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
Polyhymnia at the Berliner Philharmonie Condenser Microphones
Old 6th April 2013
  #61
Lives for gear
Multi and spaced miking seems to be the preference of the majority for the sound of acoustic romantic music.
I dispute this
When I listen to a spaced pair, it records the ambience and not the focus, the focus is what my ears and brain perceive
Spaced mics are aided with spots for detail,again a minor distortion.
MS technique defines focus,to my ears this is how I perceive performance,and its closer to reality than any other approach imho.
Its not commercial, its more verite.
Space is engaging but not always real.
Old 7th April 2013
  #62
Lives for gear
 

The discussion has been interesting. But ultimately, isn't it the producer who calls the shots?

I do mostly archival work for education purpose. Enhancing reality is not my first priority.
Old 7th April 2013
  #63
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by polytope View Post
The discussion has been interesting. But ultimately, isn't it the producer who calls the shots?

I do mostly archival work for education purpose. Enhancing reality is not my first priority.

I think this is true and that person may not always be pursuing purely artistic goals. Additionally it is one more layer of control which is not always beneficial. It is always a compromise, I suppose, between the producer, the engineer(s), the conductor, and whomever else showed up that day with an interest and an opinion. It makes me think of my days as a code monkey. It is amazing that any program works at all. And especially if it works and is close to user spec.
Old 7th April 2013
  #64
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Multi and spaced miking seems to be the preference of the majority for the sound of acoustic romantic music.
I dispute this
When I listen to a spaced pair, it records the ambience and not the focus, the focus is what my ears and brain perceive
Spaced mics are aided with spots for detail,again a minor distortion.
MS technique defines focus,to my ears this is how I perceive performance,and its closer to reality than any other approach imho.
Its not commercial, its more verite.
Space is engaging but not always real.

Roger, spot on. I am becoming more and more fond of MS. It's best point is getting the most action, mid, and likewise the figure eight, sides.

I want to hear what the hall heard. I can concentrate on the playing and any part of it. I do not need the engineer or mixer cranking up the volume for me as a reminder, "Hey, concentrate on this." It is kind of like a musical laugh track. Give me the benefit of the doubt, let me decide what I want to concentrate on. And if I sound like a cranky old fart it is because I am one.
Old 7th April 2013
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
"Even the producer could tell the difference."
Old 7th April 2013
  #66
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
It is depressing to see curtains of mics at classical venues
I still think 'conductor knows best'.
A first tier conductor conducting one of the top broadcast orchestras in the EU said the following to their producer a while back:
"How is the balance in the control room and out in the hall? From here you mostly hear strings"

answer: "the winds come through plenty in the hall, dont' worry"
conductor "yes, you really cannot tell from where I stand"

Conductors have to translate the gravely unbalanced sound they hear into something that works in most seats in the hall.
The theory presented here stating that two mics represent what the conductor hears is a fallacy.
Old 7th April 2013
  #67
Lives for gear
A conductor who is 12' tall may not be a fallacy
As for spaced versus MS
A beautiful lie is perhaps sometimes better than the truth.
Old 7th April 2013
  #68
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
All this reveals is who here has worked closely with a variety top orchestras and conductors and who has not. By closely, I do not mean archival recording gigs.

Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
Old 7th April 2013
  #69
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
What if the voice was meant to sound buried in the orchestration? Obviously, this is a matter of interpretation. If that is what the conductor and producer want, that is what the recordist will have to do with 2 or 200 mics.

I like amazing recordings. But they have totally blunted my desire to hear an orchestral performance in person. That is not the fault of recordists though. Glenn Gould sort of predicted this.
Old 7th April 2013
  #70
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by polytope View Post
What if the voice was meant to sound buried in the orchestration? Obviously, this is a matter of interpretation. If that is what the conductor and producer want, that is what the recordist will have to do with 2 or 200 mics.

I like amazing recordings. But they have totally blunted my desire to hear an orchestral performance in person. That is not the fault of recordists though. Glenn Gould sort of predicted this.
It is also a discussion of original instruments, original size of the string sections and the venues the poeces were written for.

