Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Card+Omnis from the lawn  (Read 3885 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #30 on: July 29, 2016, 10:37:38 AM »
Lee,
I owe this thread a longer explanation with some mixes to audition. kindms and I will be finishing the mixes soon and figure out the best trackers or LMA to post them in.
Also, as I mentioned, I would love to offer you the unedited files for a set or two that you may be musically interested in - i.e. you choose the sets/artists. we can put these on kindms ftp site for you to access if he agrees.

Finally, for those who wonder- a photo of the largest set up we did at Greyfox:
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG461/CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #31 on: July 29, 2016, 11:41:06 AM »
^ Impressive!

Thanks Kyle, I'll take you up on that, I'd love to play around with some of the raw files.  For me that's where the rubber meets the road and where all this comes together. At a gross level it's where I can determine if whether the hypothesized ideas work the way I expect of if something perhaps unexpected happens- and either way that's a positive learning experience.  On a finer-grained level I find I learn a lot about the nuances of the real world relationships and how they influence what I end up with as a best final choice.

And big thanks to you guys for posting these examples!  That's the main area where I've been lacking with all this.  I can't reasonably expect many to try this stuff without samples to listen to in order to decide if the effort is worth it.



Random comment on something I've found interesting recently, stereo mix-wise for these spaced omnis plus front/back pair recordings:

One thing I've been messing around with over the last couple weekends, while away from home playing files recorded using these methods directly from the DR-680 using it's built-in monitor mixer to dial in a stereo mix for headphone listening, is trying switching on the Tascam's M/S monitor mix decoder for the front/back facing mic pair.  That may seem odd, since the recording was not made using a M/S mic setup, but it's actually worked nicely.   

Obviously if recorded using a center M/S pair, you'd want to use a M/S decoder for that center channel pair to turn it into L/R in the resulting mix, tweaking the M/S ratio to taste.  A ratio of all mid and no side would be identical to a three mic recording with just the center mid mic between omnis and and no side mic.  As you change the M/S ratio more side mic gets added until it's eventually all side and no mid between the omnis.  Okay, that's standard M/S stuff.

But I'm talking about using the M/S decoder after recording using a front/back mic pair.  Normally when bringing up the level of the front facing center mic and mixing in some of the back facing center mic, both are panned to the center of the playback image.  We get the 'expanded mono' you mentioned above, limit35.  We gain depth and spaciousness in one sense, but in another sense all the stereo information comes from the omnis.  When using the M/S decoder, the rear facing center mic is no longer "panned center", but is mixed in with reversed polarity on one side.  That allows for dialing in a sort of different type of "stereoness" which can be played against the wide omni "stereoness".  It unlocks the "stuff coming from behind" from the center - the reverberant stuff, the audience stuff from back there - and spreads it more diffusely in the playback image.  Using 100% Mid is the same as not using the M/S decoder and not bringing up any of the rear-facing mic.  Changing the ratio to 100% side makes for super-over-wide stereo with none of the rear-facing mic filling the center, very ambient and diffuse, with the only remaining mid information being whatever is provided by the sum of the omnis.

Like usual when finding the most appropriate mix, I'll bring up the omnis first and balance that on its own. Then I'll bring up the center using a 100% mid ratio, and find a good balance for that with the omnis.  I'll then play around with the M/S ratio, listening for what it sounds like dialing in 100% side, and eventually settling on a good M/S balance which works best in combination.  It's interesting comparing this against mixing the center pair in directly, both panned to the center.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 11:45:28 AM by Gutbucket »
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #32 on: July 29, 2016, 12:09:34 PM »
I played around with it and the X-X/card option seems pretty bassy and dark so perhaps I will try hypers and see how that goes in the first set at least.

Keep in mind that you can break free of needing to have the tonal response and spatial responses inseparably linked.  This stuff is at it's most powerful when one fine-tunes the spatial response by way of the choice of mic setup, and fine-tunes the tonal response afterwards using EQ.

Nothing wrong with choosing mic setup which gets closer to the tonal response you want.  That's the way most tapers work in choosing both the mics and the mic setup they prefer.  It's certainly simpler.  But if one is not averse to using EQ afterwards to get the tonal balance right, one can more or less 'forget about tone' when choosing mics, mic pattern and mic setup, and focus instead on what cannot be as easily adjusted later- the resulting spatial aspects of the mic patterns and their relationships determined by the mic setup.

There is no hard line here though.  By recording this way we do gain significant spatial control after the fact where we previously had very little, just as we've been talking about.  And obviously we can change tonal aspects at the front end by selecting different mics, mic pickup patterns, and mic configs, just as most tapers do.

It's simply the greater freedom achievable by un-linking these tone and spatial aspects which I'm arguing for here.  Approaching it that way isn't necessary, and it is more complicated, but it's also more powerful.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 102
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #33 on: August 01, 2016, 03:10:49 PM »
I am a convert on this mic setup and it's going to be my go to method when the conditions allow. It really captured what I expected, not all all like a near spaced pair, big full sound.  The audience reaction is well captured and accurately represented. 

Quote
One thing I've been messing around with over the last couple weekends, while away from home playing files recorded using these methods directly from the DR-680 using it's built-in monitor mixer to dial in a stereo mix for headphone listening, is trying switching on the Tascam's M/S monitor mix decoder for the front/back facing mic pair.  That may seem odd, since the recording was not made using a M/S mic setup, but it's actually worked nicely. 

That is funny, I was playing around with this at the hotel room after the show. Doing this adds some really nice openness to the recording. For the Wheatland Dead & Co show I recorded this adds a little and opens it up, I noticed it really isn't needed though, good location. The following night at Shoreline I found this really helped out the recording, poor location. The latter sounded a bit flat, playing with the M/S decoder opens up the recording a bit more. I think the change was more noticeable on headphones than it is on speakers now that I listen to it at home.

That is surely a tool I am going to be using more because adding that little amount of "air" to the recording sounds really nice.

edit: spelling
« Last Edit: August 01, 2016, 04:25:59 PM by Limit35 »

Offline rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2016, 03:50:12 PM »
^^^^^^ To Limit35's point:
I am not 100% sure of kindm's thoughts, but I do feel each of us, myself for sure, is committed to using this spread omni plus 1 or 2 as the go-to set up when conditions permit as well.
We may not be certain of exactly which mics to run etc, but the overall concept has been proven to me over several different types of music, indoor and outdoor venues, and on playback in different situations as well.

To my ears, the "accuracy" or "realism" is so much more present with these recordings as compared to even the very best of coincident, 2 channel recordings. The fact I even say this is monumental as I am the guy for over 30 years that used to tell people, we only have two ears, we don't need more than two microphones to record from the audience. Thanks GB, and I am working my way through Greyfox almost finished with the raw mixdowns to 2 channels and will get them posted, even if it is just private server or soundcloud for you guys. then I will offer up the raw files for the sets you might like to hear/play with.

Another snap from Greyfox: (THU 7-14)(AKGck22 spread 36 cm with AKG c414 XLS/ST Cardiod forward 0', AKG c414 XLS/ST Cardiod rear facing 180'

music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG461/CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 102
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #35 on: August 01, 2016, 04:51:18 PM »
^^^^^^ To Limit35's point:
I am not 100% sure of kindm's thoughts, but I do feel each of us, myself for sure, is committed to using this spread omni plus 1 or 2 as the go-to set up when conditions permit as well.
We may not be certain of exactly which mics to run etc, but the overall concept has been proven to me over several different types of music, indoor and outdoor venues, and on playback in different situations as well.

To my ears, the "accuracy" or "realism" is so much more present with these recordings as compared to even the very best of coincident, 2 channel recordings. The fact I even say this is monumental as I am the guy for over 30 years that used to tell people, we only have two ears, we don't need more than two microphones to record from the audience. Thanks GB, and I am working my way through Greyfox almost finished with the raw mixdowns to 2 channels and will get them posted, even if it is just private server or soundcloud for you guys. then I will offer up the raw files for the sets you might like to hear/play with.

Another snap from Greyfox: (THU 7-14)(AKGck22 spread 36 cm with AKG c414 XLS/ST Cardiod forward 0', AKG c414 XLS/ST Cardiod rear facing 180'

I couldn't agree more. What I found with the X-Xs is they seemed to want to be at around 1.3m and out 180 degrees to open things up a bit, I was really happy with their performance. The front 853 hyper added to that pulled in what we were hearing well. There wasn't much stereo information coming from the PA, the "stereoness" or openess was environmental. When taking off and on the monitor headphones there was very little sonic difference, the sound was being accurately represented. The rear hyper  picked up some PA and nice audience color from behind. It was really nice.

