Topic: 4-ch mic configs - what do you use?

[Brian Skalinder]

In response to a discussion in another thread, starting here, I wanted to ask others what 4-mic configs they're using?

I've not yet used my R-4 for 2-ch AUD + 2-ch SBD (or 3 + 1) , so have stuck mostly with 4-ch mic configs.  And even those, I've only run a handful of times due to a serious taping slump.  Anyway, I've basically tried three options so far:

• Close-micing.  Close-mic'd the 4 performers or their amps (only Goran Ivanovic Group so far).  Love the sound from micing the sax directly.  Likewise for the drum kit, but even though it's a fairly minimal kit, I've found it difficult to pick up enough of the kick drum yet still remain far enough overhead to get good decay out of the cymbals and high-hat (that settles it, I obviously need 8-ch!).  Love the control over discrete instruments when mixing.  However, while it sounds alright, I'm not thrilled with the results micing the bass and guitar amps.  May try a 4-ch feed from the SBD next time, or mic the sax / drums on-stage and feed the guitar / bass via SBD.  Not sure I can get a decent sound by micing the guitar / bass directly - I could probably mount a mic in front of Goran's guitar easily enough (not quite sure on placement), but I'm pretty sure I can't mount one of my 414s to Matt's bass!
  
  
• Near-coincident flanked by split omnis.  So far, mostly DIN/DINA cardioid or hypercardioid pair flanked by omnis split ~14".  I now have the capability to split easily up to ~24".  Interesting results - definitely like the option to tweak the depth/width of the image by mixing the two sources, but the results have sounded somewhat smeared.  I don't know the proper term, but I hear a distinct lack of center focus - probably due in part to the venue in which I've run this config (Metro in Chicago, the soundboard and under-balcony area is a trap and causes more open configs to come out a little muddy, and the stacks are spread w-i-d-e).
  
  
• Coincident flanked by split omnis.  Just ran this the first time for Tortoise recently (see Kickdown for BT/FTP).  Early set ran XY90º for the main pair, and omnis split ~24".  Late set ran XY110º main pair, same omni split.  I liked both results, and both produced a more focused center than previous attempts.  Though to be honest, I've always experienced good results at the Empty Bottle.  One thing I love about adding the omnis to the mix, aside from the more open and natural sound in general, is the robust bass I get out of the 414s.  Some people feel I keep too much bass in my recordings (ahem, mmmatt...though I suspect you're not alone), but I love it on my playback system.
  
  

What are others' experiences?  Ultimately, I'll play around more with the above options (assuming I don't revert back to a work-induced taping slump for another few months), but also plan to run SBD + an on-stage pair, SBD + ambient pair, and on occasion on-stage main pair + spot mics.  So far I've really enjoyed the flexibility 4-ch allows, though I still need to figure out what configs work best in which environments, etc.  Of course, for me, anyway, trying out new stuff is half the fun!

[stirinthesauce]

Well, I'm not using an r-4, but I use my w+mod ua-5 for 4 mic mixes as much as possible.  Not sure off hand the exact number of times I have run this but I will list my configs and type of enviroment for the last 5 times.

1.  WSP in Memphis this summer, 2nd night (7/29 I believe).  Ran a flanking (split 15' pointing at the outside of the stacks) of my Peluso subcards straight into the ua-5.  I had a center pair of 414's, DINa hypers >v2>rca input.  Of course all of my 4 mic mixes have to be done on the fly so it is a little iffier results than if I could mix in post.  My thoughts on the results.  Loved it.  The hypers brought a more in your face sound but the subcards really opened things up.  Was very impresse with the results.  This was from the OTS.

2.  7/21/06 - South Cumberland Orchestra.  This was a student orchestra put on by the Sewanee summer music festival.  Top student musicians from all over the country.  I was setup maybe 15' back from the orchestra.  Very large ensemble with 70+musicians.  Had alot of space to cover.  I ran a center pair of akg 481's DIN with a flanking pair of Peluso subcards split 45' angled in 45* towards the orchestra.  akg's ran into the ua-5 and the Peluso's into a v3.  Mixed on the fly.  Results were spectacular.  Huge soundstage, stereo imaging is incredible.  Very impressed.  Probably one of my better if not best recording (to my ears) and my first attempt at 4 mics.  Of course taping orchestra's are so much fun because of the wide dynamic range.  This will have to be done again and will keep the flanking configs but may change up the center pair by using omnis baffled.

3.  My sister's wedding reception, Labor Day weekend 2006 -  We hired a bluegrass band to play all acoustic.  It was outside on the front porch.  I ran avenso sto-2's pointed at the outside of the group>ua-5 and AT 831's>bbox>line in (DIN).  This turned out fantastic.  It was a real quiet performanc since there was no amplification.  I was set up 5' in front of them but still had my omnis much higher in the mix.  It sounds wonderful.  It will be a great gift to give my sister and new brother in law.  Great stereo seperation even with the omnis.