As for your blunted desires, I have a different experience.
Nothing in terms of recordings will ever come close to my experience attending the tokyo quartets farewell concert with Peter, concertgebouw on tour and at home, Philharmonia on tour in the new Nagata designed hall in copenhagen (oh so that hall does have bass response after all)
Chicago at Symphony hall, or my own experiences on stage with Solti, Eschenbach, Harding, MTT, Muti, Dudamel etc
Old 7th April 2013
  #71
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plush View Post
"Even the producer could tell the difference."
That's like the ultimate tenor joke, "Did you hear about the tenor who was so stupid that all the other tenors noticed?"
Old 7th April 2013
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Larry Elliott's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
All this reveals is who here has worked closely with a variety top orchestras and conductors and who has not. By closely, I do not mean archival recording gigs.

Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
So true.
Old 7th April 2013
  #73
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
All this reveals is who here has worked closely with a variety top orchestras and conductors and who has not. By closely, I do not mean archival recording gigs.

Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
With all due respect, perhaps. I return, again, to the MLP catalog which is full of three and then two mic recordings which are wonderful and lifelike. And there are others. Good recordings were made with two mics, QED. And by choice not accident. If this has become too disputatious for your tastes I apologize. It was never my intent to start an argument but only to register an opinion.
Old 7th April 2013
  #74
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Thank you!

Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
All this reveals is who here has worked closely with a variety top orchestras and conductors and who has not. By closely, I do not mean archival recording gigs.

Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
Old 7th April 2013
  #75
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by boojum View Post
With all due respect, perhaps. I return, again, to the MLP catalog which is full of three and then two mic recordings which are wonderful and lifelike. And there are others. Good recordings were made with two mics, QED. And by choice not accident. If this has become too disputatious for your tastes I apologize. It was never my intent to start an argument but only to register an opinion.
Of course it can work, and when it does work it can sound great.
I have a whole filmscore out where all spots ended up muted for the every single cue (50 minutes of music)

The problem is that it is more often than not impossible to know if a main array is enough until all is edited and final mix is delivered.

There is not a single engineer or producer in the world that can reliably and repeatably achieve Polyhymnia level results with two mics given the variety of venues they work in and enembles they work with.
You mention concertgebouw. I have played there a number of times and like any hall it is not in any way an acoustically trouble free zone. It also sounds quite different depending where you listen.
If it was trouble free, why would many orchestras record on the floor rather than using the stage?

Dr. Everett gets brilliant results every time on the concertgebouw archival recordings and radio broadcasts I have heard.
I would venture to say he is in the business of guaranteeing first class results without exception rather than gambling on a red herring.

The Berlin session in question is a concert recording, presumably with multiple pieces programmed.

How do you find this sweetspot that sounds perfecty balanced for the Bach orchestral suite followed by Brahms violin concerto and then Bartok Concerto for orchestra?
How do you deal with the balance change caused by an unknown number of sold seats?
Remember your soundchech was with an empty hall.
And what was balanced yesterday is not today because often things change a lot from performance to performance.
There is now a sub on principal oboe because of illness and the projection of the player who is sightreading the concert is completely different from the player you had for your soundcheck.
Not to mention that the conductor only did spots in the dress, so you have no idea how two of the movements sound until the concert.
The brass saved their chops for the night and as such play a lot louder and more present.
The solo violin changed from metal strings to covered gut after the dress

The list goes on and on and I see this every week in one orchestra and so does my wife in another
Old 7th April 2013
  #76
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
Of course it can work, and when it does work it can sound great.
I have a whole filmscore out where all spots ended up muted for the every single cue (50 minutes of music)

The problem is that it is more often than not impossible to know if a main array is enough until all is edited and final mix is delivered.

There is not a single engineer or producer in the world that can reliably and repeatably achieve Polyhymnia level results with two mics given the variety of venues they work in and enembles they work with.
You mention concertgebouw. I have played there a number of times and like any hall it is not in any way an acoustically trouble free zone. It also sounds quite different depending where you listen.
If it was trouble free, why would many orchestras record on the floor rather than using the stage?

Dr. Everett gets brilliant results every time on the concertgebouw archival recordings and radio broadcasts I have heard.
I would venture to say he is in the business of guaranteeing first class results without exception rather than gambling on a red herring.

The Berlin session in question is a concert recording, presumably with multiple pieces programmed.

How do you find this sweetspot that sounds perfecty balanced for the Bach orchestral suite followed by Brahms violin concerto and then Bartok Concerto for orchestra?
How do you deal with the balance change caused by an unknown number of sold seats?
Remember your soundchech was with an empty hall.
And what was balanced yesterday is not today because often things change a lot from performance to performance.
There is now a sub on principal oboe because of illness and the projection of the player who is sightreading the concert is completely different from the player you had for your soundcheck.
Not to mention that the conductor only did spots in the dress, so you have no idea how two of the movements sound until the concert.
The brass saved their chops for the night and as such play a lot louder and more present.
The solo violin changed from metal strings to covered gut after the dress

The list goes on and on and I see this every week in one orchestra and so does my wife in another
Point taken.
Old 7th April 2013
  #77
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
All this reveals is who here has worked closely with a variety top orchestras and conductors and who has not. By closely, I do not mean archival recording gigs.

Great conductors are often the first to ask for a highlight so they can finally hear a voice that is buried by Brahms's poor orchestration or the like.

What is disappointing here is that rather than praising Dr. Everett and the guys at Polyhymnia for consistantly getting great results and asking how this is achieved, many choose to make this a battle of ideology rather than actual results.
Klaukholm,even a humble archive recordist can have an opinion,GS is not a closed shop, as yet.
The woeful state of the music business reveals its current commercial limitations, I and some of my friends still prefer realism in recording, not pop music manipulation.
Old 7th April 2013
  #78
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Klaukholm,even a humble archive recordist can have an opinion,GS is not a closed shop, as yet.
The woeful state of the music business reveals its current commercial limitations, I and some of my friends still prefer realism in recording, not pop music manipulation.
Come on,
are polyhymnia recordings not realistic sounding?

Pop music manipulation, really?
Old 7th April 2013
  #79
Lives for gear
As I said in a previous post ,a beautiful lie.
Old 8th April 2013
  #80
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
As I said in a previous post ,a beautiful lie.
Edited for the sake of kindness:

I'm sorry, but that's ridiculously inflammatory. Not to mention that you are writing off, oh, the VAST MAJORITY of the major classical releases since the inception of stereo sound.

Just because the technique highlighted in this article (which this post was supposed to be about, in case we've all forgotten!) isn't one you personally like, doesn't mean you have to berate it, or those who use it. Not only is it unnecessarily inflammatory towards those who do this sort of work, but as Klauk said above, all it really serves to prove is ones arrogance to the standard technical practices in the business.

Honestly it really irks me in a very bad way, the way most threads like this go, because all this naysaying serves to do is off put and drive away the pros on the forum, whose opinions on the above it would actually be interesting to hear about. If you are only recording for archival sake, I don't really care what you think about modern classical recording, because you have absolutely 0 experience or frame of reference as to what the heck you are talking about! Please, stop typing, and open your ears and mind to the info provided, instead of negatively bashing the whole industry of classical recording in a thread that could have been an intelligent discussion of recording technique. This is beginning to look a lot like an audiophile forum, where everyone has an opinion, even when they have no actual knowledge on the topic.

Which brings me to my final point: before you all started tearing into the perceived flaws of this recording, DID ANY OF YOU ACTUALLY BOTHER TO SEEK OUT AND LISTEN TO IT???? Because it is terrific.
Old 8th April 2013
  #81
Lives for gear
 
matyas's Avatar
 

Much as I enjoy a good 2-mic recording, and genuinely love a lot of older discs (such as the much-lauded Mercury recordings referenced so frequently in this thread), I'm going to have to go with Kjetil on this one.
In the course of my career, I have worn all of the hats of composer, orchestral player (although not at nearly major orchestral level), conductor, recording engineer (my main gig these days). I can, therefore, concur that the conductor's viewpoint is not always optimal. (As a student, I remember being told to go out into the hall mid-piece during rehearsal in order to hear how different it sounds from that perspective.) Nor is the composer infallible. Much of modern orchestral practice evolved around attempting to deal with unidiomatic or troublesome orchestration. A brief session reading up on the history of orchestration should dispel any myths that the composer always knows best with regards to orchestral balance. (Certainly Mahler didn't trust Beethoven's orchestrations!)

