Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Zoom F8 for Classical recording  (Read 28198 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« on: September 26, 2015, 01:37:42 PM »
Since I record acoustic classical chamber music, most of the samples posted of F8 recordings don't help me.  I finally got a chance to try out my new F8 yesterday, in what I hoped would be a gentle test - recording only two tracks stereo of piano with a Josephson C617 pair with Gefell LD omni caps (MG102.1) on a Jecklin Disc.  These are really hot mics so require not too much help from the interal pres.

First, I need some help understanding the gain of the F8.  I have been using the Josephsons on piano directly in to a Sound Devices 633, last week with a rather muscular young Russian pianist.  The stubby gain knobs on the 633 line-in run roughly from 7 o'clock to 5 o'clock and add from +22 dB to +72 dB, last week I had them set just short of 9 o'clock so I figure about 30 dB of gain.  For a loud pianist this was just about perfect, the wav kissed zero once.  So yesterday with a quieter pianist I started around 30 dB on the F8, but during rehearsal found I had to cut to +15 dB on the mic-in of the F8.  The wav took a 1.7 dB boost in post to peak at 0.  The position of the piano and the mic stand may not have been identical, but were close enough.  Any idea what is going on here?

The headphone amp was okay after I got used to it.  Most of the issues I had with setup had to do with learning the ropes of a new machine (even though I have played around with it at home).  Luckily I left myself enough time.

Okay, so how does it sound?  Given that I didn't do a direct comparison and that different pianists do record differently, and also the possibility that after 10 years I finally hit the super-sweetest spot yesterday, I can't be sure.  But it is one of the best sounding piano recordings I have made, very impressed with the F8.  Next week I will tape a string quartet using a Josephson C700S, three tracks.  Not as sensitive a mic, and strings are quieter than piano, so will use more gain from the F8 pres.

Jeff


Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #1 on: September 26, 2015, 05:58:38 PM »
Would you please share some samples?  There is precious little Team Classical action here lately.  Not only that, you're using some great mics that don't get much discussion over here either.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #2 on: September 26, 2015, 06:53:48 PM »

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #3 on: September 27, 2015, 12:39:56 AM »
Here's the F8 recording:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bXBaSmI5NmNEa1hyZHNUQw

Wow, that is really a beautiful recording, and very sensitive interpretation by the pianist!  Well done to both of you!

What was your placement / spacing / distance?  It's clearly fairly close, but I can't tell by the imaging if you're near-spaced right in front or if it's a tail placement.

Also, what was the piano?  If it's a Steinway, it sounds like it's an old one - the treble register is really brilliant but the middle register seems somewhat softened and that says an early 1900s instrument to me.  A beautiful instrument regardless.  (Curious classical pianist here).

Thanks so much for sharing!  You should also put this up on the Gearslutz Remote board for the classical folks over there to hear how well the F8 does with this.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2015, 07:27:23 AM by voltronic »
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #4 on: September 27, 2015, 01:05:45 AM »
Thanks.  The stand was towards the end of the piano pointing into the strings, about 6-7 feet up and maybe 5 feet from the piano.  The C617s were spaced the canonical distance from the Jecklin Disk (mine has a little string to check the distance).  The piano is a very nice Steinway on loan from the company, not sure of the age but I'll check next week.

Offline 404 Not Found

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 399
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2015, 09:54:43 AM »
Thank you for the sample!  I am looking forward to your take & results on the F8 with the String Quartet.

Recorders: Alesis HD24XR | Marantz PMD661 (Oade Warm Mod) | Sound Devices 552 |Zoom F8 | Zoom H6
Pre-Amp/Mic Mixers/PS: Sound Devices 552 | Sound Devices MixPre-D | Shure FP33 | Audix APS911's | Audio Technica AT8501
Mics: Telefunken M60 FET MP/TK62's  | Miktek C5 MP's | Neumann  KM100/AK40's AK43's AK45's | Audix M1255B's | Audix M1280B's | Sennheiser K3-U/ME-20's 40's & 80's | Shure VP88
Stands-Poles: Manfrotto 3361 (8') | Manfrotto 1004BAC (13') | K-Tek KE79CC Traveler Boom Pole (1.8 - 6.7' )| K-Tek KEG150CCR Carbon fiber boom pole (12.6')

LMA: https://archive.org/bookmarks/Adam%20Axel

         Team Philly!

***Team Telefunken***

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2015, 11:07:59 AM »
Quote
So yesterday with a quieter pianist

.. which makes a handy test - allows us to hear the noise all the better!  (Not that there is any of any consequence).

I have to say I was amazed when I heard the audience applause at the end - I had thought I was listening to a studio or room recording rather than an auditorium.  Sounds like a very dry place.  But the silence before the applause was also handy to hear.

(Nicely played but he (?) doesn't quite get away with the pianissimo arpeggios - some notes not quite sounding.  The fact that this is clearly audible - or rather inaudible - on the recording speaks well of the system).

Looking at the specs and assuming they are correct, I wouldn't expect to hear anything adverse from these preamps.  The EIN is (for the purpose of music recording) more than adequate, and the frequency response is for practical purposes flat.

Equivalent input noise:    

−127 dBu or less
(A-weighted, +75 dB input gain, 150Ω input)

Frequency characteristics:    

10 Hz – 80 kHz +0.5 dB/−1 dB
(192 kHz sampling rate)

Looking forward to more samples in due course!  Thanks for taking the trouble.

Offline Bruce Watson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2015, 11:44:43 AM »
Okay, so how does it sound?

Overall impression is just wonderful. Those Josephsons are amazing, especially the low end. And the pianist is amazing; heck of a left hand. The piano isn't bad either -- Steinway D? Finally, nice sounding hall, as in unobtrusive and nicely linear frequency response, with a sufficiently short T60 time; an excellent hall for piano work.

If I can quibble a bit, did you identify the source of the noise near the beginning of the recording? Since it's coming almost entirely from the left hand side, I'm thinking that's audience noise, and since you were in Decca Tail position, I'm doubtful that it's mechanical noise from the piano itself. But IDK, which is why I'm asking.

Also, it seems interestingly soft -- that is, the initial transients from the hammer strikes seem rounded off. C617s are exceedingly quick; transient response is what they have in spades. So I'm wondering where this softening / rounding is coming from. Mic capsules? Preamps? Piano itself? Any idea? Or is it just me?

Thank you for sharing this -- a little unexpected beauty on a Monday.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2015, 11:47:23 AM by Bruce Watson »

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2015, 05:04:06 PM »
The piano is a NY Steinway D, about 10 years old.  The audience likes to watch the keyboard, so it is weighted to the left side of the hall (luckily the hall is not a rowboat), and the Jecklin Disk was pointed into the piano at about 45 deg., screening the right mic somewhat both from the audience noise and the HVAC (turned low but still not studio quiet).  I faded in the opening, but probably should have lifted out the brief remaining noise there.  Also used RX3 to get out some coughs.

I love the C617 on the piano.  The C700S is great for strings, if I set it up right the accuracy of the sound stage image is almost uncanny. 

Jeff

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2015, 06:03:46 PM »
Okay, so how does it sound?

Also, it seems interestingly soft -- that is, the initial transients from the hammer strikes seem rounded off. C617s are exceedingly quick; transient response is what they have in spades. So I'm wondering where this softening / rounding is coming from. Mic capsules? Preamps? Piano itself? Any idea? Or is it just me?

Thank you for sharing this -- a little unexpected beauty on a Monday.

I agree, but only for the middle register.  Now that we know this is a newer piano, what I hear is a difference in hammer felt hardness across the keyboard, with the mid-treble being by far the softest section.  The transients seem quite snappy to me in the bass and higher treble register, but the arpeggiated figure in the middle register that continues throughout the piece sounds "wooly" even in the louder sections.  The treble hammers are always going to have thinner felt on them so they have the hardness advantage, and the bass hammers are heavy and hitting heavy-gauge strings so they have the mass advantage.  But the midrange is where a technician may need to spend more time spiking or shaving the felt to get that balance consistent.  10 years is also about the time where hammers might start to get significant grooving from the strings, maybe even sooner for a heavily used concert instrument.

Combine that with the pianist's excellent balance of voices where he is purposely keeping that accompaniment figure very low in the mix, and I think that explains the soft midrange transients.  The missed notes Ozpeter correctly identified are a result of the pianist trying to keep an ultra-soft touch in that figuration, so much so that it isn't enough force to get the notes to actually speak, even though he's probably not really missing anything - the keys are indeed being pressed.  You may be hearing a keyboard that is also in need of regulation in that same register, or he was just playing a touch too light for this particular instrument.  (For non-pianists reading, "regulation" means adjusting the mechanical balance throughout the key mechanism so that they player has consistent control of the full dynamic range across the entire keyboard.  Adjusting the hammer felt is only one part of this; it gets much more complicated.)
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2015, 10:07:54 PM »
Quote
he's probably not really missing anything - the keys are indeed being pressed.

Indeed - and this provides an excellent example for the debate about digital recording of classical music.  The audience, at some distance from the instrument, might not be so aware of this technical problem and would be enchanted by the delicate interpretation.  Someone listening to the concert recording however, with its close focus which lets nothing go unnoticed, might be distracted by the unsounded notes.  The pianist indeed might be taken aback when listening to the recording as a performer often tends to hear what he or she intended, rather than the fine detail and hard reality of what was actually achieved. 

Sadly the highly technically correct performances emerging on CD from digitally edited sessions make this kind of essentially inconsequential imperfection much less acceptable than might have been the case 40 years ago.  In days gone by the interpretation carried much more weight than the technical realisation of the work.  Now in striving for technical correctness, the beauty of such an interpretation as we hear here is likely to be lost.

I know from experience what would be happening had this been a CD session - the producer would be red-ringing unsounded notes all over the page and drawing them to the attention of the pianist, who would then start either to get insecure and nervous and overplay the passages thus ruining the delicate interpretation, or the pianist and piano technician would start to be at loggerheads with the pianist complaining about uneven regulation of the action and the technician (in remarks probably made to the engineer out of earshot of the artistic team) would be claiming that the piano was fine but the pianist was where the problem lay.  And probably at a later stage the producer would be requiring the unlucky editor to hack together tiny bits from a number of takes so that in the finished result every note could be heard sounding evenly, but you'd actually be listening to a patchwork which didn't really represent what was actually played - end result, technical perfection but potentially a sterile interpretation.

All of which has little to do with the qualities of the F8 for classical recording, apart from it evidently having the ability to reveal very clearly every nuance of the performance - good and "bad".

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2015, 10:56:41 PM »
Quote
he's probably not really missing anything - the keys are indeed being pressed.

Indeed - and this provides an excellent example for the debate about digital recording of classical music.  The audience, at some distance from the instrument, might not be so aware of this technical problem and would be enchanted by the delicate interpretation.  Someone listening to the concert recording however, with its close focus which lets nothing go unnoticed, might be distracted by the unsounded notes.  The pianist indeed might be taken aback when listening to the recording as a performer often tends to hear what he or she intended, rather than the fine detail and hard reality of what was actually achieved. 

Sadly the highly technically correct performances emerging on CD from digitally edited sessions make this kind of essentially inconsequential imperfection much less acceptable than might have been the case 40 years ago.  In days gone by the interpretation carried much more weight than the technical realisation of the work.  Now in striving for technical correctness, the beauty of such an interpretation as we hear here is likely to be lost.

I know from experience what would be happening had this been a CD session - the producer would be red-ringing unsounded notes all over the page and drawing them to the attention of the pianist, who would then start either to get insecure and nervous and overplay the passages thus ruining the delicate interpretation, or the pianist and piano technician would start to be at loggerheads with the pianist complaining about uneven regulation of the action and the technician (in remarks probably made to the engineer out of earshot of the artistic team) would be claiming that the piano was fine but the pianist was where the problem lay.  And probably at a later stage the producer would be requiring the unlucky editor to hack together tiny bits from a number of takes so that in the finished result every note could be heard sounding evenly, but you'd actually be listening to a patchwork which didn't really represent what was actually played - end result, technical perfection but potentially a sterile interpretation.

All of which has little to do with the qualities of the F8 for classical recording, apart from it evidently having the ability to reveal very clearly every nuance of the performance - good and "bad".

All good points, and you've identified the reason why I find modern studio classical piano recordings overly sterile.  "Live" performances are almost always better, though not necessarily in sound quality.

Here's a great article from the NYT on my favorite pianist, whether or not you're talking studio or live performances: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/27/arts/music/sviatoslav-richter-enigmatic-pianist-playing-with-contradictions.html?_r=1

And here's a phenomenal live concert recording from the box set mentioned in the article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZ2J1eFM-Rs
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline Bruce Watson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #12 on: September 29, 2015, 09:08:22 AM »
The missed notes Ozpeter correctly identified are a result of the pianist trying to keep an ultra-soft touch in that figuration, so much so that it isn't enough force to get the notes to actually speak, even though he's probably not really missing anything - the keys are indeed being pressed.

So that "clacking" sound I hear from the right hand [EDIT: that's the pianist's right hand, it sounds in the left channel of the recording] during the rapid pianissimo arpeggios early in the recording is caused by too light a press on the keys resulting in hammer throws with insufficient force to reach the strings? That's an interesting idea, and when I relisten I can hear the missing notes in the arpeggios. But why the clacking? If you get that kind of noise from pressing a key within insufficient force, wouldn't you also get it from pressing a key with sufficient force? I mean, the hammer gets launched from its catchment in either case, and it falls back to its catchment in either case, so I would have thought (wrongly apparently) that we'd get the same mechanical noise from either case. And yet we don't. Hmmm.... I'm just trying to understand how the playing (and, OK, the piano too) makes this particular noise.

And personally, I'll take that noise to get this performance. I would make that trade any day, absolutely. And given a choice, I'd certainly leave the noise in rather than contaminate such a nice performance (maybe attenuate it a bit if I can do it without leaving any audible artifacts). I guess this means I'll never make it as a record producer, eh? Oh darn....  ;D
« Last Edit: September 29, 2015, 03:05:45 PM by Bruce Watson »

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #13 on: September 29, 2015, 12:01:20 PM »
Thanks for the thread and the sample Jeff, looking forward to giving this a listen.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #14 on: September 29, 2015, 06:08:54 PM »
The missed notes Ozpeter correctly identified are a result of the pianist trying to keep an ultra-soft touch in that figuration, so much so that it isn't enough force to get the notes to actually speak, even though he's probably not really missing anything - the keys are indeed being pressed.

So that "clacking" sound I hear from the right hand [EDIT: that's the pianist's right hand, it sounds in the left channel of the recording] during the rapid pianissimo arpeggios early in the recording is caused by too light a press on the keys resulting in hammer throws with insufficient force to reach the strings? That's an interesting idea, and when I relisten I can hear the missing notes in the arpeggios. But why the clacking? If you get that kind of noise from pressing a key within insufficient force, wouldn't you also get it from pressing a key with sufficient force? I mean, the hammer gets launched from its catchment in either case, and it falls back to its catchment in either case, so I would have thought (wrongly apparently) that we'd get the same mechanical noise from either case. And yet we don't. Hmmm.... I'm just trying to understand how the playing (and, OK, the piano too) makes this particular noise.

And personally, I'll take that noise to get this performance. I would make that trade any day, absolutely. And given a choice, I'd certainly leave the noise in rather than contaminate such a nice performance (maybe attenuate it a bit if I can do it without leaving any audible artifacts). I guess this means I'll never make it as a record producer, eh? Oh darn....  ;D

I'll try to clarify: I think the keys are being pressed, but the action in that register is not sufficiently "light" enough in touch to respond.  This may be a mechanical issue or just a peculiar thing about instrument - every instrument is quite different, especially Steinways which are mostly hand-built.  This pianist may be used to playing on an instrument with much lighter response. 

There is a point where the force applied to the key overcomes the mechanical inertia of the action parts enough to strike the string at an audible level.  Below that threshold, the hammer escapes the catchment but then returns without ever having struck the string.  If the string had actually been struck, the hammer would have rebounded off of the string and thus the mechanical motion of the hammer on its way back down would have had a different force entirely.  That, and the sound of the note itself mostly overpowering the action noise both could explain the difference in action noise you're hearing when the notes are not sounded.  Look closely inside a piano action while a note is being sounded versus a key pressed only lightly enough to raise the damper but not strike the string, and you'll see what I'm talking about.  On most pianos when you do this, I'd characterize the noise as more of a "thump", but then again my experience is in doing this on purpose in pieces that specifically call for it, such as Schoenberg, Ravel, etc. where they wanted specific strings undamped so that other struck notes could activate their harmonics sympathetically.

The clacking noise may not necessarily be this at all - piano actions can make all kinds of interesting(?) noises that may or may not be heard during a performance.  Worn felt bushings are a typical culprit.  The worst was when Steinway decided to change all of their felt bushings over to Teflon at some point in the 70s, since everything was Teflon so why not?  Teflon doesn't wear down easily from abrasion as felt does, which I think is what they were going for - fewer worn bushings requiring service.  Unfortunately, they didn't consider that Teflon also does not expand and contract with temperature and humidity the same way the rest of the wood action parts do, and you had loose clackety bushings all over the place depending on the environment you were in.  Needless to say, they quickly went back to using felt.  That's obviously not the case with this instrument - just an interesting example of widespread action noise due to a design decision.
« Last Edit: September 29, 2015, 10:20:00 PM by voltronic »
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2015, 10:29:50 AM »
Listening at fairly damaging levels through cans, I'm hearing what I'd interpret as most likely piano stool noises (eg at 2'38"), second likely pedal action noises, third likely, fingernail noises.  Very subtle noises faithfully recorded by the F8!  Right at the start I'm hearing what seems to be a noise in the audience, like a latecomer settling down in his seat.  Then there's a very low frequency rumble at about nine seconds in which sounds like wind noise from a/c or a footfall from someone walking past the mic stand.

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2015, 05:31:17 PM »
To the OP:

You stated this recording only was set at 15 dB of gain, and the sound is extremely clean and revealing.  Would you be able to post something with a much higher gain setting?  I don't know if the self noise on your Josephson's is low enough to make this practical, but they're probably quieter than the mics most of us here are using.  Just trying to get a sense of self noise at high gain levels.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2015, 10:55:49 PM »
Will be doing this this weekend, I hope. 

Has anyone any idea why ~30 dB gain on a SD633 to max out would equal 16.7 dB (with the boost in post to 0 dB) on the F8????  Am I comparing apples and oranges, or where is the extra 15 dB coming from?

Jeff

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2015, 11:11:03 PM »
Will be doing this this weekend, I hope. 

Has anyone any idea why ~30 dB gain on a SD633 to max out would equal 16.7 dB (with the boost in post to 0 dB) on the F8????  Am I comparing apples and oranges, or where is the extra 15 dB coming from?

Jeff

Pure speculation here.  Were you recording iso tracks on both recorders or comparing the stereo mixdown tracks?  I'm thinking it's possible that one or both of these decks may have the ability to record the stereo mix track at a different level than the separate iso tracks that is user-adjustable.  If that's the case, I would suspect that it's set on your 633 as you should be getting way more than 30 dB if at max.

I have no experience with either unit though, so hopefully others can give a better answer.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2015, 12:09:27 AM »
No, I was recording ISO tracks on both.  Both machines allow you to record L/R mix (SD633 another stereo mix as well) with any of the ISO tracks panned to L, R or in between, with faders for levels, but I only record the ISOs and mix in post.

Jeff

Online aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3861
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #20 on: October 01, 2015, 10:25:09 AM »
I have no experience with either deck, so take this with a grain of salt...

My thought is that you are not actually adding 30 dB of gain with the 663.  This is all very back of the envelope (for real; I scribbled this out on an actual envelope), but maybe worth a look.  According to DPA's Microphone University, "sound pressure level inside a concert grand piano can exceed 130 dB SPL peak less than eight inches (20 cm) over the strings".  From your description, your mics were about 5 feet from the piano, so if it was being played at near peak volume, it would be about 112 dBSPL at the caps.  Those mics are quite sensitive (50 mV/Pa), so at 112 they are putting out about -6 dBu.  SD specs the maximum mic input as 0 dBu, so I think you would likely be overloading at 30 dB gain.  Probably the -6 dBu figure is inflated, as I only used your estimate of horizontal distance (the extra height would make it further, per Pythagoras, but probably not a whole lot) and because the actual SPLs at the piano probably didn't reach that 130 dB extreme.  So probably in the ball park of the F8 gain setting would get you touching zero.

If possible, I would send a signal of known SPL into the 663 and see how much gain is added at that 9 o'clock setting.

[EDIT:  Assuming I did the math correctly...]
« Last Edit: October 01, 2015, 10:27:53 AM by aaronji »

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #21 on: October 01, 2015, 10:35:15 PM »
Wow. This sounds great. Kudos!
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #22 on: October 04, 2015, 12:16:04 PM »
Okay, SQ.

https://www.hightail.com/download/bXBiYUlpOC9wTVhLd01UQw

The Josephson C700S is less sensitive than the C617, the tape is of the X and Y caps mixed to Blumlein (no use of W).  I used 40 dB of gain this time, and added 3.7 dB in post.  Instead of mid-stage, the stand was front stage with the rear lobe of the X-axis figure-8 facing the audience.   So more audience noise (throat-clearing, coughing, program rustling, chair noise, and always HVAC noise) and also more noise from the players (toe-tapping, chair squeaks, breathing).  The stand was about 5 feet from the front of the players, about 6-7 feet off the stage floor.  Used RX3 to get out some noises, but the posted sample has less of this than tracks where cell-phone noises, etc. had to be more aggressively tackled.

Not in my view a scientific test of the pres, but for me it shows that the F8 is usable for acoustic chamber music.

Jeff


Offline Bruce Watson

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 86
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2015, 03:12:05 PM »
Not in my view a scientific test of the pres, but for me it shows that the F8 is usable for acoustic chamber music.

Excellent. Thanks for posting this sample. I'd say the F8 passed this test with flying colors. This should go a long way toward dispelling any doubts about the quality of the micpres in the F8.

I'd love to hear a split from these mics into an SD 788t, because I'm wondering how much better it might be. I'm guessing, not much at all. But The SD is hugely more expensive. Hmmm....

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #24 on: October 04, 2015, 04:35:28 PM »
Another great recording, Jeff!  The F8 is certainly proving itself worthy, and thanks for demonstrating another really nice mic.  I don't know that quartet - what was it?  And are you able to credit the players?  They are excellent.