4. NMAS a couple weeks back outdoors.  I knew this would be thumping bass heavy situation and wanted to really capture the experience.  I ran avenson audio sto-2's healy method>oade m-148 and Peluso cards DIN>ua-5.  Very loud show and couldn't get the mix the way I wanted it.  The 20db fixed gain was too much from the brick, I wanted the omnis lower in the mix but ended up with the omnis higher in the mix.  The results are mixed.  Great on home playback, waaaay to much bass for a car stereo.  Not so much just boom as the highs and mids are very present, just that the omnis really picked up Chew's bass.  Of course it was extremely bass heavy there so I account this to an accurate representation of the night.  Next time I will keep omnis lower in the mix for a more pleasing playback.

5.  WSP 2 nights ago.  Split subcards (8' split)>ua-5 and mk4v's(ortf)>722>lineout>ua-5.  I set the subcards just a tad lower in the mix.  Results were fantastic.  Torrent is up on etree if anyone wants to hear it.  The mk4v's by itself will be posted tomorrow so to hear the differences between 2 and 4 mics.

Having to mix on the fly can be a bit difficult but so far most of my outings have yielded results surpassing my expectations.  I like the idea of flanking mics.  Omnis I will use more outdoors and the subcards more indoors (to block some of the rear bounce back) and hypers if I am far away from the source or cards if I am closer for the center pair. 

Great topic, thanks for starting it Brian.

[Brian Skalinder]

Thanks for the input, stir.  Downloading a track or two from your WSP recording, as well as phishy12's C34 + Schoeps MK21 mix.  While I love the 414's LD sound (meaty and robust), pretty sure I'd like to have the option of another pair of SDs.  I didn't realize the Peluso's offered a variety of caps - and reasonably priced, taboot!  I may have to pick up a set of CEMC6 bodies and omni and subcard caps once finances allow.     If only they had figure-8 caps.

Based on your comments, I think I'll try split subcards at the Metro next time to see if the bit more rear rejection reduces the mud sufficiently.  Someone in the other thread also mentioned running the center pair real tight, like ~70º, and I think I'll give that a go, too.

[bgalizio]

I didn't realize the Peluso's offered a variety of caps - and reasonably priced, taboot!  I may have to pick up a set of CEMC6 bodies and omni and subcard caps once finances allow.     If only they had figure-8 caps.

DO IT! I love the Peluso subcard sound. I remember Nick's Picks saying that Peluso was developing a fig-8 cap...

EDIT: I find this topic very interesting. My 4 channel experience with the R-4 is limited to SBD/AUD and will probably stay that way for a long while, as the new house effectively killed all gear funds. Maybe I'll pick up those Naiant Studio's $50 omnis 

[Brian Skalinder]

DO IT! I love the Peluso subcard sound. I remember Nick's Picks saying that Peluso was developing a fig-8 cap...

That would seal the deal and I'd just have to finagle the finances.

Maybe I'll pick up those Naiant Studio's $50 omnis 

Do it!  Even if they're not top-notch quality, you can still use them for reinforcement and helping control the openness of the imaging.

[kirk97132]

Here's a set up we used that turned out great.  I know the Electro voices are an odd choice but they worked well with the AGK's. 

Jerry Joseph & The Jackmormons
7-26-03
Mt Tabor
Portland, OR

Source: (all mics on stage)
2 EV-ND408's(10'spread) &
2 AKGb 480B-ULS (with
ck61 [cardiod] caps) @ center & SBD>
Behringer UB2222FX-Pro mixer>
Lunatec V3>VX Pocket V2>
Toshiba 3490ct laptop

http://db.etree.org/shninfo_detail.php?shnid=22698

[stirinthesauce]

Thanks for the input, stir.  Downloading a track or two from your WSP recording, as well as phishy12's C34 + Schoeps MK21 mix.  While I love the 414's LD sound (meaty and robust), pretty sure I'd like to have the option of another pair of SDs.  I didn't realize the Peluso's offered a variety of caps - and reasonably priced, taboot!  I may have to pick up a set of CEMC6 bodies and omni and subcard caps once finances allow.     If only they had figure-8 caps.

Based on your comments, I think I'll try split subcards at the Metro next time to see if the bit more rear rejection reduces the mud sufficiently.  Someone in the other thread also mentioned running the center pair real tight, like ~70º, and I think I'll give that a go, too.

Yeah, the split subcards work great.  The DDBB opening set I ran just split subcards, no center fill.  Turned out nice.  Very open with some pleasing reverb but not muddy at all.  Just posted it up on etree, http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=500708  so this will give you an idea of the difference adding the center fill stereo pair.  Thanks for the tips on running a tighter center pair, I may try that next time or an xy coincident.

The Peluso's are great.  Give me plenty of options without breaking the bank.  They sound wonderful too.  Subcards are very warm but still have the small diaphragm detail.  I believe extra caps are around $180 for a matched pair depending on dealer.