Regarding Polyhymnia in particular, I was present as an audience member on a disc they recorded and released on the PentaTone label. I know the hall and the orchestral very well. My initial reaction, upon putting the disc on for the first time, was amazement at how well they had captured the sound of the room. I don't know that I had ever heard a record that sounded that much like the space. This was on a production that used 20-some mics. If the results are that spectacular, how can anyone fault them?

On the other hand, I have a disc of baroque guitar and lute music on the MA label. Two mics in a great acoustic. It sounds gorgeous, and I love the sound. It is one of my most-played recordings. But it sounds a bit hyper-real and just a "hyped" to me.
Old 8th April 2013
  #82
Lives for gear
 
boojum's Avatar
KP - please go back to page one of this thread where I jumped in right after you and seconded already posted opinions. I did not show up as some wild-eyed, bomb-throwing anarchist. And my support was not general but specific.

I am entitled to an opinion and I can base it upon my experience as a recordist and as a listener. I am an amateur archivist. I came late to the game and will probably never make a penny for what I do. And I do not have lots of time left to record. What I do is record folks who could not otherwise afford a recording. I live in a poor area, one that is awash in meth and Appalachia style poverty. So these folks are not hiring anyone. And if there is a chance that I would be taking bread off someone's table I will not touch the deal. I can do without the job, the other fellow may not be able to.

As an amateur recordist I have some good gear but a budget of nearly zero. I have squat time to set up for live gigs and I have fantasies of what it must be like to record in a studio with hot shot LDC's, pre's, convertors, compressors, room simulators and so on. Just a good space! Or on-site with time, gear and expertise. Doing this for a living has to be grueling. But try driving two hours with your gear, dragging it into an Irish saloon to record only to be told that because there is an insane pre-St. Pat's day party in cross dressing ballet costumes and noise makers that that recording just is not going to be happening. The fiddler did bring me a quart of super salsa, a pizza like what you get in a French chacuterie and a pint of homemade basil pesto which was really shredded basil leaves which made a beautiful basil pesto with the addition of oil, pignoli, parmesan and some garlic. So I drove the two hours home and had some nice pasta. Some days you get the bear. Some days the bear gets you.

I do this solely because I love it. It is a life-long dream. I work as hard as I can and study what I can to get better. Some folks on here have been exceedingly kind in sharing their craft and in some cases their secrets which makes the jump from SONY MD recorder to 788T workable. For this I am grateful.

If you do not like my opinions, I can live with that. That is what we call "a difference of opinions." If you think I should not express them I will have to respectfully disagree.
Old 8th April 2013
  #83
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
I'm sorry to be abrasive. I'd just like to discuss Polyhymnias work, and not for the 10 millionth time the merits of 2 mic vs multimic recording techniques. I'd be interested in hearing critical evaluation of the disc, like how, to my ears anyways, the vocal balance is a bit hot and dry, especially the male voice on the farthest R position (I wish I knew the score better but this is not a piece I'm familiar with).

But to denounce a work simply for not meeting an ideological standard seems premature. Wouldn't you agree?
Old 8th April 2013
  #84
Lives for gear
 
just.sounds's Avatar
If you have any special requests to ask, I assist Everett Porter tomorrow at the Concertgebouw.
We will do a recording of Janine Jansen, Lang Lang and Thomas Hampson with the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra.

We probably will hang the main system

Wide AB - modified km 130
crossed pair schoeps ccm22
surrounds (AB 3m from front +- 3m wide) modified schoeps mk2s

Spots are hanged and are probably the usual

1st violin dpa4060
Cello

Cb km 140
Timp
Corni

Rest = Schoeps ccm4
We normally record a total of +- 20 channels except with large Mahler concerts.

Preamps are polyhymnia inhouse design
Converters benchmark or Meitner
Recorder pyramix 7 on a Dell
Old 8th April 2013
  #85
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by just.sounds View Post
If you have any special requests to ask, I assist Everett Porter tomorrow at the Concertgebouw.
We will do a recording of Janine Jansen, Lang Lang and Thomas Hampson with the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra.

We probably will hang the main system

Wide AB - modified km 130
crossed pair schoeps ccm22
surrounds (AB 3m from front +- 3m wide) modified schoeps mk2s

Spots are hanged and are probably the usual

1st violin dpa4060
Cello

Cb km 140
Timp
Corni

Rest = Schoeps ccm4
We normally record a total of +- 20 channels except with large Mahler concerts.