Also, what's with the edit just before the applause?
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

stevetoney

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #25 on: October 05, 2015, 09:05:36 PM »
Not classical, but here's another native recording into the F8 with no outboard preamp.  The band is a three piece; drums, bass and steel drums.

https://archive.org/details/jsf2015-10-03.mk4_24bit

Offline noam

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #26 on: October 08, 2015, 09:01:34 PM »
Here's the F8 recording:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bXBaSmI5NmNEa1hyZHNUQw

I received this recording today from Jeff and played it on my speakers. I've been playing Jeff's tapes from this particular venue, with this particular piano for 7,8,9 ? years; I've spent hundreds of hours on them. This recording sounds way better than any of the previous ones with the Sound Devices units. Specifically, it sounds dramatically better than the previous one, taped with the SD 633. Direct comparison with the previous recital makes the previous one sound like it was taped with toy equipment. The resonance is so much more alive and attractive, magic. The piano sound is luxurious, rich, bigger dynamic range, both darkish (deep - a lot of overtones), at the same time sweet and powerful. I don't hear any ambiance nor is it dry. It sounds like a phenomenal live commercial recording. The sound is very different; the resonance is completely different. I would have said these are different mics (they are exactly the same).

The playing is way above average for that venue, but it cannot explain the sound. This is quite stunning - is it possible that the F8 preamps are actually better than the Sound Devices' ones? At any rate there is no reason for me to imagine this because apriori I had a strong bias against the F8. WTF?

Jeff, could you please post a sample of the previous (SD 633) recital for people to compare and comment? It is very important because if the F8 is so much better, I need to dump my 702 presto.

Noam

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #27 on: October 08, 2015, 11:05:01 PM »
Not classical, but here's another native recording into the F8 with no outboard preamp.  The band is a three piece; drums, bass and steel drums.

https://archive.org/details/jsf2015-10-03.mk4_24bit

Listening to this now - can you give any more details on how things were miked and what was through the PA?  The drums sound fantastic, but the balance between instruments is kind of the opposite of what I was expecting.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline henselt1

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2015, 01:17:21 PM »
Enjoyed your comments on recording classical piano.  I'm considering purchasing the Zoom F8 and use exclusively for stereo recording for classical piano.  Have Steinway "D"; Neumann U87 mics and have extensively recorded and edited recordings for Musical Heritage Society using Sound Tools (no longer use Sound Tools).  Want to see if getting my 9 ft. Steinway in top condition and recording with the Neumanns and F8 will reap professional results (first in my living room, and if necessary, renting a hall) Hall rental is a huge expense.  Would appreciate your thoughts.  The link you provided of your piano recording has expired.  Could you send again.  Thanks for your thoughts on all this.  Dan

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #29 on: October 23, 2015, 04:51:07 PM »
Some further observations on the F8:

A/D  I used to record two channels with a Grace V3 and SD722.  Over a few years of weekly recordings, I found that the best sounding use was to go analog-out of the V3 into the 722 using the Sound Devices A/D converters rather than the V3's.  This seat-of-the-pants observation came to mind recently when looking at the specs of the various machines.  I see that the V3 A/D is listed at 110 dB (A-Weighted) dynamic range, while the 722 is at 114 (as is the SD633 I also use), which sort of confirms what I think I was hearing.  The 788 claims 123 dB.  The F8 sheet has 120 dB, and nothing I have heard leads me to doubt this.  Not a scientific measurement, but I think an indication.

Headphones: there was some negative comment on the net initially.  My experience is that the headphone amp sounds great.  The M/S selection allows for pretty good imaging of my Josephson C700S, overall the sound is as good or better than the 722 or 633.  However, there is a glitch of unknown origin.  Two or three times my left channel has dropped out.  The mic was good, I could see on the meters that the signal was there, and quickly swapping my headset with a pair of earbuds showed that the problem was the F8.  Both most recent times the loss of signal came after I had finished setup and before I started recording, and both times I got signal back after about 4-5 minutes of fussing with the headphone routing (by the way, the "favorites" routing choices on the 633 is more convenient than the F8, where you re-route in detail from the menu).  Not sure if my unit has a hardware defect of there is something in the firmware.  A bit worrying.

Jeff (still happy with the F8)

Offline kasu64

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Male
    • Belharra Trio and EOB https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #30 on: October 27, 2015, 02:40:28 PM »
Here's the F8 recording:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/bXBaSmI5NmNEa1hyZHNUQw

Alas,

the link is updated...
the link is expired...

does somebody put this recording with a new link ?

Many Thanks

Kasu64
« Last Edit: October 30, 2015, 10:03:09 AM by kasu64 »
><((((°> <°))))><            SD-722 Sample : https://archive.org/details/Damaris2015-07-31.Damaris-Concert_Collegiale_Bayonne_FR_Beltran_Pagola_Sonata
Maite dut Euskal Herria  Zoom-F8 Live records at "audio" : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio    
Le Pays Basque, J'aime !    SD-788T, Mics : Sennheiser = MKE 2002 "Artificial head", Blumlein-M/S : SP-LSD2, Ortf : Superlux S502
Debian 9.0 Stretch 64bits   Visit : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio  and   https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation

Offline glennjr

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 47
  • Gender: Male
    • Professional Chinese Voice Over
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #31 on: October 30, 2015, 06:27:49 AM »
Hi, is there any chance for a new link to these recordings? I would love to hear them. Thank you
ChineseVocal.com  - Professional Chinese Voice Over

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #32 on: October 30, 2015, 08:52:45 AM »
pms sent.  Will get other sample to ya over the weekend.

Jeff

Offline kasu64

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Male
    • Belharra Trio and EOB https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #33 on: October 30, 2015, 10:17:33 AM »
Well received.