I can buy a soundboard and listen to the band but I don't think I could have captured the amphitheater experience better any other way.

I may switch to a card front and rear hyper and see how that works for Moonalice later in the week.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2016, 05:16:02 PM by Limit35 »

Offline rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #36 on: August 01, 2016, 05:49:25 PM »
Limit35
We have used Hypers facing forward (Beyer M201, and the 414 in Hyper just once). Not done it facing rearward. Of course, it's the old math theory trick. If two cards pointed 0 and 180 respectively are basically an Omni, what would two Hypers facing 0 and 180 act like? a figure 8 with a mini bulb in the middle of the pattern where they meet at the rear of each cap? I'm not 100% certain here.

The onetime we did the 414 Hyper facing forward we used ck61 card facing 180. I don't recall if we liked it or not in that config.
Also, don't forget with a Hyper, the rear lobe will pick up a bit of rear audience or house more than the cardiod.

We have run an MS pair with fig 8 at 0 and fig 8 at 90 (true Blumlein) as the inside pair. that is interesting and even without mixing it to MS, I did use the center channel fig 8 facing at 0 mixed in with the ck22's only those three tracks for one of the Phish shows.

I do agree, we can always buy one of the Soundboard recording if we need to hear what the SBD had, but all our recordings with the spread Omni, plus 1 facing forward and 1 facing rear (cards typically) have some realism and accuracy of ambiance you rarely find with coincident recordings.
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG461/CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline CorFit Chris

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #37 on: September 01, 2016, 12:10:10 PM »
I'm jumping into this thread since I've already had some similar discussions with some of you about this recently.  I am committed to running spaced omni's when possible too.  So I have a few questions for advice as I have already inquired about some center channel mic options (shotgun, hypercard, ext). 

Here are my current gear options:  AKG 460 (ck61); Studio Projects C4 (cards, omni's); CA-14 cards
Purchase considerations: CA-14 omni's (very likely); Shotgun mic

I recently ran my C4's with omni caps split ~ 3ft with my AKG's in the middle at PAS.  EX)   https://archive.org/details/DP2016-06-30.highberry_24bit

However, after reading this I should consider running AKG's in X/Y.  My dilemma is that I really like the sound of my AKG's as a separate pair in PAS or DIN or NOS.  So, I want to run them that way as a separate recording in case it rocks or the omni rig does not turn out well!  That currently leaves me with the C4's and CA-14 cards.  So, should I split the C4 omni's and run the CA-14 cards in the middle in X/Y?  How even do I set CA-14 cards into X/Y?  What if I pointed 1 CA-14 forward and the other backward?

Next, assuming I purchase CA-14 omni's, I can run them split wide with a retractable TV antenna and have my C4's in the middle as X/Y.  This will allow me to also have my AKG's as a standalone pair.  Thoughts?  Do you think I can expect similar results from the CA-14 omni's as the C4 omni's?
LMA: https://archive.org/details/@corfit
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/orithris
Mics: AKG 460 (ck61) | AT 4041 | Studio Projects C4  | CA-14 cards | SP-SPSM-9
Recorders: Tascam DR-680mkii  |  Tascam DR-60  |  Tascam DR-2D
Preamp: CA Ugly
Camera: GoPro Hero 4 Silver

Offline rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3332
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2016, 12:23:30 PM »
I'm jumping into this thread since I've already had some similar discussions with some of you about this recently.  I am committed to running spaced omni's when possible too.  So I have a few questions for advice as I have already inquired about some center channel mic options (shotgun, hypercard, ext). 

Here are my current gear options:  AKG 460 (ck61); Studio Projects C4 (cards, omni's); CA-14 cards
Purchase considerations: CA-14 omni's (very likely); Shotgun mic

I recently ran my C4's with omni caps split ~ 3ft with my AKG's in the middle at PAS.  EX)   https://archive.org/details/DP2016-06-30.highberry_24bit

However, after reading this I should consider running AKG's in X/Y.  My dilemma is that I really like the sound of my AKG's as a separate pair in PAS or DIN or NOS.  So, I want to run them that way as a separate recording in case it rocks or the omni rig does not turn out well!  That currently leaves me with the C4's and CA-14 cards.  So, should I split the C4 omni's and run the CA-14 cards in the middle in X/Y?  How even do I set CA-14 cards into X/Y?  What if I pointed 1 CA-14 forward and the other backward?

Next, assuming I purchase CA-14 omni's, I can run them split wide with a retractable TV antenna and have my C4's in the middle as X/Y.  This will allow me to also have my AKG's as a standalone pair.  Thoughts?  Do you think I can expect similar results from the CA-14 omni's as the C4 omni's?
Chris, I can only speak to the AKG part of your question since I have no experience with using the SP's or CA's.
I hear you re a backup config. for many shows, kindms and I would run our ck61 actives in DIN or DINA in the middle of our split omni experiments (Omni's were AKG c414's split 3 feet, with middle a 460/ck8 or 460/ck1) in order to have a "safety copy" in case things went awry with the rest. Since we now have the ck22's mated to our 460's we have run a middle channel coincident 90 degree figure 8 with the 414's as well as the ck8 or ck61 facing forward (3 channels) OR the ck8/ck61 forward (0') and a ck61 rear (180') [4 channels].

The only other thing I can add is: we use what we own, but the 414's are a bit large or heavy as the split omnis, and if you have a choice, I'd go with gutbuckets concept of light weight mics on an antennae as you mentioned.
« Last Edit: September 01, 2016, 03:21:32 PM by rocksuitcase »
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG461/CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2016, 03:07:45 PM »
My dilemma is that I really like the sound of my AKG's as a separate pair in PAS or DIN or NOS.  So, I want to run them that way as a separate recording in case it rocks or the omni rig does not turn out well!

[my bolding above]

This is important!  In more ways than one.  In addition to providing a 'safe recording' in case the new technique doesn't work out as hoped (which to my way of thinking is what minimizes the risk inherent in trying out new configurations), it also provides a key 'known good' standard stereo reference to which the results from the new technique can be compared carefully and critically.  The ability to compare the two resulting recordings made at the same time, from the same location on the same mic stand, by the same taper who is aware of all the setup details, is critical for making well informed decisions about what truly is better and what isn't in an honest and objective overall sense.  It also allows one to get an far more accurate handle on all the subtle qualities which collectively make one sound better than the other, which helps greatly in considering what adjustments or changes to the new technique may be appropriate moving forward.

For me, the limits on doing that are: How many channels I can record, and how complicated I care to get with additional mics, rigging, and wiring.  I'm always using whatever gear I have at the start, until I determine I actually need something else, or have tied and refined the technique to the point where I'm happy with it and don't feel as much need to play around with it so extensively, at which point I move on to fine tuning things to optimize practicality. 

This gets back to a tension between two essentially different approaches in experimenting with multiple mic stereo audience recording-  Either starting from a favorite 2-channel stereo setup and adding additional mics to that in an attempt to make it better, verses starting with a whole new approach and a clean slate.  The former is safer, while the later is potentially more fruitful.. yet if you have enough channels and don't mind the complication, you can do both!

More on this later.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2016, 04:51:04 PM »
Of course, it's the old math theory trick. If two cards pointed 0 and 180 respectively are basically an Omni, what would two Hypers facing 0 and 180 act like? a figure 8 with a mini bulb in the middle of the pattern where they meet at the rear of each cap? I'm not 100% certain here.
 
Two back to back coincident cardioids sum electronically at an equal ratio produce an omni.  Two back to back coincident hypercardioids summed electronically at an equal ratio produce..... an omni! (with lower sensitivity). 

Lets walk through it- Think of the pickup pattern of a microphone as mathematical combination of an omni component and a bidirectional (figure-8) component mixed together at a particular ratio.  That ratio determines the pickup pattern.  An omnidirectional microphone is 100% omni component and 0% bidirectional component. A cardioid is equal amounts omni and bidirectional.  The hyper is less omni and more bidirectional.  A figure-8 is all bidirectional and no omni.  Good so far?

A bidirectional mic has a specific orientation polarity. It's front side produces a positive polarity signal and back side a negative polarity signal.  An omni has no specific orientation polarity.  Summing any two opposite facing coincident mics, the omni components double, and the bidirectional components cancel out (positive lobe + negative lobe | negative lobe + positive lobe).  If the mics were to face the same direction, the omni components would still double, and the bidirectional components would double as well (positive + positive | negative + negative). 

