Topic: Shure A27M question(s).......

[OhioHead]

Just wondering if with this mount you have any "phasing" issues since the cap's are not the same plane (NOS, ORTF or "straight" PAS)?

I used the mount a couple weeks ago to tape Kimock @ the Woodlands ran XY for the 1st time w/ card cap's vs. supers fairly happy w/ the results. 

Taping WSP this Sunday @ the Rose and I stuck pit left/section behind (Jimmy side) and debating which mic placement to run in a not optimal taper spot.

Forgot to add Telefukken ELA 260's > Naiant 1.0 (2015 edition).

http://www.rosemusiccenter.com/events-tickets/seating-map.html

Please weigh in, thanks!

[DSatz]

Two capsules can never occupy the same point in space, so absolute coincidence is impossible. Fortunately it isn't needed. If one capsule is directly above the other, the pair can be aimed so that the distance from (say) the center of the sound sources to the centers of both diaphragms will be the same for both channels. When you do that, the time it takes for sound to reach both capsules is identical, so there will be no significant phase conflict between channels for direct sound.

However, in any environment that isn't perfectly anechoic (i.e. anywhere where anyone would EVER actually want to perform, hear or record music), there will always be phase conflicts due to the different-length paths that the reflected sound takes along the way to the microphones. So there's no such thing as having no phase conflict--even in a mono recording made with a single, small transducer.

The only advantage that coincident miking can give you for certain is a predictable, very high degree of mono compatibility--the ability to sum the recorded channels without audible "comb filtering"--and again, that applies only to the direct sound. But mono compatibility hasn't been a major requirement for a long time; pleasant stereo sound outweighs it greatly in importance nowadays. Back in the 1950s and early 1960s, when stereo recording had begun but most people still had mono equipment, program material had to be "compatibly" recorded, and maybe these days it might matter once again for playback on mobile phones, if they only have one speaker for both channels.

But some amount of spacing between capsules is generally desirable to keep the reflected sound from having too strong a mono component (a condition which undermines the spaciousness of a recording). Apart from the amount of M/S recording that's done so that the choice of stereo image parameters can be deferred to post-production, I think there has been less and less use of coincident stereo main microphones in recent decades. And the tendency of the major microphone manufacturers during the past (say) 20-25 years has certainly been more to discontinue this type of microphone than to bring out new models.

--best regards

[voltronic]

But some amount of spacing between capsules is generally desirable to keep the reflected sound from having too strong a mono component (a condition which undermines the spaciousness of a recording). Apart from M/S recording that is done specifically for the sake of deferring the choice of stereo image parameters to post-production, I think there has been less and less use of coincident stereo main microphones in recent decades. And the tendency of the major microphone manufacturers during the past (say) 20-25 years has certainly been more to discontinue this type of microphone than to bring out new models.

This is an excellent observation.  I've been trying to steer some of my coworkers away from using X-Y for acoustic ensemble recording if they want any kind of natural hall reverb, but I've been unable to adequately explain why that kind of arrangement kills the ambiance.  I think your explanation makes it very clear, and I'm going to steal it.

We shouldn't forget about Blumlein either, as that's another very old coincident technique with mono compatibility but I think it manages to preserve a decent amount of the natural reverb when used carefully.  I would never use it with this kind of concert though.

In the OP's situation, the discussion may be moot anyway, because for an amplified show in that location I doubt there's very much stereo information happening there to be recorded.

[F.O.Bean]

I agree about the spacing! Even if its a few inches of spacing between caps, it sounds better and more natural than XY IMO! As always, YMMV! But that's for recording amplified music in all kinds of environments! The ONLY time I will use XY is if I *must* stack tape, and I'm super close to the stack on one side or the other! Even when I'm in less than ideal situations, I run my caps a few inches apart to give it a little stereo effect, instead of running XY!

That said, I can easily run XY on my Vark Bar with a spacer and my Mini SGC Clips, but I really like those black vinyl mounts that guy in the retail section makes for around $40[scrpa or something like that?], and Id like to get one of his black vinyl XY mounts made for my caps/KCYs, so that I can quickly run XY in my INV6-HG shocks the rare times when I do use it

And DSatz, I haven't realized about the coincident stereo mics not being made anymore, but it def makes sense! Those old Schoeps/Neumann/Telefunken/etc stereo mics can sound AMAZING, but they don't have the same sound stage and overall sound that spacing mics has, and IMO, there is NO comparison They are hit or miss IMO for live shows like I do, and that's why I definitely prefer the more consistent results of running spaced caps As always, YMMV!

And as far as the A27M stereo mount goes, I had one for years and loved that thing! Its bulletproof and damn near indestructible, and you can do just about ANY config possible and everything in between, with the right stuff I had AT8415 shocks with the upgraded K-Tek K-SUS HD Rubber Mounts, and it was sooo bulletproof, that I just left the AT8415 shocks ON my vert bar at all times, and could set that up and throw my 480s into it super quick! I'm sure you could do the same thing with your Telefunken m260s

Enjoy your new vert bar

[aaronji]

In the OP's situation, the discussion may be moot anyway, because for an amplified show in that location I doubt there's very much stereo information happening there to be recorded.

Personally, I think that, even if the music is essentially mono, recording in stereo is still beneficial.  The non-direct sound and ambience provide a sense of space and some stereo cues, which I think are beneficial...