Many thanks Jeffrey.

I'm waiting for others samples.  ;)

><((((°> <°))))><            SD-722 Sample : https://archive.org/details/Damaris2015-07-31.Damaris-Concert_Collegiale_Bayonne_FR_Beltran_Pagola_Sonata
Maite dut Euskal Herria  Zoom-F8 Live records at "audio" : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio    
Le Pays Basque, J'aime !    SD-788T, Mics : Sennheiser = MKE 2002 "Artificial head", Blumlein-M/S : SP-LSD2, Ortf : Superlux S502
Debian 9.0 Stretch 64bits   Visit : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio  and   https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation

Offline beatkilla

  • Trade Count: (70)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2104
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #34 on: October 30, 2015, 11:32:37 AM »

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #35 on: November 14, 2015, 01:53:17 PM »
After a couple of weeks of more solo piano or string quartet, I got a chance to record violin and piano yesterday.  I am normally a devotee of single-point recording, but I have not yet found a setup that lets me do this with strings and piano where I can capture the piano sound best without swamping the strings, so I got to try the F8 with four channel input.  I had a main pair of Schoeps MK4s ORTF (thanks to the 3D printed mount from Shapeways via a TS seller) and spotted the piano with Josephson C617 omnis on a Jecklin disk.  I also decided to record a L/R mix of these (my SD633 can do this, but I never tried it), I found it very easy to fade the four channels to a stereo mix I could monitor from the F8, and ended up going with that mix, though I now think that perhaps more of the piano tracks might have been a touch better.  I recorded 4 original tracks to the first SD card, and backup 4 channels plus L/R mix on the second.  Very happy with my F8, both the on site monitoring and resulting recording were flawless (my mix may be sub-optimal). I also used both external battery (Naztech) and when that seemed to be running down (it really wasn't) I swapped out to a DC-in 12V battery between pieces, no glitches in the tape.

PM me for a link to a sample.

Offline WiFiJeff

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 980
  • Gender: Male
  • I tape therefore I am.
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #36 on: December 12, 2015, 01:07:54 PM »
A piano quintet, same setup as for the piano and violin.  I used more of the piano omni pair for the mix I recorded on the F8, and it sounded good, but I was surprised to find at home that the L/R mix sounded off, I was however very happy with the post-production mix I ended up using, which was down 3-4 dB on the piano, similar to what I used for the mix on the F8 last time with the piano/violin setup.  Since I was seated quite close to the cello, I think the live sound leaked in to my monitoring and led me to de-emphasize the ORTF pair.  Will bring my Remote Audio headphones in next time to try to get a better handle on the mix channel.

Overall, still delighted with the results on the F8.  I had been thinking about buying one of the new Millennia preamps, but not sure I will need it.  PM me for a link to a sample file.

Jeff

Offline scorsesefan

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 68
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #37 on: December 13, 2015, 06:42:11 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM6VOEYpm4g

BH review

Nice, thanks. Holds up pretty well sound-wise against the big guys...

Offline Pasaribu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #38 on: May 03, 2016, 02:23:02 PM »
Would it be possible to post a new link to the recordings mentioned?

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #39 on: May 26, 2016, 01:44:37 PM »
Thought this post might be interested in another example of using the Zoom F8 to record violin and piano.

I've been asked to record a series of concerts covering the 10 Beethoven sonatas.  Venue is a really nice church in Greenwich, London with, in my opinion, a great acoustic.

This is a sample from the first concert - it was a bit of a discovery session for me to figure out a good mic placement and balance of the instruments.  The violinist is a quiet player, so the piano was threatening to drown her out.  I'm going to augment the violin with a CM3 spot mic next time and reposition the main mic array to get a better balance/spread, but see what you think of this first effort:

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

Recorded using ORTF DPA 2011C + 67cm-spaced OM1 outriggers.  Mix is unprocessed, straight off the mics.

I'm always amazed at the F8 - a great device which works well for every type of music I've thrown at it so far.

Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline kasu64

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
  • Gender: Male
    • Belharra Trio and EOB https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #40 on: May 26, 2016, 03:34:05 PM »
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

Choose "Ecouter-voir"
then "Audio"
or "Video" (Audio from the Lumix G5  :-\ )



Zoom F8 is very good, but with some lacks
for field usage... (I own a SD-722 since 8 years...)

Kasu64
><((((°> <°))))><
« Last Edit: May 26, 2016, 03:38:29 PM by kasu64 »
><((((°> <°))))><            SD-722 Sample : https://archive.org/details/Damaris2015-07-31.Damaris-Concert_Collegiale_Bayonne_FR_Beltran_Pagola_Sonata
Maite dut Euskal Herria  Zoom-F8 Live records at "audio" : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio    
Le Pays Basque, J'aime !    SD-788T, Mics : Sennheiser = MKE 2002 "Artificial head", Blumlein-M/S : SP-LSD2, Ortf : Superlux S502
Debian 9.0 Stretch 64bits   Visit : http://belharratrio.wix.com/belharratrio  and   https://eobiarritz.wixsite.com/eobiarritz/presentation

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #41 on: May 26, 2016, 03:40:20 PM »
Thought this post might be interested in another example of using the Zoom F8 to record violin and piano. [snip..]

Sounds good.  Great clarity with a very nice acoustic ambience.  I can hear the violinist inhaling before each interjection, which may bother some, but can also be interpreted as intimate realism, and can be hard to avoid depending on the player. 