Preamps are polyhymnia inhouse design
Converters benchmark or Meitner
Recorder pyramix 7 on a Dell
Keep up the great work you are doing over there!
Can you describe in greater detail the AB and crossed pair combination?
Old 8th April 2013
  #86
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by king2070lplaya View Post
Edited for the sake of kindness:

I'm sorry, but that's ridiculously inflammatory. Not to mention that you are writing off, oh, the VAST MAJORITY of the major classical releases since the inception of stereo sound.

Just because the technique highlighted in this article (which this post was supposed to be about, in case we've all forgotten!) isn't one you personally like, doesn't mean you have to berate it, or those who use it. Not only is it unnecessarily inflammatory towards those who do this sort of work, but as Klauk said above, all it really serves to prove is ones arrogance to the standard technical practices in the business.

Honestly it really irks me in a very bad way, the way most threads like this go, because all this naysaying serves to do is off put and drive away the pros on the forum, whose opinions on the above it would actually be interesting to hear about. If you are only recording for archival sake, I don't really care what you think about modern classical recording, because you have absolutely 0 experience or frame of reference as to what the heck you are talking about! Please, stop typing, and open your ears and mind to the info provided, instead of negatively bashing the whole industry of classical recording in a thread that could have been an intelligent discussion of recording technique. This is beginning to look a lot like an audiophile forum, where everyone has an opinion, even when they have no actual knowledge on the topic.

Which brings me to my final point: before you all started tearing into the perceived flaws of this recording, DID ANY OF YOU ACTUALLY BOTHER TO SEEK OUT AND LISTEN TO IT???? Because it is terrific.
Kevin
I dont quite understand a 'beautiful lie' as inflammatory in nature
I love beautiful lies, as does any recordist worth the salt.
I said earlier dry point etching and Jan van Eyck can co exist,and so thankfully, they do.
All music recording is a confection,some is artful, some excess, modern technique is pretty transparent and small labels can now produce most vivid and wonderful sounds.
However curtains of microphones and countless tracks of Pyramix are similar in my mind to multiple cameras ,multiple radio microphones, and hundreds of tracks on a modern movie production.
Choice has got somewhat out of hand.
Its not arrogant to question technique and I am no naysayer berating current production topology.Change is inevitable.
I listen avidly to the latest recordings and some are quite astonishing ,but no more real than classics from the simpler past imho.
Roger
If a feeble old bloke like me can drive thick skin pros away from this forum I would be truly amazed.
Old 8th April 2013
  #87
Lives for gear
 
Roland's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Kevin
I dont quite understand a 'beautiful lie' as inflammatory in nature
I love beautiful lies, as does any recordist worth the salt.
I said earlier dry point etching and Jan van Eyck can co exist,and so thankfully, they do.
All music recording is a confection,some is artful, some excess, modern technique is pretty transparent and small labels can now produce most vivid and wonderful sounds.
However curtains of microphones and countless tracks of Pyramix are similar in my mind to multiple cameras ,multiple radio microphones, and hundreds of tracks on a modern movie production.
Choice has got somewhat out of hand.
Its not arrogant to question technique and I am no naysayer berating current production topology.Change is inevitable.
I listen avidly to the latest recordings and some are quite astonishing ,but no more real than classics from the simpler past imho.
Roger
If a feeble old bloke like me can drive thick skin pros away from this forum I would be truly amazed.
Because of the advances and cost of modern technology it is possible to have workstations that will record in excess of 100 tracks, the ability to have a single cable to carry 64 + tracks of audio, even the camera analogy allowing the use of 5+ cameras to shoot a scene. Technology isn't the problem, it's how and when we use it. In this scenario, it is being used to make sure that the job is covered whatever happens. It's then down to the producer/director to have the good taste to use it correctly.

If this is one of the Berlin Phil's live broadcast concerts there could be other factors, such as the need for the sound to reinforce the picture and it is common for TV to deploy more equipment for this. As has been pointed out by others in the thread, and I would particularly refer to Mark Donahues posts, deployment doesn't necessarily indicate that it was used and the fact that it is professionally unnacceptable to not be able to offer "options" should the client need it.

For all the arguements over this companies sound vs that companies sound, Polyhymnia produce consistantly professional recordings that meet the highest level of requirement, as remarkable as the Mercury Living Presence recordings were for their time, they wouldn't be acceptable today in terms of fidelity.
Old 8th April 2013
  #88
Lives for gear
 
just.sounds's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by klaukholm View Post
Keep up the great work you are doing over there!
Can you describe in greater detail the AB and crossed pair combination?
Yes i can

If surround is the main delivery format we used to use a wide AB of more than 2m For LR complemented by a Center omni for the center channel. But this was not so usefull for stereo so we started using a small XY pair wich is summed on the C channel and used LR for stereo. Other engineers also use a 20/30 cm AB instead of the XY of Everett. The Wide AB modified km130 are "standard" and also the surround mk2s. This is a large square with the back end +- a meter higher than the front. We hang this from the ceiling with auditorium hangers and it is positioned with a small plastic rope.
Old 8th April 2013
  #89
Lives for gear
 
NetworkAudio's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by just.sounds View Post
Yes i can

If surround is the main delivery format we used to use a wide AB of more than 2m For LR complemented by a Center omni for the center channel. But this was not so usefull for stereo so we started using a small XY pair wich is summed on the C channel and used LR for stereo. Other engineers also use a 20/30 cm AB instead of the XY of Everett. The Wide AB modified km130 are "standard" and also the surround mk2s. This is a large square with the back end +- a meter higher than the front. We hang this from the ceiling with auditorium hangers and it is positioned with a small plastic rope.
What is the angle of the XY, is ity larger than 90degrees?

Do you tend to bring in the schoeps for ambience?
Old 8th April 2013
  #90
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
 

Thread Starter
Yeah, fair enough. There certainly are some great oldies-but-goodies in the catalog which were done very simply. Also some rather complex ones (anyone here familiar with the Szell/Cleveland "Pictures at an Exhibition"?).

Sorry to misinterpret your meaning. The word "lie" to me comes across as inflammatory, as if you were calling work done with spots a "lie", wouldn't those making that work be the "liars"? So hard to infer subtext from a text-only forum :-( and I apologize for that.

I guess, in my mind, a "lie" would be an edit, something that wasn't at the performance. Like in pop music, the lies are the retunes, drum quantization, heavy compression used to make up for lack of control, anything to make the performance "better than it was".

But transcribing a performance with microphones, without the editing, I don't really think that's a lie. Like a photographer taking a photo of a famous work of art, there are questions of lens type, filter, lighting, etc., and while one may come out with something that we all love having a print of in our bedrooms, it will never have the texture and grain, that touch of human-ness of the original. All we can do is find ways to get as close as possible with the tech available.

And while I love having a simple mains setup, this pair alone often leaves me wanting in the rooms I'm typically recording ensembles in. It usually lacks on a large ensemble the "realness" I'm seeking, even if I reposition many times. Any spots I add are usually not intended to rebalance volumes, but perspective, and clarity. I don't see this as a lie, but rather as details to clarify the truth.

And I'm out of steam on this forum, I feel like I've said the same thing many times, and you all probably do too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Kevin
I dont quite understand a 'beautiful lie' as inflammatory in nature
I love beautiful lies, as does any recordist worth the salt.
I said earlier dry point etching and Jan van Eyck can co exist,and so thankfully, they do.
All music recording is a confection,some is artful, some excess, modern technique is pretty transparent and small labels can now produce most vivid and wonderful sounds.
However curtains of microphones and countless tracks of Pyramix are similar in my mind to multiple cameras ,multiple radio microphones, and hundreds of tracks on a modern movie production.
Choice has got somewhat out of hand.
Its not arrogant to question technique and I am no naysayer berating current production topology.Change is inevitable.
I listen avidly to the latest recordings and some are quite astonishing ,but no more real than classics from the simpler past imho.
Roger
If a feeble old bloke like me can drive thick skin pros away from this forum I would be truly amazed.
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
illiummusic / So much gear, so little time
7
damien / So much gear, so little time
3
mic anon / So much gear, so little time
24
AlexLakis / So much gear, so little time
6
FFTT / Geekslutz forum
43

Forum Jump
Forum Jump