So with two summed back to back cardioids, the bidirectional components cancel, and the omni components double.  Given the 50/50 ratio of omni/bidirectional components in a cardioid, we're left with a doubling of the two 50% omni components, yielding 100%, or equal sensitivity to one of the single cardioids we started with.

With two summed back to back hypercardioids, the bidirectional components cancel, and the omni components double like in the previous example.  But given that a hypercardiod is made up of a higher ratio of bidirectional component to omni component, we're left with less omni component to add together, yielding less than 100% of the original sensitivity compared to that of the single hypercardioid we started with.

Summing a pair of coincident but opposite facing bi-directional mics leaves nothing, as there is no omni component provided from either microphone. If we want to combine opposite facing coincident directional mics to produce a figure-8 instead of an omni, we need to polarity invert the signal from of one of the microphones.  Then the bidirectional components double and the omni components cancel. Two summed coincident yet opposite facing directional mics produce a pseudo figure-8, and two summed coincident omnis leaves nothing.

This is how the signals from two opposed cardioid capsules inside in a multi-pattern electrically switched microphone can be combined in various ways to produce any pickup pattern from omni through cardioid through bidirectional.

That's the mathematics of it at least.  In the real world, it's never that clean and neat.  Capsules arranged so as to be as coincident as possible won't cancel entirely even if levels and responses are precisely matched, and if we introduce any significant spacing between the mics then the resulting time/phase interactions insure that none of the clean theoretical mathematical stuff above holds true anymore.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #41 on: September 01, 2016, 06:12:04 PM »
Also, don't forget with a Hyper, the rear lobe will pick up a bit of rear audience or house more than the cardiod.

Yeah, maybe.  Although I haven't found that significant in my experience. May depend on how hyperish/ figure-8ish your hypercardioid actually is, but I think it's more about average sensitivity across the entire back, than the existence or lack of lobe.  I think what matters is having a minimum average sensitivity across the entire rear hemisphere, actually across a greater arc than just the rear hemisphere wrapping around towards the front a bit.  Of the several supercards I've used in the center facing forward, all of them have excluded more surrounding audience noise than using cardioid, despite their small rear lobe.   

Selection of the forward facing center mic for me is primarily about getting the best quality pickup of sound I can from the PA and stage, and then secondarily about the ability to minimize pickup of the surrounding audience and reverberant ambience as much as possible without overly compromising the sound pickup from the front.

Selection of an appropriate backwards facing mic is sort of the same, but with the primary and secondary goals reversed.  Most important to my way of thinking for the backwards facing mic(s) is getting as much isolation as possible from sound arriving from in front (which is going to be the loudest direction by far, often burying the audience and reflected sound arriving from behind), and only secondarily about getting a good sound from what arrives from behind.  The usefulness of a rear mic is leveraged by maximally excluding the PA/stage sound from that channel, which is a difficult task.  That's why when recording on stage and using a rear facing mic or mic pair, I prefer to hang the rear-facing (room/audience) mics below the stage-lip, so the the entire stage acts as a baffle further reducing pickup of the on-stage sound beyond the attenuation achievable by mic pattern alone.*

It's interesting to solo and listen to just the sideways facing bidirectional mic (my most recent experiments involve adding those to determine if turning the front and back facing center mics into Mid/Side pairs is useful) and comparing that to a solo'd rear facing cardioid, and to a solo'd rear facing supercardioid.  A sideways bidirectional has a far deeper null facing directly towards the stage than a rear facing cardioid, and the supercards actually have their small rear lobe facing forward.  Yet when listening to that channel alone, the bidirectional has the most PA sound in it.  I'm tempted to say the cardioid has less, and the supercardioids the least, but I'd need to double check that with more listening.  In practice a rear facing cardioid or supercard may be about the same. That's partly what confirmed in my mind that it's more about the integrated response sensitivity across the entire back side of the mic which is more important than the particular shape of it's pickup pattern.