I don't hear a level imbalance between piano and violin.  Personally I'd like to hear the image placement of the violin shifted leftward slightly from center to balance it in a spatial sense against the piano which images right of center and a bit further back, making it more of an duet between equally important voices, although this presentation which highlights the violin by placing it in the center with a "closer sounding" timbre is fine and totally justifiable.  ORFT + omnis = a big enveloping and zoomed-in type sound more than a sharp pin-point imaging type sound, partly due to the complex phase interactions between the four relatively near-spaced microphone positions.  It won't necessarily suffer from a "hole in the middle" like wide spaced omnis alone might, but will still have a similar sort of a diffused imaging type center, with the violin not imaging as sharply when placed dead center as it might if placed off to one side a bit.

[edited for clarification]
« Last Edit: May 26, 2016, 04:26:41 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #42 on: May 26, 2016, 04:08:40 PM »
Thanks for the feedback - yes I was quite pleased I managed to get the balance I was hoping for, but it was achieved by moving the array much closer to the violin that I'd have liked.  Here's a picture from last night which will give an idea:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CjVKrJHWEAIuEfM.jpg

I'm going to see what happens when I add the CM3 spot over the violin and move the main array to a position more between the instruments.

I'll report back with a sample
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #43 on: May 26, 2016, 05:08:53 PM »
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!
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #44 on: May 27, 2016, 03:07:50 AM »
Sounds like good advice to me, Gutbucket, thanks, and they make logical sense.  I'll try your ideas at the next concert.

My usual approach is to try to capture the kind of sound that the audience would hear, rather than someone floating six feet in the air above the musicians, or with their ears right next to the instruments, so we're very much on the same page.

Going back to the original post's title, hopefully the examples that have been posted by a number of people are proving that the F8 is definitely up to the task.  The recording quality is excellent (I record at 192k/24), the mic pre-amps are clean and quiet.  Having 8 possible channels allows a good amount of flexibility for having additional optional mics when recording in more challenging situations.  It's a nice, small, portable device that can be kept discreetly out of the way in a venue, and can be battery-powered so you don't need to worry about having power points available (a challenge in most old UK churches) - less heavy cables to carry around and have lying around on the floor at the venue. 

I'm able to take my entire kit by public transport - it all fits in a large wheelie suitcase: again a useful thing to be able to do in London, where traffic and parking is a real problem.
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #45 on: May 27, 2016, 05:01:52 PM »
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.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #46 on: June 03, 2016, 08:39:41 AM »
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


Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #47 on: June 03, 2016, 08:52:04 AM »
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
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #48 on: June 03, 2016, 09:40:37 AM »
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.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #49 on: June 03, 2016, 10:06:31 AM »
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











Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #50 on: June 03, 2016, 10:14:35 AM »
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
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #51 on: June 03, 2016, 10:43:08 AM »
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.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #52 on: June 03, 2016, 12:49:00 PM »
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.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #53 on: June 03, 2016, 01:20:00 PM »
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!

Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #54 on: June 03, 2016, 01:31:23 PM »
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!
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #55 on: June 03, 2016, 01:44:38 PM »
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.
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #56 on: June 03, 2016, 02:56:38 PM »
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.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #57 on: June 03, 2016, 05:02:10 PM »
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.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #58 on: June 03, 2016, 05:22:24 PM »
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.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #59 on: June 09, 2016, 04:42:30 AM »
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.
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #60 on: June 09, 2016, 06:22:19 PM »
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.

Now we're getting somewhere!  This is a big improvement in tonality, and it now sounds like a real piano in a real space.  Nice natural hall decay, and the instrument itself just sounds so much better.  I'm also guessing it was tuned between your last sample posting and this one.  What was the distance of your main array from the piano, and how was it aligned?  (As in, was it lined up in front of the hammers or farther over towards the bend of the piano?)

My only criticism is that the violin is very strong left in the image and the piano very strong right, which makes me think your main array was set more to the left (in line with the hammers).  I'm not getting much of the piano in the left channel.

I think your spot sounds nice - I wouldn't want any more "detail" than that.  Would you be able to please post the same excerpt with the spot muted for comparison?  I'm curious to hear how much of the violin is captured by your main array.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Online Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #61 on: June 09, 2016, 07:48:09 PM »
Good timbral and depth balance on that one to my ear.  Violin is no longer over-present, over-close and over-bright, breaths are less prominent, piano is far less woolly.  Personally I don't mind the strong left/right channel separation so much for this duet, the ambience doesn't seem to have any appreciable hole in the middle - I'm listening on headphones, which makes me think it should be fine on speakers as well.  The HVAC low frequency rumble defining the noise-floor is pretty noticeable and my only criticism, mostly noticeable at the start and a few other places.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #62 on: June 10, 2016, 06:43:00 AM »
I'm listening again on my monitor speakers, and need to revise / amend some of my earlier comments as they are more revealing in the treble than my headphones (and obviously tell you more about imaging):

1. The piano was not tuned in between your last two sessions (but it's not far out - this isn't an annoyance; I'm just realizing I was wrong earlier).

2. The violin is not as far left as it had sounded in headphones - it's just left of center, which is a fine-sounding place for the soloist.

3. The piano is definitely placed hard right, even more so listening on speakers.  I get where Gutbucket is coming from where it's nice to have the separation, but for an instrument as large as a piano there should be a lot of information in both channels (IMO).

4. The HVAC rumble is easily taken care of with iZotope RX.  I can send you a lightly denoised sample if you want.
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #63 on: June 10, 2016, 08:00:15 AM »
Thanks for the comments, guys.  It's all very helpful for future reference.

I agree about the tuning of the piano - in fact it's not a great instrument and really needs replacing, and they could certainly do with tuning it more regularly.  The tuning of a piano is something I always acutely notice.