[ethan]

Although I don't own an R4 I have been messing with 4-6 mic live two track mixdowns with my Soundcraft Notepad.

My general approach with 4 mics is to first evaluate all the sound sources on stage. All amplified? Are there wedges? If so are there multiple monitor mixes. Is there anything I think will be way too loud or way too quiet?

First if there are vocals and monitors I mic a monitor and pan it to both channels. I like to at least do one stereo config usually a stage lip NOS config. However depending on monitor placement and stage layout I'll move the stereo config to a location I think I'll get balanced channels and maximize onaxis looks at non mic'ed amplified sources (guitar,bass, drums). Then I'll use the rest of my mics to augment which sources I think need it.

-e

[OFOTD]

Coming from the original thread that spawned this one.   I made reference to the proliferation of four mic mixes on the popular torrent sites.  To me it has generally seemed that those folks have just thrown up two sets of random mics.   While I know a great deal of this is based on what mics you have on hand it seems like more often than not these random mic combinations sound really bad together.   

I like Brian's idea in the first post about tempering odd parings with different patterns. 

I would suspect that as 4 mic mixes start becoming more and more regular that time and testing will be spent on different mic combinations.  Like do the 414's  sound best with the 480's or do the 414's sound best with the mk4's?   

As Brian talks about the mic configs I wonder how much that plays into the mix as opposed to exactly which mics are used?  Which has the greater effect, mic configs or mic parings?

Looking forward to this discussion.  +T    Brian for starting this thread.

[kirk97132]

here's a new seed of the 4 mic show: http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/showthread.php?t=27194

[RebelRebel]

I always run either 1.)blumlein with omni flanks 2.)jecklin disc with cardiod flanks 3.) ortf with omni flanks or 4.)faulkner phased array with cardiod flanks.

even though I do mainly acoustic material, I have a feeling that it would work equally well with a taping enviroment(id think with cardiod flanks more than omnis). I get about 75% of the sound from the main mics, and mix in the flanks so that I barely notice when they are gone. in a good room, I will also use 3 omnis across the front of the group...this works very well too..(sort of a decca tree, but all the mics are in the same plane instead of forming a triangle) panned hard L C R

[wbrisette]

As a old veteran of 4 channel mixes, what I've been using successfully for a long time is using two omnis spread 1 metre apart, with a pair of cards in the ORTF position in the middle of those.

Wayne

[Shawn]

I've heard some really great tapes made by placing two mics on-stage. usually it's cards in ORTF/DIN/XY or sometimes a PZM mic. The other two other mics are split and placed very close (less than 5 ft) to each PA stack. This is good for small rooms. It has a nice in your face sound. It sounds more like a SBD than an typical AUD, but you get a couple of advantages over a straight SBD recording. First, you still get a little of the room sound (read natural reverb), and second you pick up the sound coming from the stage. It's best if you can mix the signals in post, but I've heard amazing results done 'on the fly' by experienced people. If I ever get some $ and pick up another set of mics I plan on trying it. here are a couple of samples for anyone interested...


http://www.archive.org/details/tlg2005-12-30.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/tlg2005-12-15.onstage.flac16

[wbrisette]

This is cheating a bit because this is a six mic mix, but...

http://www.archive.org/details/TLG2006-04-29

Wayne

[easy jim]

I've only tried four mics a couple different ways in the following configs:

On stage: split pair + center pair  The split pair has generally been cardioid, but I have also used the omni and wide-cardioid patterns with the 414s.  The center pair has always been the SD AKGs being run in a DINish type config.  These have all worked out really well, filling in those parts of the stage sound generally missed by either a center or split pair run alone, but they have also always been done in conjunction with a SBD feed to get what's not in the stage mix (i.e., vox).

Mid-Side LD center pair + flanking SD cards near coincident (DINish)  I tried this once for the hell of it because I wanted to try mid-side out for the first time when I received my 414s.  I really only ran the SDs as a back up in case I screwed up the Mid-Side pair.  In the end, I mixed them in post and it turned out great.  Link attached.

http://www.archive.org/details/xr2006-08-02.akg414-451matrix.flac16
http://www.archive.org/details/xr2006-08-02.akg414-451matrix.flac24

Stage pair plus PA pair (+ SBD)  This is my favorite way to run now, and what I try to do, if possible, for shows in which I have the necessary access.  I do not worry too much about the PA pair, which I just set up by the SBD which is where I run my rig, since I only use the PA pair to add room sound and as a cut-away source if there are issues with the SBD and/or stage feed.

[Gutbucket]

I always run either 1.)blumlein with omni flanks 2.)jecklin disc with cardiod flanks 3.) ortf with omni flanks or 4.)faulkner phased array with cardiod flanks.
...

Has anyone tried splitting the pairs among different freq. ranges?  I've wondered about Blumlein & omni flanks with a lowpass on the omnis, either with a corresponding highpass on the center pair or just allowing for the natural low end rolloff of the fig-8's.  Same could be applied to other configs of course, but that one in particular intrigues me.

[RebelRebel]

I always run either 1.)blumlein with omni flanks 2.)jecklin disc with cardiod flanks 3.) ortf with omni flanks or 4.)faulkner phased array with cardiod flanks.
...

Has anyone tried splitting the pairs among different freq. ranges?  I've wondered about Blumlein & omni flanks with a lowpass on the omnis, either with a corresponding highpass on the center pair or just allowing for the natural low end rolloff of the fig-8's.  Same could be applied to other configs of course, but that one in particular intrigues me.

I generally dont mess with any filters or roll off on the way in, simply because I want to wait until I get the material back to a known enviroment and see how the freqs. interact. all roll offs can be done later...no point in taking a chance unless there is something really problematic.

[Gutbucket]

I generally dont mess with any filters or roll off on the way in, simply because I want to wait until I get the material back to a known enviroment and see how the freqs. interact. all roll offs can be done later...no point in taking a chance unless there is something really problematic.
[/quote]

Understood of course, I agree doing it in post would be the more prudent choice.  I was refering to the final results.

[BayTaynt3d]

I sometimes EQ very differently on different mics. I tend to do this when I do a combo of a single stereo pair and then reinforce with a couple of spot mics. For example if I run a single stereo pair as my main AUD, then another mic stuck in the piano (think Jazz quartet maybe) because I know it'll be really low in the mix because it is in the back or something like that, then I might try to isolate the piano more on the spot mic to some extent. Piano is a tough example because it goes way up and down the scale, but my point is that I might roll off the deep bass (being picked up from the double-bass and kick drum) and de-ess or roll-off the super highs (from the high hats) on the spot mic, so when I do mix in more of the piano to the main stereo pair, I know I'm not adding too much more uber-lows or highs, just (mostly) more of the piano. Anyway, that was meant just as an example, but you can extrapolate from there...

[bgalizio]

I have to bump this thread, as I'm considering picking up the Avantone CK-1 in addition to my Pelusos. Yes, I know I just stated a few days ago that I'm scared of 4-mic mixes and phase issues. Still am.

So, what would be gained by having these two sets of mics, considering I probably wouldn't be able to split either the Avantone omnis or Peluso subcards? Has anyone run, say, cards/hypers XY with subcards NOS? Or would all this not be worth it for the final mix?

[Shawn]

I have to bump this thread, as I'm considering picking up the Avantone CK-1 in addition to my Pelusos. Yes, I know I just stated a few days ago that I'm scared of 4-mic mixes and phase issues. Still am.

So, what would be gained by having these two sets of mics, considering I probably wouldn't be able to split either the Avantone omnis or Peluso subcards? Has anyone run, say, cards/hypers XY with subcards NOS? Or would all this not be worth it for the final mix?

I've run two coincident or near coincindent pairs a few times, and I got a little heat for it from some people. what I can tell you is that the best audience recording I've ever made was ADK TL's (hypers NOS) + akg 461 (DIN with 60hz roll-off). While that may seem like a random combination of mics I specifically chooose them together because the AKGs have a bright top end and the TLs have a big fat LD low end. mixing them together really evened things out. The configurations on that particualr occassion were more of an experiemnt, and hoenstly at the time I didn't plan on mixing them together. When I was messing around with things In post I quickly realized how great they sounded together. On the other hand, as far as configurations go I really do dig a split omni + coincident pair sound and find it to be the superior setup if the room acoustics are good enough to run omnis.

I'd be more worried about phase issues with running 4 mic on-stage/stage lip. i've seen numerous split omnis + a near coincident pair on-stage tapes lately, and  I can't for the life of me figure out how people are doing that without some very wierd phase issues. at greater distances I think the phase issues are diminshed, but maybe I'm wrong.

[Todd R]

I have to bump this thread, as I'm considering picking up the Avantone CK-1 in addition to my Pelusos. Yes, I know I just stated a few days ago that I'm scared of 4-mic mixes and phase issues. Still am.

So, what would be gained by having these two sets of mics, considering I probably wouldn't be able to split either the Avantone omnis or Peluso subcards? Has anyone run, say, cards/hypers XY with subcards NOS? Or would all this not be worth it for the final mix?

Barring on-stage configurations (and sbd-ambient mic matrix mixes, though those aren't 4mic mixes), what I'm really hoping to accomplish with a 4-mic mix is this:  (1) get the "focus" and soundstage detail I find I get with say cardioids near-coincident (or hypers) (2) get the huge soundstage and feeling of spaciousness I get with split omnis.  This is what I'm hoping for, though I really haven't gotten there yet.  In large part since I most likely will only do this for outdoor shows and I just haven't had enough opportunity to try yet.

My main impetus has been the fact that I just haven't been too excited by my split/j-disk omni 2ch recordings, and I want to capture that omni magic while still retaining the soundstage detail I find with cardioids.

That said, for me, I don't think I'd be happy with omnis/subcards NOS.  Just not convinced that'd capture the huge soundstage I'm hoping for -- I'm guessing it might even make the mix tend more towards mono than just a 2ch cardioid near-coincident recording.  If split omnis are out, I'd recommend trying j-disk omnis for the 2 channels.

BTW, why is split omnis out?  Even a 1-meter split will give you good stereo separation, and this isn't too hard to accomplish with one stand (for all 4 channels).  If it is concerns about phasing, using a true coincident pattern for your cards should help.

Also, it'd be helpful to know what you are trying to accomplish with a 4-mic mix in order to comment on whether NOS omnis would work -- I'm just projecting my desires onto your proposed configuration.

[BayTaynt3d]

I think you'd be missing out on a lot of the potential of 4-mic mixes by not being able to spot or split. That said, if you had to run four together, I'd be trying a mix of tight patterns with wide patterns. Maybe ORTF hypers with XY cards, that'd give you a nice center and the hypers might be able to reach out to the sides more? Just a thought. Anyway, I think the point would be to get two very different sources for later use in the mixdown (or are you mixing on the fly?).

[bgalizio]

I have to bump this thread, as I'm considering picking up the Avantone CK-1 in addition to my Pelusos. Yes, I know I just stated a few days ago that I'm scared of 4-mic mixes and phase issues. Still am.

So, what would be gained by having these two sets of mics, considering I probably wouldn't be able to split either the Avantone omnis or Peluso subcards? Has anyone run, say, cards/hypers XY with subcards NOS? Or would all this not be worth it for the final mix?

Barring on-stage configurations (and sbd-ambient mic matrix mixes, though those aren't 4mic mixes), what I'm really hoping to accomplish with a 4-mic mix is this:  (1) get the "focus" and soundstage detail I find I get with say cardioids near-coincident (or hypers) (2) get the huge soundstage and feeling of spaciousness I get with split omnis.  This is what I'm hoping for, though I really haven't gotten there yet.  In large part since I most likely will only do this for outdoor shows and I just haven't had enough opportunity to try yet.

My main impetus has been the fact that I just haven't been too excited by my split/j-disk omni 2ch recordings, and I want to capture that omni magic while still retaining the soundstage detail I find with cardioids.

That said, for me, I don't think I'd be happy with omnis/subcards NOS.  Just not convinced that'd capture the huge soundstage I'm hoping for -- I'm guessing it might even make the mix tend more towards mono than just a 2ch cardioid near-coincident recording.  If split omnis are out, I'd recommend trying j-disk omnis for the 2 channels.

BTW, why is split omnis out?  Even a 1-meter split will give you good stereo separation, and this isn't too hard to accomplish with one stand (for all 4 channels).  If it is concerns about phasing, using a true coincident pattern for your cards should help.

Also, it'd be helpful to know what you are trying to accomplish with a 4-mic mix in order to comment on whether NOS omnis would work -- I'm just projecting my desires onto your proposed configuration.

I think my goal with a 4 mic mix would be similar to yours - get the huge subcard NOS sound with some focused sound as well. That's what I like about SBD/AUD matrixes as well. But, I'm new to 4 mic mixes and am not quite sure what could be achieved.

Split omnis are essentially out because of space constraints. I'm generally the only taper and keeping things somewhat low profile is key. Running 2 pairs of mics, one pair XY, one pair NOS, doesn't interfere much more than one pair of mics. I guess I could split as far as the AKG stereo bar goes (something like 8.5"), but that isn't much.

Same goes for the J-disc. I ran one a few times when I had C4's, but it was too much of an eye sore for other concert-goers.

And, this is most likely going to be all "ambient," not on-stage. Mixing would be done in post, as the R-4 makes that very easy.

[stirinthesauce]

Another option for omnis on a single stand is an AB stereo setup of 17cm, caps at 180 degrees.  Also known as the Healy Method.  I've done this before for the need of a small footprint several times with mixied results.  When done where the desired result was achieved, it was an ideal room (sonically), location was optimum, and the omnis were down about 25% in the mix, maybe less maybe more    .  As Todd stated, I too look for the focus yet huge soundstage.  

Oh, and mixing on the fly made this terribly difficult the first few times.  Mixing in post makes things so much easier. 

[OFOTD]

Happy that this thread is seeing some life.

For Panic a few weeks ago I ran 4 channel for three nights in a row.  All three were the same config.

1: AKG 483 (x/y) > ACM V3 > R4 Pro
2: AKG 482 (split 42") > Wmod R4 Pro



Usually I never run x/y but on the suggestion of Doug Oade I decided to try it for the weekend.   The thought was that by running x/y that most of the bass would then defer to the split omnis.  Didn't happen.  Two things really struck me.  The first was how far away and distant JB's voice sounded on both tapes and second was how much bass came through.  Really too much bass.  I tried rolling off some of it from both sources and in the end only mixed one night as I needed to take a break from listening to the same stuff a million times.  My ears became overwhelmed. 

I am hoping this weekend at Old Settlers to run 10 different configs.  Well that's the goal anyways, 10 different configs.    I have kinda decided to make sure I run a tried and true (din, dina) and make sure that at the very least I get a good 2 channel tape.  While not discouraged by 4 channel recording I am very much hoping the learning curve gets a whole lot quicker.

[Shawn]

you could try running the roll off switch on the x/y pair. That always improved the quality of my 4 mic tapes. it does really help focus the bass on the omni pair.

[stirinthesauce]

I spot a zman in that pic 

[stirinthesauce]

Back to the discussion though.  I have had experiences like yours also, OFOTD where bass was overwhelming.  I've also found that xy doesn't cut the bass (at least not noticeable to my ears) but gives me a not too ideal (non realistic) soundstage, at least outdoors with sd's.  LD's is another ballgame.

Try mixing differently in post.  Rolling off the bass, maybe bumping the mid highs or highs for some presence, keeping the omnis lower in the mix.

Or it could be just a poorly mixed PA that night 

My best experiences running 4 mic mixes have been in the sweet spot, up close, in doors, in sonically good rooms. 

[OFOTD]

you could try running the roll off switch on the x/y pair. That always improved the quality of my 4 mic tapes. it does really help focus the bass on the omni pair.

I thought about that but in the end always defaulted to making changes in post.  I knew going in that experimentation is the key.  I just wish 3 nights of Panic was not the place to do that. 

Back to the discussion though.  I have had experiences like yours also, OFOTD where bass was overwhelming.  I've also found that xy doesn't cut the bass (at least not noticeable to my ears) but gives me a not too ideal (non realistic) soundstage,

Took the exact words right out of my mouth.  +T

[stirinthesauce]

you could try running the roll off switch on the x/y pair. That always improved the quality of my 4 mic tapes. it does really help focus the bass on the omni pair.

I thought about that but in the end always defaulted to making changes in post.  I knew going in that experimentation is the key.  I just wish 3 nights of Panic was not the place to do that. 

Back to the discussion though.  I have had experiences like yours also, OFOTD where bass was overwhelming.  I've also found that xy doesn't cut the bass (at least not noticeable to my ears) but gives me a not too ideal (non realistic) soundstage,

Took the exact words right out of my mouth.  +T

plustee in twelve to you sir!

[OFOTD]

Well then if anyone has any suggestions on some sample configs to run I am all ears.  As my sig line states I have a full set of ck6x caps as well as 2 pairs of 480's.  Old Settlers is a great bluegrass festival and a GREAT place to experiment with taping.

The Healy method WILL be run.  Any other combinations anyone want to see run?

[SonicSound]

I have only been running 4-mic for the past 3 months (diffidently still experimenting).  I would say that I do like the results and would compare it to a focused NOS subcard recording.  I like the results I have had when using hypers (I am using mk41v > m222 which have a nice smooth off access response and warmth from the tubes) with onmi’s.  

On-stage/Stage lip: Split omni’s 3ft up to 15ft split Mixed with hyper dina, xy, or 70deg-2cm or figure-8 blumlein.  From my experience I have had the best results with 4ft split and using the hypers.

PA : Omni’s NOS or Blumlein mixed with hyper dina.  I am looking forward to the festivals this summer to try out some different configurations.  

[Gutbucket]

Do any of you running a center pair + split flanking mics ever move the center pair forward of the split pair (in a pseudo Decca tree config) or do you usually position all the mics in the same plane?

[OFOTD]

Do any of you running a center pair + split flanking mics ever move the center pair forward of the split pair (in a pseudo Decca tree config) or do you usually position all the mics in the same plane?

The front part of my center pair were/are only about 6" further forward than the split omnis if that helps.

[THE NIZ BIAAAAACH!]

I have been running 4 track for a while now and have found that most of the time 4 is better than two.

I have run a modified mid side with 2 cards at 180* and two subcards at 0*  TLG 10-31-06

4 X cards at the inside of the stacks and the outside.

cards at ortf subcards at the stack

cards dina, subcards split 6 feet to 12 ft

on stage cards flanking at 6 to 8 feet with subs in the center dina

My favorites have been the cards dina and split subcard tapes.  I have tryed runing a filter once, and would like to give it another go.  I would run the same config with two sets of mics and run a filter on both high pass on one set low pass on the other with a small cross over of frequencies. That way you could mix down the pairs in the same way that you eq.  A lot of people have said they are running ortf with splits, this makes no sense to me.  If you have a split pair, they will determine how wide your sound stage is, why not run the other pair at much tighter angles to dertime how focused your center and imageing is?

[mmmatt]

Nice thread guys.  most of the multi-pair mic stuff I have done was in addition to sbd to a multi rig, but I have played with the mics w/o the soundboard many times.  here are my suggestions fwiw.

Use at least one pair of omni's in the mix because they will be less prone to phase issues.

Don't diss the x/y as long as you are close to the source.  the advantage of the x/y is again the reduction of phase issues, and to my ears the image is awesome when on stage.  Although I've never run m/s or blumlien, I understand that this is also an advantage of these configs.

I did an entire 3 day festival with a pair of ld's x/y center stage, split omni's 100' back, 15' split at the foh, a pair of cards on the stage corners facing the audience (only had one pair of omni's unfortunately and used them for the splits), and a stereo sbd feed.  Most all the mixes were all 8 sources and I liked it a lot.  Alternatively, the foh omni's mixed well with any of the sources once the delay was dialed in.  Mixing too much of the stage sources however would drown out the vox so without the board it was a lot of omni but I like splits outdoors anyways.

The best 4 mic live mix I ever made however was indoor at a small venue.  I had ld's x/y on center stage (centered to instruments NOT the geographic center of the stage), and two omni's on the outside corners facing the audience.  I would do this again if I were to do a 4 mic live mix, and probably wouldn't try any other config unless the band had vocals.  In a multitrack configuration, I would do the split omni's from foh or wherever was convienient and then add delay in post.
     I ran heally one time FOB for MMW indoor as a 2chan and I hated it.  Crowd was too pronounced.  Applause nice and bright, and the music a bit muddy.  On stage however this might be a good way to keep the instruments up-front over the drum kit in a drum center type situation, so I always thought I would try it again.  I would be interested in how it works with a 4 mic mix, but my guess is it would be no big thrill.
   So for anyone trying this I will suggest you try the center config on stage (x/y, m/s, or blumlien) and omni's on the outside stage corners at the audience if it is an amplified, non-vocal band.  Or try a center stage pair mixed with splits from the rear/middle of the venue.  It is my understanding that putting mics right on the PA cabs and mixing that with another source is a good way to go, but I have yet to try that.  I bet that works wonderful when a band has vox and you can't get sbd access.

matt

[wbrisette]

Do any of you running a center pair + split flanking mics ever move the center pair forward of the split pair (in a pseudo Decca tree config) or do you usually position all the mics in the same plane?

I run same plane when I do this. There are a bunch of shows on archive that have been run in this config.


Wayne

[stirinthesauce]

Nice thread guys.  most of the multi-pair mic stuff I have done was in addition to sbd to a multi rig, but I have played with the mics w/o the soundboard many times.  here are my suggestions fwiw.

Use at least one pair of omni's in the mix because they will be less prone to phase issues.

Don't diss the x/y as long as you are close to the source.  the advantage of the x/y is again the reduction of phase issues, and to my ears the image is awesome when on stage.  Although I've never run m/s or blumlien, I understand that this is also an advantage of these configs.

I did an entire 3 day festival with a pair of ld's x/y center stage, split omni's 100' back, 15' split at the foh, a pair of cards on the stage corners facing the audience (only had one pair of omni's unfortunately and used them for the splits), and a stereo sbd feed.  Most all the mixes were all 8 sources and I liked it a lot.  Alternatively, the foh omni's mixed well with any of the sources once the delay was dialed in.  Mixing too much of the stage sources however would drown out the vox so without the board it was a lot of omni but I like splits outdoors anyways.

The best 4 mic live mix I ever made however was indoor at a small venue.  I had ld's x/y on center stage (centered to instruments NOT the geographic center of the stage), and two omni's on the outside corners facing the audience.  I would do this again if I were to do a 4 mic live mix, and probably wouldn't try any other config unless the band had vocals.  In a multitrack configuration, I would do the split omni's from foh or wherever was convienient and then add delay in post.
     I ran heally one time FOB for MMW indoor as a 2chan and I hated it.  Crowd was too pronounced.  Applause nice and bright, and the music a bit muddy.  On stage however this might be a good way to keep the instruments up-front over the drum kit in a drum center type situation, so I always thought I would try it again.  I would be interested in how it works with a 4 mic mix, but my guess is it would be no big thrill.
   So for anyone trying this I will suggest you try the center config on stage (x/y, m/s, or blumlien) and omni's on the outside stage corners at the audience if it is an amplified, non-vocal band.  Or try a center stage pair mixed with splits from the rear/middle of the venue.  It is my understanding that putting mics right on the PA cabs and mixing that with another source is a good way to go, but I have yet to try that.  I bet that works wonderful when a band has vox and you can't get sbd access.

matt

quick question about you running healy.  Where you using a true pressure transducer or a dual diaghramed mic (LD)?  I ask because I've read that this method only works with a pressure transducer.

I also have had mixed results, once in a club, the mix was just not what I wanted.  Once in very nice sounding theater style venue for panic, probably one of my top 5 pulls ever.  Oh, and once outdoors, great, hell fantastic results on the opener (Old Union, still havn't tracked it out yet) and NMAS as headliners that night.  The NMAS set was way to bass heavy, they had Chew way up in the mix and I used to much omni in the blend. 

[mmmatt]

quick question about you running healy.  Where you using a true pressure transducer or a dual diaghramed mic (LD)?  I ask because I've read that this method only works with a pressure transducer.

I also have had mixed results, once in a club, the mix was just not what I wanted.  Once in very nice sounding theater style venue for panic, probably one of my top 5 pulls ever.  Oh, and once outdoors, great, hell fantastic results on the opener (Old Union, still havn't tracked it out yet) and NMAS as headliners that night.  The NMAS set was way to bass heavy, they had Chew way up in the mix and I used to much omni in the blend. 

Well, the dual diaphragm omni's aren't supposed to work with a jdisk either but people throw their tl's on jdisks all the time and love it.  Either way though, I was running sp c4's, so it was a true omni.  We were even in front of the sweet-spot way FOB and you would think that would help, but it still sucked ass IMO.

. 

I have often thought that maybe the method is best for omni's that have limited high-end response so you can bump the highs without making the crowd sound wierd... I tried EQ on this recording and once I got the music where I liked it, the crowd was overly abrasive in the highs, so I never even tracked out the show (mmw sucks to track anyways!), the 393 source above me was pretty good so why bother.  Once I started running splits I never looked back though... I love split omni's either outdoors or on stage.  I just decieded if I ever do heally again it will be on a large stage, with a amplified band, with drum kit centered, where I can move up close to the kit.  In that case I wouldn't mind having the center of the image a little duller.  I'm sure some people like the heally, but it just isn't for me.  I like crisp sound, and in my limited experience, this doesn't deliver it.

matt

[boa]

I use DPA4061 omnis spread 36" with MG 21 hypers in the center. I run the hypers in either A/B, DINA or ORTF. I love the way these two sound together.

[mmmatt]

David (OFOTD) brought up a good point about my experience with healy method.  Maybe using it as part of a 4 (or 3) mic config would be OK.  I wonder a bit about the 1/2 out of phase healy mixed with a normal config, but I guess it is worth a try.  Omni's of course have minimal problems with phase so I guess we'll see if he runs it.  The question at hand however is if the image produced by healy is worthy of manipulating with additional mics.  I dug up the master on that mmw show so you can all decide for yourselves.  I found a chunk that had some stereo effects as well as some crowd response so you can hear the full gamut.  I wish I still had a copy of the 393 source for comparison.  It really was far better in all aspects IMO.  Either way attached is a sample.  This is per the pic above c4 omni healy > dmod ua5 > jb3 @16/44

Matt

[stirinthesauce]

David (OFOTD) brought up a good point about my experience with healy method.  Maybe using it as part of a 4 (or 3) mic config would be OK.  I wonder a bit about the 1/2 out of phase healy mixed with a normal config, but I guess it is worth a try.  Omni's of course have minimal problems with phase so I guess we'll see if he runs it.  The question at hand however is if the image produced by healy is worthy of manipulating with additional mics.  I dug up the master on that mmw show so you can all decide for yourselves.  I found a chunk that had some stereo effects as well as some crowd response so you can hear the full gamut.  I wish I still had a copy of the 393 source for comparison.  It really was far better in all aspects IMO.  Either way attached is a sample.  This is per the pic above c4 omni healy > dmod ua5 > jb3 @16/44

Matt

Thanks for the sample.  To me, sounded unfocused, definitly a situation for directional mics. 

Here is an example of mics healy (avenson audio sto-2), cards DIN (Peluso cemc6 ck4) last October 15 in Chattanooga for Panic.

Ran this config 4 times, twice came out fantastic, twice less than fantastic.  This is, IMO, a fantastic example of what this config can do.

http://www.mediafire.com/?4qekzorknqh

[mmmatt]

Thanks for the sample.  To me, sounded unfocused, definitly a situation for directional mics. 

Here is an example of mics healy (avenson audio sto-2), cards DIN (Peluso cemc6 ck4) last October 15 in Chattanooga for Panic.

Ran this config 4 times, twice came out fantastic, twice less than fantastic.  This is, IMO, a fantastic example of what this config can do.

http://www.mediafire.com/?4qekzorknqh

That sounds great Jon.  That was 4 mics then, or just the healy?


matt

[stirinthesauce]

Thanks for the sample.  To me, sounded unfocused, definitly a situation for directional mics. 

Here is an example of mics healy (avenson audio sto-2), cards DIN (Peluso cemc6 ck4) last October 15 in Chattanooga for Panic.

Ran this config 4 times, twice came out fantastic, twice less than fantastic.  This is, IMO, a fantastic example of what this config can do.

http://www.mediafire.com/?4qekzorknqh

That sounds great Jon.  That was 4 mics then, or just the healy?


matt

4 mics.  Peluso's into w+mod ua-5, avenson's>v3>rca in w+mod>jb3.  Kept the omni down in the mix, probaby peaked at -12 to -10db at the most.