[*edit- soloing the audience/room facing mics of my on-stage setups lead me to the same conclusions as soloing the back facing mic in these audience setups.  Minimizing pickup of the main PA/Stage sound is the most important thing for making those channels useful.  With on-stage taping, I began with my additional room/audience mic experiments by attaching omnis to the rear wall facing forward, behind the audience, then switched to using cards or supercards as part of my on stage setup facing out into the room and away from the stage (better), before hanging those same mics below the stage lip (best).  That game turned out to be all about achieving sufficient isolation in the audience/room channels from pollution by the stage and PA sound.  It was something of a mental hurdle to realize that exclusion of good direct sound as much as possible was the most appropriate goal for those channels, since conversely getting good clean direct sound is usually the most significant challenge for tapers!]
« Last Edit: September 01, 2016, 06:22:21 PM by Gutbucket »
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Chuck

  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10423
  • Gender: Male
  • time between the notes...
    • My recordings on the LMA
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #42 on: September 01, 2016, 08:50:51 PM »
The way you guys are talking... I'm wondering if using my LD in figure 8 (side) and my AKG Ck-63 hyper facing forward (mid) with spaced omnis A-B might give me the most options for mix down. 4 channels total. I'm recording an amplified folk group (with drummer) outside this weekend and looking for something new to try. My last try at mid-side was disappointing, because the figure 8 pattern is so thin sounding. But, with the omnis to mix in later it would fill it out.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.

Microphones: (2) Microtech Gefell M300, (2) AKG C 480 B comb-ULS/ CK 61/ CK 63, (2) CAD GXL1200 (cardioid and sub-cardioid capsule & electronics mod), (2) Audix M1290-o, (2) Micro capsule active cables w/ Naiant PFA's, (2) Naiant MSH-1O, (2) Naiant AKG Active cables, (2) Church CA-11 (cardioid), (2) CAD C9, (1) Nady SCM-1000 (mod)
Pre-amps: Naiant littlekit v2.0, BM2p+ Edirol UA-5, Church STC-9000
Recorders: Tascam DR-680, iRiver iHP-120 (Rockboxed & RTC mod), Denon DTR-80p

Recordings on the LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/ChuckM
Recording website & blog: http://www.timebetweenthenotes.com

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10865
  • Gender: Male
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #43 on: September 02, 2016, 11:09:13 AM »
I think so, especially if you want to try something new.  Give it a try let us know what you think.  If you can arrange it so your M/S pair is slightly forward of the omnis that's probably best (I shoot for something like 8" to 12"), but no worries if setup is easier having all the mics in a line.

When mixing it, bring up the omnis first and get that sounding right, then bring up the center and balance it with the omnis, then introduce some center stereo width from your LD and play with the M/S ratio until you get the most seamless image across the playback stage.  You may end up using very little Side or you may use a lot, it all depends on what the specific situation calls for and the sound you like.  The omnis and center mic are doing most of the heavy lifting here, and the Side mic helps blend those primary components seamlessly, by whatever amount is appropriate.

I consider the omnis + a forward facing center mic the basic core of this technique.  Making the center a M/S pair brings the gravy and pulls it all together.  I wouldn't suggest M/S alone without the omnis.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

"Narrow or widely spaced microphone configurations are preferred. It is well-known experience that pure coincidence microphone concepts are not able to produce a satisfying natural spatial impression, due to the lack of adequate interchannel temporal relations (time-of-arrival, phase, correlation)" -Günther Theile
"The mix of the Double M/S signals with a large A/B configuration of omnis results in the spacious sound that is often desired. This option also provides decorrelated low-frequency signals." -Helmut Wittek

Offline Chuck

  • Trade Count: (41)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 10423
  • Gender: Male
  • time between the notes...
    • My recordings on the LMA
Re: Card+Omnis from the lawn
« Reply #44 on: September 02, 2016, 11:18:48 AM »
I wouldn't suggest M/S alone without the omnis.

Yeah, that's what I've discovered too.
Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one.

Microphones: (2) Microtech Gefell M300, (2) AKG C 480 B comb-ULS/ CK 61/ CK 63, (2) CAD GXL1200 (cardioid and sub-cardioid capsule & electronics mod), (2) Audix M1290-o, (2) Micro capsule active cables w/ Naiant PFA's, (2) Naiant MSH-1O, (2) Naiant AKG Active cables, (2) Church CA-11 (cardioid), (2) CAD C9, (1) Nady SCM-1000 (mod)
Pre-amps: Naiant littlekit v2.0, BM2p+ Edirol UA-5, Church STC-9000
Recorders: Tascam DR-680, iRiver iHP-120 (Rockboxed & RTC mod), Denon DTR-80p

Recordings on the LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/ChuckM
Recording website & blog: http://www.timebetweenthenotes.com

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.17 seconds with 36 queries.
© 2002-2017 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF
Website Design by Foxtrot Media, Inc., a Baltimore Website Company