Topic: Zoom F8 for Classical recording

[Gutbucket]

Here some samples recorded with my F8
during a "Belharra Trio" concert in France (Biarritz

Without any postprod... 

http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio

Very nice, and well recorded. Thanks for the link. I had to jump straight to the Piazzolla, a personal favorite.  Really enjoyed the Ravel as well.

[robtweed]

Just edited my last post a bit to clarify a bit better.  Sounds like a good plan.  I doubt you'll actually need the spot, although it won't hurt to record it anyway. 

Looking at the photo, see how the soundboard of the violin is facing more or less directly upwards towards the middle of the microphones, and the lid of the piano on short-stick sort of shadows the direct line from piano strings to the microphones?  I'd suggest trying the same array, shifting it to the right, back a bit so that it is placed more or less between the two instruments, and lower.  You'll get less breath and playing noises from the violinist by moving a bit further back, and adjusting the overall height of the microphone array will tweak the balance in timbre between the violin and piano.  As the microphone array is brought lower, off-axis from the top of the violin and begin to "peer further under the piano lid to the strings", you'll get more warmth and less shrill brightness from the fiddle and more brightness and "closeness" from the piano closer to a normal height listening perspective.  Personally I question the whole "up high" mic placement tradition in classical recording, which to my thinking is mostly appropriate as a way of balancing the front/back direct/reverberant balance and timbre of the sections a large ensemble, where the instruments in back are considerably farther away and somewhat blocked by the instruments close to the front and the mic position.  Most of the time I think it's mostly tradition and a practical way of getting the mics out of the sight-lines of an audience.  I usually prefer a lower listening perspective which sounds more like it does when standing there in person, as the instruments were designed to do.

A lot of that is just personal preference though, feel free to ignore it!

Here's a sample mix-down from last night's concert at the same venue.  Completely different mic set-up, taking your suggestions into account - interested to see what you think:

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/sample1.wav

Again, recorded onto and mixed directly from the F8 files

[robtweed]

Hi
Thanks Robtweed for your sample

Here some samples recorded with my F8
during a "Belharra Trio" concert in France (Biarritz

Without any postprod... 

http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio

Lovely recordings!  I'd be interested to hear about the microphones used and how they were set up

Rob

[Gutbucket]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for posting the new sample.  It's very interesting to compare these recordings made in the same room with the same instrumentation, with the mic setup the primary variable between the two.  I find this sort of listening comparison the best way for me to really learn what's going on and confirm how things work in the real world.

What are your thoughts about the differences between the two?  We are entering the realm of the subjective here, where mechanics of the craft are satisfied and subtleties of artistic preference become the focus.

[robtweed]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for posting the new sample.  It's very interesting to compare these recordings made in the same room with the same instrumentation, with the mic setup the primary variable between the two.  I find this sort of listening comparison the best way for me to really learn what's going on and confirm how things work in the real world.

What are your thoughts about the differences between the two?  We are entering the realm of the subjective here, where mechanics of the craft are satisfied and subtleties of artistic preference become the focus.

Well let me first explain the microphone set up this time.

The main array at about between waist and chest height, a few meters back from the violinist, and about a third the way along the piano (from the keyboard end).  The mid-point of the array pointing midway between the violinist and pianist.  The array consisted of a pair of CM3s, 41cm apart, and a pair of OM1s, 67cm apart.  The violin is augmented by a stereo spot - the DPA 2011s in X/Y - about chest height and about a meter away from the violinist, so picking up the sound coming obliquely off the side of sound board, to get the wood / body sound of the violin as much as possible.

The difference in sound?  To me the violin now has a warmer, woodier body sound to it - the thin scratchiness of the first set-up has been removed.  I think the piano sounds more rounded too, and there's a nice space around the instruments - all in all a better balanced and more natural sound, closer to what the audience would have heard.

This session was actually the third (of four).  I decided to use an X/Y stereo spot using the DPAs because in session 2 I used a single CM3 as a spot.  It picked up too much piano (it is of course a wide cardioid), and being mono, to boost the violin (she's a quiet player, which is a key challenge in these recordings), the piano spill on the CM3 shifted the stereo image of the piano.  I figured the more directional DPAs would be better in this role, and a stereo spot would give me some control over positioning its image.  Personally, I think it worked.

I've certainly learned a lot in this series of recordings - your advice was truly welcomed, and it also got me reading a load of relevant threads on GearSlutz too.

What was your impression of this latest recording by comparison?

Rob

[robtweed]

Here's a couple of pics of the mic setup - hopefully helps to explain what I described in words!

