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
Tags: ,

Organ recording - comments and criticism requested Condenser Microphones
Old 2 weeks ago
  #1
Gear Addict
 

Organ recording - comments and criticism requested

Hey everybody, it's been quite a while since I posted here, because I've been away from recording for a long time. Finally making some new attempts now.

Today I got to record a pipe organ, something I've only done a few times before. I didn't get much chance for soundcheck, so I tried a few different mic combos and techniques to maximize my odds of getting something good out of it, and also to learn about the resulting differences.

Without revealing what mics were used or which techniques were employed, I'd like to request feedback on these 4 variations. I'm open to any comments or criticism, but in particular I'm interested in hearing thoughts on stereo width, amount of room sound (to wet or dry,) and tonal balance (appropriate bass levels for an organ, etc.)

These are all rough mixes just to evaluate the differences between various mics and methods. I haven't applied any EQ, effects, etc. These are pretty raw right now.

Once I've gotten some unbiased feedback on what's good and bad about each sample, I'll reveal which mics and methods were used (and of course try to make new and improved samples based on your feedback.) Thanks in advance for any insights you can share.

P.S. It was a school recital, and there was a minor snafu that resulted in no programs being available. I believe this excerpt is from Zwei Choralphantasien, Op. 40 by Max Reger, but I may have that wrong.

***EDIT: Had some trouble uploading files (first WAV files were too big, then it wouldn't accept FLAC, even though it says it does... so now we're down to MP3 files.)
Attached Files

test1_16.mp3 (5.50 MB, 633 views)

test2_16.mp3 (5.50 MB, 615 views)

test3_16.mp3 (5.50 MB, 615 views)

test4_16.mp3 (5.50 MB, 612 views)

Old 2 weeks ago
  #2
Lives for gear
 
jimjazzdad's Avatar
I prefer Test 4. Followed by Test 2 and Test 1. As a side comment, my small but orderly brain prefers a simple two-choice test, like being at the optometrist - this? or this? I find it hard to remain objective flipping back and forth between multiple samples. However, I do understand that you are trying to narrow down the field without subjecting us to batteries of tests...looking forward to all the deets.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #3
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjazzdad View Post
I prefer Test 4. Followed by Test 2 and Test 1. As a side comment, my small but orderly brain prefers a simple two-choice test, like being at the optometrist - this? or this? I find it hard to remain objective flipping back and forth between multiple samples. However, I do understand that you are trying to narrow down the field without subjecting us to batteries of tests...looking forward to all the deets.
You make a good point about simple AB comparisons vs. multiple choice comparisons. It's a good point for me to keep in mind when doing my own evaluations, and even more so when I'm asking others to help me out. Duly noted.

Thanks for taking the time to listen and respond. Much appreciated! I'll reserve further comment on the recordings and methods until others have had time to respond.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #4
Gear Addict
 

Hmmm, if no one else is interested in comparing and choosing among samples 1-4, maybe you'd be interested in just listening to sample 5? This is my own interpretation of what's best about samples 1 & 4 above, still with very little processing, but not none.

I'd love to hear feedback on what's good or bad about this recording:
Test5 16 by Beowulf Recording | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Old 2 weeks ago
  #5
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebeowulf17 View Post
Hey everybody, it's been quite a while since I posted here, because I've been away from recording for a long time. Finally making some new attempts now.

Today I got to record a pipe organ, something I've only done a few times before. I didn't get much chance for soundcheck, so I tried a few different mic combos and techniques to maximize my odds of getting something good out of it, and also to learn about the resulting differences.

Without revealing what mics were used or which techniques were employed, I'd like to request feedback on these 4 variations. I'm open to any comments or criticism, but in particular I'm interested in hearing thoughts on stereo width, amount of room sound (to wet or dry,) and tonal balance (appropriate bass levels for an organ, etc.)

These are all rough mixes just to evaluate the differences between various mics and methods. I haven't applied any EQ, effects, etc. These are pretty raw right now.

Once I've gotten some unbiased feedback on what's good and bad about each sample, I'll reveal which mics and methods were used (and of course try to make new and improved samples based on your feedback.) Thanks in advance for any insights you can share.

P.S. It was a school recital, and there was a minor snafu that resulted in no programs being available. I believe this excerpt is from Zwei Choralphantasien, Op. 40 by Max Reger, but I may have that wrong.

***EDIT: Had some trouble uploading files (first WAV files were too big, then it wouldn't accept FLAC, even though it says it does... so now we're down to MP3 files.)
It is the Choralphantasie "Wie schön leucht uns der Morgenstern" op. 40 Nr. 1 of Max Reger. As an organist I choose 3, because the direct and the indirect sound is the best in balance
.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #6
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dingenus View Post
It is the Choralphantasie "Wie schön leucht uns der Morgenstern" op. 40 Nr. 1 of Max Reger. As an organist I choose 3, because the direct and the indirect sound is the best in balance
.
Thanks! Getting an opinion from an actual organist here is a pleasant surprise. Thanks for the clarification regarding the name of the piece as well. Cheers!
Old 2 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 
jimjazzdad's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingenus View Post
...As an organist I choose 3, because the direct and the indirect sound is the best in balance
.
One surprising thing I heard in conversation with an organist I know is how different the pipe organ sounds at the console in organ loft compared to the 'full blossomed' sound down in the nave. Of course sometimes the console is adjacent to the sanctuary or in other locations...but I wonder how the organist would ever know the sound in the middle of the congregation? Perhaps by listening in the audience when other organists play and then comparing? Organs are a great mystery to me
Old 2 weeks ago
  #8
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjazzdad View Post
One surprising thing I heard in conversation with an organist I know is how different the pipe organ sounds at the console in organ loft compared to the 'full blossomed' sound down in the nave. Of course sometimes the console is adjacent to the sanctuary or in other locations...but I wonder how the organist would ever know the sound in the middle of the congregation? Perhaps by listening in the audience when other organists play and then comparing? Organs are a great mystery to me
Yep, you are right. Always listening while others play with your registrations. An other way is to use a direct listening system with 2 mics in the space on the right place with a closed headphone at the console. In the most big churches here in The Netherlands is that rule.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #9
Gear Addict
 

Well, I'd hoped for more responses before the reveal, but here goes. All the recordings are mid-side from the same spot in the chapel, roughly 20 feet away from the organ, maybe 10 feet or so up above the ground. I had an AKG CK91/CK94 pair as the main pickup, but also added my only omni coincident with the main pair so that I could use any combination of omni or cardioid mid when matrixing my mid side balance. The omni was (gulp) a Behringer ECM8000.

Since this was my first time recording a live gig straight to my laptop, I also recorded my trusty Shure VP88 mid side mic directly to an HD-P2 recorder as a backup. The VP88 was on the same stand, but 4-6 inches lower, so I wouldn't want to mix it with the others because of potential phase issues.

Here's the breakdown on mixes:
1) CK91/94
2) ECM8000/CK94
3) VP88
4) CK91/94, with 24dB/octave crossover mix, using ECM8000 for bass frequencies below 80Hz, and CK91 for everything over 80Hz
5) (added in post 4) CK91/94 with side 2(3?)dB down for a little less room, and +2dB at 30Hz to fill in the bass just a bit without needing the omni.

I'm quite happy with the concept of adding a coincident omni to a cardiod MS setup. It's working just as I'd hoped - I can tweak the amount of room up or down based on omni/cardioid balance. I'm not in love with ECM sound - l really want to get a better omni before I do this again - but the experiment has served its purpose.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #10
Gear Addict
 

Here are a few pics of the array and the chapel:

Killworth Chapel Organ - Google Photos

P.S. Don't worry! This was during sound check. Those cables got taped down safely as soon as I was sure of my mic placement.

P.P.S. I'd really love to have nice gear across the board, but in a way I also enjoy the challenge of doing the best I can with limited resources.

Last edited by Ebeowulf17; 2 weeks ago at 02:36 PM.. Reason: Added note about cables, trip hazard.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #11
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebeowulf17 View Post
P.P.S. I'd really love to have nice gear across the board, but in a way I also enjoy the challenge of doing the best I can with limited resources.
off topic: think you're bringing up a good point: i strongly believe that working with capable but not very expensive gear for many years made me work harder and maybe even contributed to becoming a better engineer - i don't mind working with high quality gear these days, but it's a privilege, not a necessity!

well, kinda: some projects, i simply couldn't do without my desk...

___


on topic: i'm always using a blm to capture the lowest notes of the organ. other than this, it's mostly a stereo main pair (or a soundfield) and a distant ambient pair - imo recording an organ is as much about capturing (the sensation one gets upon listening in) the room/hall/church as the instrument by itself.

i hardly ever feel the urge of going up very high with my mics - if so or if aiming at a more direct sound, i put the mic stands on the balcony for both main and ambient mics (with mains then more likely in very wide a/b).
Old 2 weeks ago
  #12
Lives for gear
 
jimjazzdad's Avatar
Which setting for the "S" signal was used on the VP88? I stick with my choice of Test #4 . I think you need some omni LF response to get the best capture of an organ...YMMV.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #13
Gear Addict
 

Arrow

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimjazzdad View Post
Which setting for the "S" signal was used on the VP88? I stick with my choice of Test #4 . I think you need some omni LF response to get the best capture of an organ...YMMV.
The VP88 was set to MS output, recorded with equal gain, and matrixed with even levels during mixing. What I didn't realize, until your question prompted me to look closer, is that the side cartridge is 1.6dB more sensitive than the mid cartridge. So I thought I was doing 50/50 MS, but I think the sensitivity difference means I actually made a mix wth side 1.6dB higher than mid.

As for equivalent VP88 stereo settings, I *think* this is an exact match for their "wide" setting but I'm not totally positive if their descriptions of dB levels for various widths are including the sensitivity difference or not, so I could be wrong.

[***EDIT: I'm deleting the paragraph that was here about filter slopes and crossover errors. I simply mis-read something this morning. The settings were all correct after all!]

I'm also personally leaning towards Mix4, or at least some close variation of it.

The original performer liked Mix2 (omni mid,) citing the extra room sound, but I'm hesitant to use it, cause I don't like the tonal balance in the mids and high mids as much. I really like the overall sound of that CK91!

The organist who responded earlier in this thread chose the VP88 for the direct/room balance (which was apparently 1.6dB more side than mid,) so it seems organists are wanting a bit more room than my Mix4. I'm thinking maybe I'll try Mix4 with just a little more side mic (and the crossover correction) to see if I can get the room they want with the tone I want.

I don't have the experience to back it up, but based on my first experiment here, I'm inclined to agree with you about the omni bass response.
Old 2 weeks ago
  #14
Gear Addict
 

Here's an updated version of Mix4, but with 2dB more side mic to give it just a little more room and width. I'm playing with this idea to satisfy the organist's desire for more room, but I'm not sure how I feel about it myself.

I've attached an MP3 copy, and here's a link to it on Soundcloud, where I was able to upload higher resolution:
Attached Files

test6_AKG-plus-sub-wider.mp3 (5.50 MB, 165 views)

Old 1 week ago
  #15
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebeowulf17 View Post
Here's an updated version of Mix4, but with 2dB more side mic to give it just a little more room and width. I'm playing with this idea to satisfy the organist's desire for more room, but I'm not sure how I feel about it myself.

I've attached an MP3 copy, and here's a link to it on Soundcloud, where I was able to upload higher resolution:
This is the best one in my ears. Why an organist wants to hear more space is, in my opinion, situated in the fact that a well intonated organ pipe is acoustically coupled with the space in which he sounds. (That is not about reverberation!) You can hear that by listening to the tone that sounds throughout the room when you release the key. This works even in relatively dry rooms. If the sound is gone immediately, not resonating in the room, the pipe is not properly intonated. So, if you make a too dry recording you miss a part of the sound. Conversely, if you have too little direct sound, that is true too.
Topic:
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
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Epan / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
0
luc8004 / Newbie audio engineering + production question zone
2
drewspuppet / Electronic Music Instruments and Electronic Music Production
0
misa / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
13
wavez / Work In Progress / Advice Requested / Show and Tell / Artist Showcase / Mix-Offs
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump