thx, you are correct!
i used an over-simplified 'model'/missed out on the correct term...

anyway, when using lots of mics (100+ on some occasions), one inevitably runs into issues in quiet moments as the snr then drops to critical levels: the more mics, the more obvious the effect.


p.s. it's kinda interesting to experience the tipping point where clip mics start outperforming spot mics in terms of snr although the former have much higher self-noise specs.

I think I might have heard something like this in my research. It sounded like like a fake out of phase fake stereo mixing and the note/reverb was bouncing left and right.

I'm replying to a private message from the OP in this thread because there's no reason not to continue the discussion here.

That's one approach, but the presentation of the soloist as a phantom image will be very different between the two pairs. An alternative technique that will allow you to adjust the room sound while maintaining the same source width is a Straus Packet. Here's a picture of the traditional way to do it, but today we have another method: dual diaphragm mics in which the front and rear signals are brought out separately to allow the pattern to be adjusted in post. Examples include the Sennheiser MKH800 Twin and the Austrian Audio OC818; there are others as well. I think a pair of the AA's might be a very good bet because they're designed as a best-in-class '414/C12 style microphone which is a family that I've used on cello successfully in the past. (They are also less than half the price of the Sennheisers.) The plug in that comes with them allows you to create different patterns at different frequencies. You might, for example, maintain the omni bloom on the bottom but get less room and better definition up top.

I haven't yet purchased a pair of OC818's myself, but there are others on this thread who own them and several people with more Straus Packet experience than me, so I'll let them weigh in now.

David L. Rick
Seventh String Recording

If it's a beautiful acoustic space, I agree with others that 2-3 feet is way too close. Try more like 6-7 feet away. Of course, you'll have to use your musical judgment and go for an acceptable direct to reverberant sound ratio. Another thing to consider is the style of the piece. If it's unaccompanied Bach, you can't go wrong with capturing a fair amount of gorgeous reverb (not overdone, of course, but enough to allow the listener to enjoy the hall). If it's a more modern type work like the Hindemith unaccompanied sonata or the Crumb, a bit of edginess is appropriate, IMO, accomplished with a closer main pair. In the end, get the thumbs up from the cellist as they'll be bound to have an opinion on it. I think a pair of omnis would work beautifully. At 6-7 feet away, I'd start with about 67 cm apart.

While not focused on capturing classic cello, Hendyamps Studios has captured my favorite cello recordings using a three mic, vertical spaced arrangement with careful attention to phase.

Recording and video are not done together, mics are not in the video. Chris sent me a picture of the mic arrangement.

I love their cello work (and gear), starting with Misty Mountains (Hobbit Dwarf Song):

https://youtube.com/c/HendyampsStudios

What does “careful attention to phase” mean, and how do they adjust for it?

Can you post the pics of the mics?

Ray

Sent PM

Happy to send PM to those interested

Hello guys, reporting back after the shoot.

Wish I can show you the shots and the recording. I wanted to do Omnis, but the client wanted to concentrate on the cello and reduce the pick up from the audience(coughs, chair, movement noises etc) So we did OTRF with a pair of matched Cardioids. I used mics from MicW, they sounded very technical with very almost no colouring. I'm surprised that in that configuration it also picked up very little reverb, is the orchestral space designed to have less reverb?

I used a Zoom H5, starting the recorder just before door opens, it ran for about 2 hours with only 1 bar left when I picked it up. The cellist is a world class musician so overall it was a wonderful night at work.

Thanks for all the discussions and help. Really made this an enjoyable learning shoot.

As described to me, Chris and Landon meticulously position the mics by ear, will not record until they have the sound they want, without phase issues.

In the linked video, they discuss their recording process, patterns in great detail, however, this episode is focused on acoustic guitar:

https://youtu.be/gZOlB6Gyf60

Oh, this was live! I thought it was a recording session. I missed that. Glad it all worked out.

So, these guys claim "ribbon mics should never be used on strings" eh ...lol !

I'll split hairs and take issue with their methodology: they're not so much meticulously positioning the mics by ear...as they're meticulously placing them by ear-by headphones.

While I can appreciate their explanation that it hugely aids the iterative process (of moving the mic(s) near the guitar, while listening with cans in real time to the results of their incremental moves.)...I'm not sure that the ear isolation that each earcup gives is conducive to hearing those phase interactions between spaced mic pairs ?

This is mainly because each ear is hearing only the contribution of that (hard panned) mic...whereas if listening to the same mic pair feed via monitor speakers, you're going to get the crossfeed of left speaker sound into right and vice versa. You could call this 'air mixing' or 'room mixing'....and it's going to expose those phasing anomalies they discuss with much more clarity and immediacy.

There are some headphones (and headphone amps) which will feed a controlled amount of interchannel bleed from one earcup to another....such a method would help to expose the phasing issues which they claim to hear using headphones in the tracking studio...but which I'll contend are actually masked by conventional headphones (and exposed by monitor speakers)

In summary, while I applaud the drive to remove phase anomalies via critical listening to the mic feed (and adjusting mic angles/distances accordingly)....using closed-back headphones as they describe isn't the way to do it...

Speakers are...and thus the frequent walk-trips between control room and studio that they decry (as an unwelcome 'extra effort killer') are in fact necessary !

Understood, appreciate your PoV, points well taken.

Chris has a very unique PoV, if you ever try any of his gear, like Michelangelo as one example, you will notice it is not like anything else.

Regarding monitors, I was told by Chris that they are huge fans of Amphion, use them for mixing and mastering.

One challenge Chris lays out for all: make your choices through listening. I happen to love listening to those cello recordings.

BTW, I only know Chris through correspondence about his gear, specifically a peculiar mosfet circuit he uses in some gear, ended up buying a pair of Picasso SS. He’s easy to reach, has endless patience to discuss gear and recording and has challenged my thinking in a good way. I am trying to think more creatively.

I like their passion and energy, which comes through in the video...and clearly they follow solid practices to arrive at their methodologies. I'm looking forward to hearing some of their cello recordings (tho' they spill the beans at the end of the guitar video that their audio and video components are created apart )

Studio guys often have different backgrounds, methods and rationales from live concert recording folk...they're quite divergent contexts.

I'm keen to check out their recording gear....to see if it falls on the transparent or 'coloured' side of the audio capture spectrum ?

I'm curious about it - a PM would be nice

::
Mads

PMs sent

Thanks very much!

::
Mads