Unfortunately in these situations, you get what you get and have to make the most of them.  In fact, I reckon I've made the piano sound a lot better in the recordings than it sounds in real life! :-)

The positioning of the main array was such that the 90 degree angled mics pointed a bit to the left of the violinist (LHS) and towards the end of the piano (RHS).  The mid-way point of the array was focused directly between the pianist and violinist.  ie I aimed to get the piano's full width from about the mid-point all the way right.  It's interesting that Voltronic feels the piano is hard-right. That wasn't the intention!  I mixed for speakers (using my Naim/PMC set-up which is very revealing), and checked on headphones (Sennheiser HD650) - no panning was applied to the main array mic signals in the mix.

I'll post the 3 separate mic pair recordings from that sample a bit later and see what you think.

Thanks again, guys! (I'm hoping others are finding this voyage of discovery helpful and interesting too)
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #64 on: June 10, 2016, 08:42:41 AM »
OK so here's the 3 separate mic pairs, raw, straight off the F8:

First the DPA 2011s in the main array.  Actually I think this almost works on its own - see what you think:
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/sample10-dpa.wav

Then the OM1s:
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/sample10-om1.wav


and finally the Calrecs (X/Y spots on the violin):
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/robs-music-files/sample10-calrec.wav
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline robtweed

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #65 on: June 10, 2016, 10:41:13 AM »
The HVAC rumble is easily taken care of with iZotope RX.  I can send you a lightly denoised sample if you want.

I'd not heard of iZotope RX before you mentioned it, Voltronic - looked it up and although it's pretty expensive, it looks extremely powerful.  Not sure I can really justify that kind of expense but it's definitely on my "if only I had the money" list :-)
Mics: DPA 2011C, Line Audio OM1 & CM3, Calrec CM652D, Behringer C-4
Recorders: Zoom F8, Zoom H4n, Sound Devices USBPre2 + MacBook Air
Mixdown: Audacity, Cubase LE on Mac OS X
Playback: Beresford Caiman II DAC, Naim NAP 100 amp, PMC TB2i speakers

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #66 on: June 10, 2016, 08:14:49 PM »
Thanks for the comments, guys.  It's all very helpful for future reference.

I agree about the tuning of the piano - in fact it's not a great instrument and really needs replacing, and they could certainly do with tuning it more regularly.  The tuning of a piano is something I always acutely notice.

Unfortunately in these situations, you get what you get and have to make the most of them.  In fact, I reckon I've made the piano sound a lot better in the recordings than it sounds in real life! :-)

The positioning of the main array was such that the 90 degree angled mics pointed a bit to the left of the violinist (LHS) and towards the end of the piano (RHS).  The mid-way point of the array was focused directly between the pianist and violinist.  ie I aimed to get the piano's full width from about the mid-point all the way right.  It's interesting that Voltronic feels the piano is hard-right. That wasn't the intention!  I mixed for speakers (using my Naim/PMC set-up which is very revealing), and checked on headphones (Sennheiser HD650) - no panning was applied to the main array mic signals in the mix.

I'll post the 3 separate mic pair recordings from that sample a bit later and see what you think.

Thanks again, guys! (I'm hoping others are finding this voyage of discovery helpful and interesting too)

Actually, I think it's a very nice sounding instrument, or at least your recording makes it sound so. ;)  It just wasn't tuned before this session, but it's not that far out that it's a big deal.

I also wasn't suggesting that you applied panning at all, but that I believed your mics were positioned a bit far to the left, making the piano appear predominantly in the right channel.  I just listened to your isolated tracks, and that's what I hear in all 3 stereo pairs.  Your explanation of the mic position confirms this. 

Maybe this is just my preference as a pianist, but I would prefer that the main array be centered on the piano, not the center of this particular ensemble.  If this were a string quartet or woodwind quintet then that's a different story.  But the harmonic foundation of the music here is the piano, and that should be much more centered (again, IMHO).  Otherwise all of the mid / low frequency info is coming from the right.  Think of it from a concert hall perspective.  A violin sonata, opera aria, etc. is always going to have the piano centered (or close to it) with the soloist directly in front of the piano or off near the tail.

Side question - how did the pianist and violinist maintain eye contact if the violinist was left of the piano?  Was the piano not facing the audience, and angled somewhat with the tail forward?  That would also help explain the imaging I'm hearing.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2016, 08:16:37 PM by voltronic »
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4104
Re: Zoom F8 for Classical recording
« Reply #67 on: June 10, 2016, 08:36:51 PM »
The HVAC rumble is easily taken care of with iZotope RX.  I can send you a lightly denoised sample if you want.

I'd not heard of iZotope RX before you mentioned it, Voltronic - looked it up and although it's pretty expensive, it looks extremely powerful.  Not sure I can really justify that kind of expense but it's definitely on my "if only I had the money" list :-)

Yeah, but I get it for half price because of the educator discount. 8) Otherwise I probably wouldn't have shelled out for it.  But since I almost always am recording acoustic music in schools or churches with loud HVAC, it's pretty much mandatory for my recordings not to be a rumbling mess.  It does require a gentle touch and a lot of experimentation to get it to really work with music in a transparent way, and it's taken me a long time to arrive at a good starting point, and I adjust from there as needed.  You also need a good clean passage of just the hall noise without coughs, claps, stand squeaks, etc. for your noise profile.  I'm probably making it sound like it's a very difficult program to use, but it's not.  Nothing else I've ever seen comes close to it for noise reduction, and then there's all of the other great things that it does as well.

Here's your latest mix after about 5 minutes of work in RX to give you an idea what it can do.  I could have removed a bit more (or a lot more) of the noise, but then it starts to deaden the natural ambiance, and beyond that can introduce artifacts.
http://www.filedropper.com/sample10denoised
I am hitting my head against the walls, but the walls are giving way.
- Gustav Mahler

Acoustic Recording Techniques
Team Classical
Team Line Audio
Team DPA

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.22 seconds with 95 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF