. Reason: details added
Old 5th June 2018
  #154
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

This is from a session in a church with a 5s reverb. A real main array was futile, since I wanted to keep the reverb out of the recording (the music is rather complex late-romantic). The tail AB ended up not being used.
The MKH800 twin + MKH30 side mic in front of the piano are matrixed afterwards in the studio, to minimize violin pickup (was approx 150 deg behind the mic), which translates to the M mic around hypercardioid setting.

The SF12 on the violin has the piano in the null of the M ribbon.

The separation is rather succesfull, which means there are no funny things happening when blending the two.

The result is rather dry, so I was able to add some convolution reverb, to get back some early delays and a nice 2s reverb.

EDIT: if I would have had only fig8 mics, I would have put the violin player slightly more to the left. This is one situation where an AB omni array does not cut it.
Attached Thumbnails
Stero pair to record classical music-fig8pic.jpg  
Old 5th June 2018
  #155
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
How did it sound when it was over and done?

D.
Old 5th June 2018
  #156
Lives for gear
This forum is pleasantly diverse on stereo technique
I know to my cost how long it takes to make a foothold in consensus on fig 8s and sum and difference arrays
Co operation is always better than confrontation, as the boss always tells me
Examples are the route to proselytising the unwashed, the more the merrier, and minimal point scoring would always help conveying experience imho
Roger
Old 5th June 2018
  #157
TC2
Here for the gear
 

Adding a beginner’s prospective…

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpdonahue View Post
Start off with a pair of Shure KSM-141. Best of both worlds, decent omni and cardoid and all for the princely sum of $800US a pair...I could make a perfectly acceptable recording with a pair of KSM141. Remember it's not the tool, it's the craftsman.
Among “tier two,” I agree with the KSM141s. They were my first stereo pair and I have never regretted it. Yes, they have their flaws, as do the Oktavas and Beyers (which I have tried) and probably the Line Audios or any other “tier two.” That’s why they’re in “tier two.” But I do like having both cardi and omni available to me, which avoids the cardi-vs-omni argument earlier. I have been learning ORTF cardi and AB omni before I experiment with MS or anything else. Learning and comparing two patterns at the start has not been overwhelming, though more than that might have been.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Rick View Post
When you get your first pair of really good mics, you will use them for everything... until you get your second pair of really good mics. Then you will discover that one pair is better than the other for certain situations, and that the reverse is also true. However, if the first pair wasn't really that good, then they'll gather dust in your mic locker as soon as you get something better.
This hits the nail on the head. The best recordings are made by the best recordists with lots of the best gear and the experience to know which of it to use. However, if you’re a beginner like me, making the best recordings is beyond your experience at this point anyway. With some practice, you can make good recordings with a single pair of “tier ones” or the good “tier twos.”

Quote:
Originally Posted by zorba1977 View Post
It's frustrating to choose a pair of good mics to record classical music...Is there a microphone that I can use for years in almost all situations?
Going back to the original post, the original poster (long gone) found it frustrating to choose a first stereo pair. It’s hard only if you overthink it. (Like most beginners around here, I did.) There were plenty of good suggestions earlier in this thread. In my limited experience so far, mic reputations around here are generally close to accurate. Read up a bit (noting both strength and flaws), try a few different mics in person if you have the opportunity, pick a reputable pair that seems appropriate for your needs and tastes and budget, and get recording. You’ll be set to make good recordings in almost all situations. Things don’t need to get any more complicated than that.

If, someday, you have the experience and the budget and the professional need to be the best, go buy multiple “tier one” pairs of cardis, omnis, wide cardis, fig 8s, etc., learn the finer points, and join the debate.
Old 5th June 2018
  #158
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Maybe this music can calm things down ...

It is not the end result yet, but quite close. We will record the second half of the double CD this year, in a completely different hall. A big room in fact. And so it goes ...

(The advantage being I can drop the same mic setup in the room and get rid of the small room sound - more or less)

I can post a 2' clip without loosing my right index finger.
So there it goes: classical music without main stereo pair !
Attached Files

Le Cygne.mp3 (4.12 MB, 2039 views)

Old 6th June 2018
  #159
Gear Head
 

Hello,
thanks to all for posts. So for classical music it's useful to have a also pair of omni. There are some options:
- a pair of Shure KSM141: both omni and cardioid
- a pair of Oktava 012 with omni and cardioid caps
- Line audio OM1 (is the low sensitivity a problem?)
A pair of KSM141 costs nearly as a pair of Neumann KM184, so I'm thinking if it's better to take them
Old 6th June 2018
  #160
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by zorba1977 View Post
Hello,
thanks to all for posts. So for classical music it's useful to have a also pair of omni. There are some options:
- a pair of Shure KSM141: both omni and cardioid
- a pair of Oktava 012 with omni and cardioid caps
- Line audio OM1 (is the low sensitivity a problem?)
A pair of KSM141 costs nearly as a pair of Neumann KM184, so I'm thinking if it's better to take them
No, the KM184 costs twice as much as the
KSM141. $1600 vs $800 for a pair of each.
Old 6th June 2018
  #161
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

IMO the KSM141 have way too much bass rolloff on the cardioid setting (starting at 200 Hz already) to be used as a main pair.

The KM184 also have quite a severe bass rolloff & a HF lift.

A very long time ago I tested the octavas, they seemed OK, but had (at that time) too big variances in sensitivity. The spec sheet shows near flat response to 20Hz for the cardioid capsule.

The Rode NT5 and NT5s seem to have less low bass rolloff, and their price is great. Apparantly Tony F is using them.
Old 6th June 2018
  #162
Lives for gear
 
James Lehmann's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
The Rode NT5 and NT5s seem to have less low bass rolloff, and their price is great. Apparantly Tony F is using them.
Do you mean NT5 and NT55?

Your statement needs some clarification because I've not seen it written anywhere that Tony F uses the NT5. I have seen him state (I think here on GS) he uses or once used the NT55.

The NT55 is a switchable-capsule cardioid/omni mic.

I'm going to make a wild guess that when Mr F says 'NT55' he means with the omni capsules fitted, which I have not heard.

I have heard and used the NT5s and as a result I'd be absolutely staggered if anyone - from Tony F to the studio cat - would seriously recommend these (or the NT55 with cardioid capsule equivalents) as a main pair for classical recording; they sound thin, boxy and artificial - please steer clear of these mics!

If you're on a tight budget the Octava MK-012s I've heard sounded better for little more money, while the many beautiful Line Audio CM3 recordings on this Forum speak for themselves I feel.

In terms of omnis I'll give a shout to the Avenson STO-2 at around $500 per pair - not the quietest and no HF lift for very distant work but these have a stunningly flat response and a pleasingly natural/neutral sound to them.

Last edited by James Lehmann; 6th June 2018 at 01:26 PM..
Old 6th June 2018
  #163
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Indeed, he apparantly uses them in omni.
But in some thread he commented the Schoeps MK4 is not superior, so at the very least he has used the cardioids ?
Old 6th June 2018
  #164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Maybe this music can calm things down ...

It is not the end result yet, but quite close. We will record the second half of the double CD this year, in a completely different hall. A big room in fact. And so it goes ...

(The advantage being I can drop the same mic setup in the room and get rid of the small room sound - more or less)

I can post a 2' clip without loosing my right index finger.
So there it goes: classical music without main stereo pair !
OK but is that method combfiltering-proof?!
Old 6th June 2018
  #165
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Yes !
Old 6th June 2018
  #166
Quote:
Originally Posted by zorba1977 View Post
Hello,
thanks to all for posts. So for classical music it's useful to have a also pair of omni. There are some options:
- a pair of Shure KSM141: both omni and cardioid
- a pair of Oktava 012 with omni and cardioid caps
- Line audio OM1 (is the low sensitivity a problem?)
A pair of KSM141 costs nearly as a pair of Neumann KM184, so I'm thinking if it's better to take them
I have the OM1, don't recommend it for a main pair, they are too flat to be used at a distance, if you add EQ you could help it, but still, too noisy for some applications.

after viewing the specs:
Shure KSM141 : -37 dBV/Pa ; 14mV/Pa
Line audio OM1 : -42dB ; 8 mV/PA

I would ask a trial of the Shure, if you don't like it trial a better mike brand such as Gefell, Schoeps, Neumann, DPA.

if you 're on a thight budget, buy the OM1, they're basically for free,
you'll end up buying more expensive stuff anyways
Old 6th June 2018
  #167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
Yes !
Hi Yannick,
why so ? is it because of the nulls and distance
there is no spill?
Old 6th June 2018
  #168
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by monitor View Post
Hi Yannick,
why so ? is it because of the nulls and distance
there is no spill?
There is spill, but the violin or piano are at least 10 dB down in the other mic.
There is also a high-pass filter on the violin mic. Both mics were about 1.5m apart, so for all intents and purposes, the comb filter is several orders of magnitude better than eg. a 50cm AB omni array.
Old 6th June 2018
  #169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yannick View Post
There is spill, but the violin or piano are at least 10 dB down in the other mic.
There is also a high-pass filter on the violin mic. Both mics were about 1.5m apart, so for all intents and purposes, the comb filter is several orders of magnitude better than eg. a 50cm AB omni array.
OK that's what I wanted to know
thanks
Emmanuel
Old 8th June 2018
  #170
Lives for gear
These 2 articles throw some light on the subject:

WHY RECORDED MUSIC SOUNDS TOO AGGRESSIVE BUT DOESN'T HAVE TO

MICROPHONE THEORY
Old 9th June 2018
  #171
Gear Maniac
Thanks for those links. The first one is interesting and I think correct - written by a musician (even though he was a conductor - wink). (Wolfgang Sawallisch).
Old 9th June 2018
  #172
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Lehmann View Post
Do you mean NT5 and NT55?

Your statement needs some clarification because I've not seen it written anywhere that Tony F uses the NT5. I have seen him state (I think here on GS) he uses or once used the NT55.

The NT55 is a switchable-capsule cardioid/omni mic.

I'm going to make a wild guess that when Mr F says 'NT55' he means with the omni capsules fitted, which I have not heard.

I have heard and used the NT5s and as a result I'd be absolutely staggered if anyone - from Tony F to the studio cat - would seriously recommend these (or the NT55 with cardioid capsule equivalents) as a main pair for classical recording; they sound thin, boxy and artificial - please steer clear of these mics!
NT55 = mic body with switchable pad and HPF that ships with two capsules: NT45-c cardioid and NT45-o omni.

The NT5 body ships with the NT45-c cardioid capsule and does *not* have switches. NT6s and NT4s also ship with NT45-c capsules.

The mics have a great boost on axis in the high end, which can make them perfect or not the best, depending on the situation.
Old 9th June 2018
  #173
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
These 2 articles throw some light on the subject:

WHY RECORDED MUSIC SOUNDS TOO AGGRESSIVE BUT DOESN'T HAVE TO
The first article is interesting in that it touches on a little (friendly) disagreement that I have with my boss about how choral music should sound. Don't get me wrong, this disagreement is about fairly minute differences.

He, and most of our choral director clients really like the sound of their choirs "blended." That is to say, no particular singer comes out front (well, soloists, duh, but that's not what we are talking about here.) and not even any section to come out front. Smooth as "silk underwear." That means, typically, a more distant main pair.

I, on the other hand (and this is entirely personal) really want to hear the words. Articulation is important to me. This means that I want to work my main pair in a bit closer.

While my technique allows for better articulation, it does tend to amplify choral mistakes as well. When choirs don't sing together, spot on, word for word, they start to sound "fuzzy" really fast. Then, articulation goes flying right out the window. We tend to work mostly with community choirs. Some are quite, quite good and record beautifully, sort of no matter which technique is used, but if a choir is singing with the voices even slightly out of time, or tune, it is clearly kinder (and more pleasant) to move the pair back a bit and let the acoustics of the house help blend those problems into the overall mass of voices.

So I get it, and since he's my boss, and the clients are specific about what they want, I mic it the way they like. But I sure do miss not being able to hear the words and it is a great experience to hear a great choir put it all together and to hear the result of perfectly timed and tuned text.

As a final note to this probably too long post is, I wonder if my years as a location dialog recordist has me trained to listen for the unencumbered "word." For 30 years, my daily job was getting the words "clean" and now I think, perhaps, it's ingrained as important.

D.
Old 9th June 2018
  #174
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by tourtelot View Post
The first article is interesting in that it touches on a little (friendly) disagreement that I have with my boss about how choral music should sound. Don't get me wrong, this disagreement is about fairly minute differences.

He, and most of our choral director clients really like the sound of their choirs "blended." That is to say, no particular singer comes out front (well, soloists, duh, but that's not what we are talking about here.) and not even any section to come out front. Smooth as "silk underwear." That means, typically, a more distant main pair.

I, on the other hand (and this is entirely personal) really want to hear the words. Articulation is important to me. This means that I want to work my main pair in a bit closer.

While my technique allows for better articulation, it does tend to amplify choral mistakes as well. When choirs don't sing together, spot on, word for word, they start to sound "fuzzy" really fast. Then, articulation goes flying right out the window. We tend to work mostly with community choirs. Some are quite, quite good and record beautifully, sort of no matter which technique is used, but if a choir is singing with the voices even slightly out of time, or tune, it is clearly kinder (and more pleasant) to move the pair back a bit and let the acoustics of the house help blend those problems into the overall mass of voices.

So I get it, and since he's my boss, and the clients are specific about what they want, I mic it the way they like. But I sure do miss not being able to hear the words and it is a great experience to hear a great choir put it all together and to hear the result of perfectly timed and tuned text.

As a final note to this probably too long post is, I wonder if my years as a location dialog recordist has me trained to listen for the unencumbered "word." For 30 years, my daily job was getting the words "clean" and now I think, perhaps, it's ingrained as important.

D.
Yes, that all makes a lot of sense. I also think words and articulation are important, and I also do some narration of books and short stories. This involves close (mono) miking.

With instrumental music (I rarely if ever record choirs), I like to move the mics as you also do, to suit the occasion, and sometimes closer miking shows up too many flaws. But if the situation is good then it works very well.
Old 12th June 2018
  #175
Here for the gear
 

Pearl MS8 re-matrixed (it's easier than you think) into left-right stereo will serve you well.
The Sennheiser stereo solutions work OK for TV drama but are too comb-filtered for music.
Old 12th June 2018
  #176
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefzapostUK View Post
Pearl MS8 re-matrixed (it's easier than you think) into left-right stereo will serve you well.
The Sennheiser stereo solutions work OK for TV drama but are too comb-filtered for music.
I'm not trying to be snarky here but could you cite some literature that supports your opinion. I have not found this to be true with either an MKH30/MKH40 pair or a Schoeps Mk8/Mk4 pair. I think both provide a nice (and manageable) MS solution.

I have not heard the Pearl. They have lots of fans, but is it a "must have" seeing as I already have the other options?

D.
Old 12th June 2018
  #177
Here for the gear
 

Choirs - following standard practice at iconic venues (Royal Albert Hall etc) large choirs are often better recorded using the "Omni curtain* technique rather than a coincident stereo pair.
Firstly - consider slinging a collection of high quality Omni mics above the ensemble (local safety rigging rules MUST be applied) probably Schoeps or similar.
Secondly - obey the 3:1 rule - the distance from any mic to it's immediate source must be at least one-third of the distance to the next adjacent microphone.
For example perhaps your slung mic over the sopranos is 2 metres over the group - therefore your next microphone in the array MUST be at least 6 linear metres away to avoid mutual acoustic interference.
If you need to reduce the horizontal spacing then you will have to lower the height of the overhead array accordingly.
While the rigging is complex, it does, if done properly, avoid the problem of hearing individuals rather than a self-balanced mix.
Old 12th June 2018
  #178
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefzapostUK View Post
Choirs - following standard practice at iconic venues (Royal Albert Hall etc) large choirs are often better recorded using the "Omni curtain* technique rather than a coincident stereo pair.
Firstly - consider slinging a collection of high quality Omni mics above the ensemble (local safety rigging rules MUST be applied) probably Schoeps or similar.
Secondly - obey the 3:1 rule - the distance from any mic to it's immediate source must be at least one-third of the distance to the next adjacent microphone.
For example perhaps your slung mic over the sopranos is 2 metres over the group - therefore your next microphone in the array MUST be at least 6 linear metres away to avoid mutual acoustic interference.
If you need to reduce the horizontal spacing then you will have to lower the height of the overhead array accordingly.
While the rigging is complex, it does, if done properly, avoid the problem of hearing individuals rather than a self-balanced mix.
Mathematically I think you've got the 3:1 rule wrong.

The distance between a mic and an adjacent mic must be at least 3 times the distance of the mic to the source. or, the distance from any mic to it's immediate source must be no greater than one-third of the distance to the next adjacent microphone
Old 12th June 2018
  #179
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tourtelot View Post
I'm not trying to be snarky here but could you cite some literature that supports your opinion. I have not found this to be true with either an MKH30/MKH40 pair or a Schoeps Mk8/Mk4 pair. I think both provide a nice (and manageable) MS solution.

I have not heard the Pearl. They have lots of fans, but is it a "must have" seeing as I already have the other options?

D.
Hi Douglas
No I don't have literature to support my claim, mainly because spec sheets come from manufacturers (with an understandable vested interest) and that kit choice is always subject to personal preference.
My post is entirely my personal opinion based on 50 years of recording professional audio.
Sennheiser is a highly respected brand - I have many thousands of pounds of their kit that I use daily.
Schoeps sit in a similar position in that I also use their kit regularly.

If you have not yet tried out the offerings from Pearl, all I can say is that you may be surprised and hopefully impressed by the result.
In no way am I trying to push the Pearl alternative down you throat to replace Schoeps and Sennheiser solutions that you already find acceptable.
I merely offer up the brand as a highly cost-effective alternative that might particularly appeal to the less well-resourced members of our community.

The music should shine through, the brand name and the price should take second-place...
Old 13th June 2018
  #180
Lives for gear
 
tourtelot's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefzapostUK View Post
The music should shine through, the brand name and the price should take second-place...
I can certainly agree with you there

A bit confused about how the Pearl MS8 achieves such a sound with the two diaphragms so clearly not aligned. I always believed that diaphragm alignment was the first priority in a "proper" MS pair.

Again, just looking to forward my education. I'd be happy to hear the results of the mic if I ever get the opportunity.

D.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump