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
Decca Tree Recording Condenser Microphones
Old 1 week ago
  #1
Gear Addict
 

Decca Tree Recording

So I did a Decca Tree Recording Jan 23rd 2019. Implemented techniques, criticism, advice and insults I was offered here and am hoping that I might get an opinion from anyone. It's Schubert's Sym No 3 and a few others.

Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud

Last edited by emenelton; 1 week ago at 01:27 AM..
Old 1 week ago
  #2
Lives for gear
Sounds promising, a bit left/right and light-on in the centre imaging (not too bad though....I'm listening on cans though, which might be exaggerating that aspect). Was it a 3 mic or 5 mic array ? Any spots ? How did you pan the mics ? Pretty good tho'.....biggest crit is misspelling Shub's name...!
Old 1 week ago
  #3
Gear Addict
 

I spell checked it against the Shubert theatre. 5 mic tree

About the L-R I had the 4006a’s pointing 40 degrees out towords the middle of the violin/cellos with the silver grids. The center is a 4006tlx with a lot flatter treble.

The ctr I turned up so it was there but it was a duller tone. The L/R I panned in a lot.
Old 1 week ago
  #4
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I spell checked it against the Shubert theatre. 5 mic tree

About the L-R I had the 4006a’s pointing 40 degrees out towords the middle of the violin/cellos with the silver grids. The center is a 4006tlx with a lot flatter treble.

The ctr I turned up so it was there but it was a duller tone. The L/R I panned in a lot.
Did you choose the centre mic deliberately to have different treble to the L/R Tree pair ? I would have assumed it's critical to have all 3 of them identical, or as closely matched as possible ? Outriggers panned hard L/R ?

Decca Tree to me sometimes can have a 'compartmentalized' image portrayal ...of each mic in the quintet existing in its own little space, preventing the seamless panoramic blend we all seek. That's what this recording demonstrates to me to some degree.

As to causes, I'd immediately suspect that centre mic's response.....after that, down to a set of complementary small panning and level tweaks across all 5 mics...to break down the walls of those cardboard boxes that each mic sort-of exists within. Do try those tweaks...it's so well worth the effort !

Do those 5 mic level/pan tweaks dynamically, organically, intensively as a system...just like the advice given to studio multitrack mixers...don't use the solo button, always adjust the sound/mic you're working on in context with the rest of the mix...soloing/tweaking robs you of that context

Really, really....so glad you fixed Schub...nobody needs that sort of cred crippler I know, it's just a name...but in the canon, he's one of the biggies !
Old 1 week ago
  #5
Gear Addict
 

The 4006 tlx was $700

I had the L/R panned at 0/-13.5 which was -75 on the pan pot and I moved them in more to -60. The back spaced pair I panned in also.
I like the tymp sound.

I will pursue your projection it is just what I needed
Old 1 week ago
  #6
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
The 4006 tlx was $700

I had the L/R panned at 0/-13.5 which was -75 on the pan pot and I moved them in more to -60. The back spaced pair I panned in also.
I like the tymp sound.

I will pursue your projection it is just what I needed
It might be profitable to spend some time eqing the central tlx to match the l/r tree pair as much as possible. So no spot mics were used, just 5 across the front ?
Old 1 week ago
  #7
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
It might be profitable to spend some time eqing the central tlx to match the l/r tree pair as much as possible. So no spot mics were used, just 5 across the front ?
the tlx is the close grid . The center i would raise up and then it would be too much but still not be satisfying

Spaced pair ww/brass
Beyer cardioid 260 tymp
Beyer mc930 bass I placed it wrong though and it just has the single 1st viol only so I have it just Peaking into the mix , you can hear it’s singularity when the bass plays

The tym though I was able to push
Old 1 week ago
  #8
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
It might be profitable to spend some time eqing the central tlx to match the l/r tree pair as much as possible. So no spot mics were used, just 5 across the front ?
thanks for helping

the 4006TLX 2db up at 5k 3db up at 9k and adjusted the level.

the first piece is the only one updated Sym No 3 4th mvt

Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Old 1 week ago
  #9
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
So I did a Decca Tree Recording Jan 23rd 2019. Implemented techniques, criticism, advice and insults I was offered here and am hoping that I might get an opinion from anyone. It's Schubert's Sym No 3 and a few others.

Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud
What motivated you to try decca tree instead of some other approach?
Old 1 week ago
  #10
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
What motivated you to try decca tree instead of some other approach?
I wanted to do better
Old 1 week ago
  #11
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I spell checked it against the Shubert theatre. 5 mic tree

About the L-R I had the 4006a’s pointing 40 degrees out towords the middle of the violin/cellos with the silver grids. The center is a 4006tlx with a lot flatter treble.

The ctr I turned up so it was there but it was a duller tone. The L/R I panned in a lot.
Why panned in a lot? The recording sounds very one dimensional and centered. Desire more reverb. The audience....everybody has pneumonia during live orchestra concerts (and at urinals) for some reason...hate that. I digress. Despite my opinion/taste....the ensemble balance is very nice and not always because the ensemble plays balanced because recording a perfectly blended ensemble doesn’t equate to that when recording. Sounds a bit flat, sterile and boring but pleasant. Not rude. Just pleasant. Not criticizing, just how I hear it.
Old 1 week ago
  #12
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I wanted to do better
Better than what?

What other methods have you tried?
What was their shortcoming that made you want better?
Old 1 week ago
  #13
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaBzg View Post
Why panned in a lot? The recording sounds very one dimensional and centered. Desire more reverb. The audience....everybody has pneumonia during live orchestra concerts (and at urinals) for some reason...hate that. I digress. Despite my opinion/taste....the ensemble balance is very nice and not always because the ensemble plays balanced because recording a perfectly blended ensemble doesn’t equate to that when recording. Sounds a bit flat, sterile and boring but pleasant. Not rude. Just pleasant. Not criticizing, just how I hear it.
The reverb goes away when truncating from 24bit to 16bit.

I do have the mix set to 65 on the IR
Old 1 week ago
  #14
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
Better than what?

What other methods have you tried?
What was their shortcoming that made you want better?
Phased array

Thanks for asking

3. Sirenes Moderement Anime 51218 by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud


Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Old 1 week ago
  #15
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaBzg View Post
Why panned in a lot? The recording sounds very one dimensional and centered. Desire more reverb. The audience....everybody has pneumonia during live orchestra concerts (and at urinals) for some reason...hate that. I digress. Despite my opinion/taste....the ensemble balance is very nice and not always because the ensemble plays balanced because recording a perfectly blended ensemble doesn’t equate to that when recording. Sounds a bit flat, sterile and boring but pleasant. Not rude. Just pleasant. Not criticizing, just how I hear it.
The recording was panned in a lot the left outrigger panner was disabled and sending mono

Thanks HelenaBzg!
Old 1 week ago
  #16
Gear Addict
 

Thanks.

Have you considered XY, Blumlein, AB, mid side, or a spaced pair with varying distance and angles?

Have you used or considered adding spot mikes for specific instruments?

I would think that a combination of these would work better if used judiciously during the mixing.

I note that ORTF and NOS are only optimised for the specific situation in France and Holland and using them other places is usually a bad idea unless you adjust the spacing and angle to match per the interactive chart you can see at sengpiel.
Old 1 week ago
  #17
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
Thanks.

Have you considered XY, Blumlein, AB, mid side, or a spaced pair with varying distance and angles?

Have you used or considered adding spot mikes for specific instruments?

I would think that a combination of these would work better if used judiciously during the mixing.

I note that ORTF and NOS are only optimised for the specific situation in France and Holland and using them other places is usually a bad idea unless you adjust the spacing and angle to match per the interactive chart you can see at sengpiel.

The female choir had the house mics split into my recorder

On this new one I am finishing to deliver, I was modifying it per Studer’s critique. I accidentally had the left outrigger’s panner set to mono and HelenaBzg’ pointed out how displeasing the sound was.
Old 1 week ago
  #18
Gear Maniac
 

No....I went out of the way to emphasize that it was pleasing and balanced. Just centered, reverb lacking in the areas I mentioned.
Old 1 week ago
  #19
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HelenaBzg View Post
No....I went out of the way to emphasize that it was pleasing and balanced. Just centered, reverb lacking in the areas I mentioned.
No worry’s as I said I had actually disabled the left outriggers panner, so the left outrigger was in mono which made it sound “flat, sterile and boring’

when I was doing that mix I kept hearing the violins in the right ,

Thanks for listening and posting, it made me go back in

Last edited by emenelton; 1 week ago at 02:10 AM..
Old 1 week ago
  #20
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
I note that ORTF and NOS are only optimised for the specific situation in France and Holland and using them other places is usually a bad idea unless you adjust the spacing and angle to match per the interactive chart you can see at sengpiel.
Does that mean that ORTF and NOS won't work if used in UK, USA, Spain, Brazil etc....or DIN only works in Germany ? Please give additional supporting details....
Old 1 week ago
  #21
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
Does that mean that ORTF and NOS won't work if used in UK, USA, Spain, Brazil etc....or DIN only works in Germany ? Please give additional supporting details....
They will 'work' anywhere.
But it may not work good.

And no you do not have to reverse the L/R settings because you are upside down in Australia.

The official numbers will only work best in a room the same size used to promulgate the ORTF and NOS distances and angles. And add that the source size should be the same as the French and Dutch used when they determined the values.

Note they did not specify the distance from the source.

Sengpiel has a chart you can use to find the distances and angles that work best for your situation.

I recently saw another place but do not remember the link that gave other data by miking method. A lot of places have a little data but that one had a lot of other things spelled out. If I find it again then I will post it here.
Old 1 week ago
  #22
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
They will 'work' anywhere.
But it may not work good.

And no you do not have to reverse the L/R settings because you are upside down in Australia.

The official numbers will only work best in a room the same size used to promulgate the ORTF and NOS distances and angles. And add that the source size should be the same as the French and Dutch used when they determined the values.

Note they did not specify the distance from the source.

Sengpiel has a chart you can use to find the distances and angles that work best for your situation.

I recently saw another place but do not remember the link that gave other data by miking method. A lot of places have a little data but that one had a lot of other things spelled out. If I find it again then I will post it here.
Here is the ORTF chart from sengpiel.
I presume they have one for NOS too but searching the site is not easy.


Visualization of ORTF Stereo Microphone System mic angle 110deg spacing 17 cm equivalence system - Array with two microphones Time of arrical difference mic - Stereo recording angle SRA time difference level difference mic orchestra angle degrees visualisator XY MS - sengpielaudio Sengpiel Berlin


Took a wild guess and inserted NOS for the ORTF and found

Visualisierung NOS Stereo-Mikrofonsystem Niere/Niere 90deg 30 cm - Aequivalenzanordnung - Visualisation des Stereosystems Visualization Visualisator - Aufnahmebereich Aufnahmewinkel Laufzeitdifferenz Pegeldifferenz Mikrofon Visualizator Visualization Orchesterwinkel Winkel Klangkorper-Ausdehnung XY MS - sengpielaudio Sengpiel Berlin


And now I see you can select 13 different schemes from EBS RAI DIN lots of ABtypes Two XY Blumlein and Faulkner all on that same page
Old 1 week ago
  #23
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
They will 'work' anywhere.
But it may not work good.

And no you do not have to reverse the L/R settings because you are upside down in Australia.

The official numbers will only work best in a room the same size used to promulgate the ORTF and NOS distances and angles. And add that the source size should be the same as the French and Dutch used when they determined the values.

Note they did not specify the distance from the source.

Sengpiel has a chart you can use to find the distances and angles that work best for your situation.

I recently saw another place but do not remember the link that gave other data by miking method. A lot of places have a little data but that one had a lot of other things spelled out. If I find it again then I will post it here.
While initially dismissive of your assertion, I would be interested to read any of the source papers associated with the evolution of those mentioned near coincident arrays...does anyone have references, links to these ? In particular if they contain room dimensions and source to mic distances as you suggest.

I think you might be referring to Michael Williams "The Stereophonic Zoom" article/paper which relates to stereo recording angle, orchestral angle etc. It provides one with tools to recalculate the mic angles and spacings in response to these variables...similar to Sengpiel's widget.

Now you can measure and calculate these from your mobile phone, using at least 2 apps (low cost and free) often mentioned in the thread of this forum; Recording Angle Williams/ Neumann App
Old 1 week ago
  #24
Lives for gear
Quote:
Yes it's a simple drop down menu in the top left, where you originally found the ORTF.....it includes many near coincident and four variations on AB. It seems you've already discovered this....

The phone apps are much more detailed and faster, especially the one which utilizes your phone's camera to measure the orchestral angle....as well as mic spacing/angle.

In addition, they all work across planet Earth.....
Old 1 week ago
  #25
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
While initially dismissive of your assertion, I would be interested to read any of the source papers associated with the evolution of those mentioned near coincident arrays...does anyone have references, links to these ? In particular if they contain room dimensions and source to mic distances as you suggest.

I think you might be referring to Michael Williams "The Stereophonic Zoom" article/paper which relates to stereo recording angle, orchestral angle etc. It provides one with tools to recalculate the mic angles and spacings in response to these variables...similar to Sengpiel's widget.

Now you can measure and calculate these from your mobile phone, using at least 2 apps (low cost and free) often mentioned in the thread of this forum; Recording Angle Williams/ Neumann App
I did find way back when descriptions of the ORTF and NOS room sizes.

The evolution is pretty much trial and error and measure results.

Somehow more recently some folks seem to be able to calculate it but I do not know their assumptions and have not seen the actual equations.

I saw references to stereo zoom on taperSSection.com but did not yet find any real description of the details.
Old 1 week ago
  #26
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe sixpak View Post
I did find way back when descriptions of the ORTF and NOS room sizes.

The evolution is pretty much trial and error and measure results.

Somehow more recently some folks seem to be able to calculate it but I do not know their assumptions and have not seen the actual equations.

I saw references to stereo zoom on taperSSection.com but did not yet find any real description of the details.
The phones apps use all of these references in their calculations automatically....just use them as your default.
Old 1 week ago
  #27
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by studer58 View Post
It might be profitable to spend some time eqing the central tlx to match the l/r tree pair as much as possible. So no spot mics were used, just 5 across the front ?
I went back and forth - seems a bit more integrated. Interested to hear your feedback.
I did get a little more reverb on it too per comment

Thanks

Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud
Old 1 week ago
  #28
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by emenelton View Post
I went back and forth - seems a bit more integrated. Interested to hear your feedback.
I did get a little more reverb on it too per comment

Thanks

Vienna Home by PlantLady Rec Services | Free Listening on SoundCloud
You seem to have improved the tree mic balance (ultimately best to have identical mics) and coherence of images across the front of the orchestra.

The newly added reverb washes out detail....completely unnecessary, reverb on the sample in post 1 was great, you had a nimble skipping sound....now it is wading through old car oil. Woodwind spots might be a fraction high, but generally the mix is moving well ahead, from an already good starting point.

I recommend you reference the 50+ CD box set "The Decca Sound" which will give you a solid set of benchmarks made across Decca's heydays from the late 50's on, when the Tree became their trademark. It will calibrate your hearing and mix goals astonishingly....and the cost per CD (or download) is minuscule ! The included essay and booklet alone is worth the box price, as it contains many valuable photos and location hints from that era.
Old 1 week ago
  #29
Gear Nut
 

I like the sound, nice recording.
May I ask, what was the spacing for the decca tree?
Old 1 week ago
  #30
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RFrommann View Post
I like the sound, nice recording.
May I ask, what was the spacing for the decca tree?
It was ~26”
The center mic was about a foot behind the conductor and maybe 11’ High.

I lost the positioning for the left right in that instead of directed down towards the first stand they were splayed out more and pointing generally towards the middle of the vn/cellos.

I saw but couldn’t get up the ‘will’ to drop the stand. The stage is four feet above the main floor and really dry and peaky compared to the hall proper.

I’m going back to my first mix that I presented and with what I learned going to do a couple minimal adjusts.
For the editors in the house; the Schubert 1st mvt - lm referring to it as the variation and tutti section - the last two variations, which are the a + b themes in that mvt are the a + b from the first two a + b’s because of problems in the last two sections. The tuttis are as performed.

Thank-you

Last edited by emenelton; 1 week ago at 07:31 PM..
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
MusicTechLink / Newbie audio engineering + production question zone
1
emenelton / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
22
emenelton / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
15
emenelton / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
65
studio1117 / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
23

Forum Jump
Forum Jump