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/IMG_0411.JPG
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/IMG_0412.JPG

Rob

[Gutbucket]

The difference in sound?  To me the violin now has a warmer, woodier body sound to it - the thin scratchiness of the first set-up has been removed.  I think the piano sounds more rounded too, and there's a nice space around the instruments - all in all a better balanced and more natural sound, closer to what the audience would have heard.

I agree with your assessment.  To me it sounds better balanced in terms of timbre, stereo image and fore/aft depth, and presents a more familiar listening perspective.

[voltronic]

I agree - overall balance is better this time.

Pianist nitpick here: I also would encourage you to open the piano full stick, which will help the instrument be more in balance with itself and allow the pianist to better control everything.  Don't worry about overpowering the violin; a good accompanist (which is sounds like you have here) will be able to compensate.  It's actually more difficult with the lid partially open.  I have lots of experience accompanying soloists from professionals down through high school students who have varying levels of confidence and projection, and unless the treble of the piano has badly grooved hammers and is very dull, you either want the piano fully closed or fully open.  When you go 1/4 stick, the treble becomes kind of beam-y out towards the audience (or mics) but the angle of the lid is so acute that the bass does not get the same benefit.  As a result, treble is reinforced from the audience perspective but bass is not since it's mostly just being reflected back into the instrument.  It's even more of a problem with older instruments where the hammers in the treble range have little felt left and/or have hardened over time.

The biggest benefit for recording when you open full stick is that you should be able to move your main rig significantly higher and several feet back, which will give you more of the room, and you'll also reap the benefits from the Tony Faulkner-ish array you have.  I'd also try deleting the CM3s entirely and just going with the spaced omnis, but move them a bit closer together to around 45-50cm.  You still might need your X/Y spot for the violin, but with the main set farther away from it you'll have less of the direct sound from the violin in the main array.

[robtweed]

I agree - overall balance is better this time.

Pianist nitpick here: I also would encourage you to open the piano full stick, which will help the instrument be more in balance with itself and allow the pianist to better control everything.  Don't worry about overpowering the violin; a good accompanist (which is sounds like you have here) will be able to compensate.  It's actually more difficult with the lid partially open.  I have lots of experience accompanying soloists from professionals down through high school students who have varying levels of confidence and projection, and unless the treble of the piano has badly grooved hammers and is very dull, you either want the piano fully closed or fully open.  When you go 1/4 stick, the treble becomes kind of beam-y out towards the audience (or mics) but the angle of the lid is so acute that the bass does not get the same benefit.  As a result, treble is reinforced from the audience perspective but bass is not since it's mostly just being reflected back into the instrument.  It's even more of a problem with older instruments where the hammers in the treble range have little felt left and/or have hardened over time.

The biggest benefit for recording when you open full stick is that you should be able to move your main rig significantly higher and several feet back, which will give you more of the room, and you'll also reap the benefits from the Tony Faulkner-ish array you have.  I'd also try deleting the CM3s entirely and just going with the spaced omnis, but move them a bit closer together to around 45-50cm.  You still might need your X/Y spot for the violin, but with the main set farther away from it you'll have less of the direct sound from the violin in the main array.

Thanks Voltronic

Actually I didn't have any say in the piano set-up.  My natural inclination would be for the lid to be fully open too, though I'm not sure how well it would sound like that in a reverberant church - I'll ask the pianist tomorrow (the last concert) and see what he thinks.   It's a pretty old and not great (or responsive) piano to be honest, and with the lid open will possibly reveal even more hammer noise...and I'm pretty sure will drown out the violinist for the audience (which I suspect is why he's using it on the short stick).

I find that the sound from the OM1s on their own is too bassy and reverberant, and brings out a boom in the piano that I don't like.  Moving them closer together may help that....but moving the array further away from the piano will further increase the reverb pickup (which is already strong), so I'm not sure of this advice - I think the CM3 / OM1 mix allows me to get a reasonable compromise and not too "distant" a recording.

There's certainly plenty of experiments I could do, but alas I don't get much time to try different things out before each concert.  It's been an interesting learning experience however!  I'll certainly try out some of your suggestions elsewhere - many thanks again.

Meanwhile, the F8 has worked great throughout!

[robtweed]

Something I've noticed on these recordings is that the mix sounds quite different on headphones than speakers.  The mix you hear is optimised (in my opinion) for speakers, and when I listen on headphones, I think the violin sounds a little too close-miked.    If I mix for headphones and take down the level from the X/Y spot (just a few dB) to get it how I think works nicely, on speakers the violin sounds too distant and loses its detail.

So...if you're listening on headphones, try it on your speakers instead :-)

Just shows how many variables you need to take into account when recording and balancing!  Makes my day-job in IT seem dead simple!

[robtweed]

One other point, Voltronic.  I'm sure you've seen it, but according to this: http://www.audiotechnology.com.au/wp/index.php/stereo-masterclass/
TF has changed the array layout again - note the 41.2cm spread of the cardioids rather than the previous 47cm sub-cardiods he previously used (and prior to that he used ORTF cardioids).  Although the CM3s are sub-cards I thought I'd give the 41cm spread a try and was pleased with the result.  As he says, though, these are just starting points.

[voltronic]

The idea that opening the lid full will overpower a soloist is a myth perpetuated by many people, including many pianists (I used to believe it also).  What it does require is a bit more delicate touch, and the trust of someone's ears out in the hall to give you feedback on balance.  But the huge benefit like I said it's that the instrument is now in balance across its full range.

I don't think you'd run the risk of increased hammer noise if you go the route I'm suggesting either.  That's more of a problem if you're close.

And yes, I saw that interview the other day.  TF is using regular cards in that interview, but like you said they're just starting points.  I've been using my CM3s alone in "wide ORTF" lately which is 21.5cm spacing as opposed to the normal 17cm.  The sound is close to the normal ORTF sound, but with the benefits of subcard that you're well aware of.  I'll post samples of a couple concerts I recently recorded with that setup soon.

Finally, if you want a more authoritative opinion on classical piano recording, send a PM to John Willett, or maybe he will chime in on this thread.  He shared some piano recordings with me, made with just a narrow spaced omni pair that show how very well this technique can work.

[Gutbucket]

Something I've noticed on these recordings is that the mix sounds quite different on headphones than speakers.  The mix you hear is optimised (in my opinion) for speakers, and when I listen on headphones, I think the violin sounds a little too close-miked.    If I mix for headphones and take down the level from the X/Y spot (just a few dB) to get it how I think works nicely, on speakers the violin sounds too distant and loses its detail.

So...if you're listening on headphones, try it on your speakers instead :-)

Just shows how many variables you need to take into account when recording and balancing!  Makes my day-job in IT seem dead simple!

Depends on the headphones, depends on the speakers, depends on the room the speakers are setup in.  In my opinion, variability of the monitoring setup used while mixing and editing the recording is perhaps the biggest untamed variable we deal with, and one we often take for granted.  Other than the mechanics of preparing a recording for distribution (LP cutting, CD pressing, radio release, online store or whatever), final adjustments to make the recording universally acceptable for as many playback scenarios as possible, is the traditional argument for professional mastering services employing skilled mastering engineers using highly calibrated playback equipment.

That said, headphone listening will often make fine detail, subtleties of timbre and low level dynamic stuff far more audibly apparent than loudspeaker playback.  And loudspeakers can sometimes be more revealing of stereo image balance, the perception of depth, and presence.  Best to listen as many ways as possible to find the most appropriate compromises which don't hurt any one scenario too much and improve all of them on average.

[Gutbucket]

Don't take those specific spacing dimensions as gospel.  The more important take-aways from that TF interview are the ability of "phased arrays" (which at its most basic definition means any number of sensors [microphones] greater than one, spaced along a line) to provide some degree of useful forward directional gain or "reach";  the significance of the collective polar pattern of the entire array in combination, rather than only considering the polar patterns of the individual microphones in isolation; in the basic corollary between microphone pattern, spacing, and included angle and how he uses more spacing as the angle is narrowed or the pattern is broadened;  and that top quality recordings can be made with relatively simple setups and gear which doesn't require a second mortgage.

Big +T to TF.  He's an excellent inspiration for us.  As a mobile short handed recordist, his approach is far closer to what we do than either the way the studio recording guys work or the way most big orchestral recording outfits doing film scores or other classical recording work.

[robtweed]

A short sample from the final recital:

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/sample10.wav

As per Voltronic's suggestion, I persuaded them to have the piano lid fully open.  I also modified the microphone set-up again:

Main array, set about head height:

- OM1s at 67cm
- DPA 2011Cs at 41cm

Spot X/Y mics on violin: my vintage Calrec CM652Ds.  These are cardioids and excellent mics (recommended by Tony Faulkner in a 1980s review he did of microphones in a UK Hi-Fi magazine [a copy of which I still have!]), but they don't have the fine clinically-accurate detail of the DPAs, which I figured would work in my favour to help get the warm, woody sound I wanted from the violin.

See what you think, but this is definitely my favourite sound of the 4 sessions.  To my ears the piano has much more delicacy - opening the lid definitely helped.