Topic: LDC from the section

[Jhurlbs81]

Hey All-

Wanted to pick everyone's brains for advice on running LDC from the section in an arena.  I've never used LDC mics before and really don't know much about how they differ sound quality wise.  From looking through some older posts, I've read comments like "they're not as detailed, but they're deep and smooth sounding".

My friend at Telefunken USA has a new pair of LDC they're beta testing and he  asked if I would run them at Phish MSG in December.  Should I run them like I would my small diaphragm condensers?  DINa hypers/ DIN card/PAS?  What do you think.  My seats are pretty much dead nuts center, at FOH. 


Thanks for your thoughts,
Jesse

[JiB97]

if you look for tapes made by a taper named "padelimike" he  tapes using the AKG 414 and I've taped with him at MSG when he was using that setup.

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=561062  is one of his Phish recordings from 2012 at MSG using 414 hypers pointed at the stacks

[goodcooker]

In that room from that location I would def run hypercardioid either DINa or PAS.

[Gutbucket]

In general, the primary difference with LDCs used in this way is their less consistent off-axis polar behavior compared to an SDC of the same pattern.  Other differences you may notice are apt to be less categorical in nature and more attributable to differences between specific mics.

I'd suggest hypers/PAS.. with sufficient spacing between them to compensate for the very narrow PAS angle from that recording location.

That likely means as much spacing as you can achieve with the bar you are using.  Here's the simplified version of the improved PAS table for super/hypercards-



From the photo, I'll guess at a PAS angle of about 60 degrees total, but may even be less.  Optimal spacing for a PAS angle of 60 degrees is 48cm = 19".  However, you probably won't be able get them that wide (or maybe unwilling to do so). In that case, just push them out as wide as you can on the bar you are using and point a bit wider, outside of the stacks instead of directly at the stacks.

Here's the link to the later "improved PAS table" with more far more info, but the one above is easiest to read and interpret- http://taperssection.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=167549.0;attach=113567;image
And here's the discussion thread where both were posted- http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=167549.0

[Jhurlbs81]

Awesome, guys.  Thanks for all the replies!

[Fried Chicken Boy]

The conservative in me agrees with what everyone else has said so far: hypers in a PAS config.  That's a safe bet and you'll likely get a good tape. 

But the experimenter in me, looking at where you'll be situated in the venue (nearly dead-center and away from the walls), says you should be running Blumlein if figure-8 is a pattern option with the Telefunken LDCs.  Believe it or not, MSG sounds better than you would expect and is actually a pretty good sounding venue for it's size.  If you have the ability to record 4 tracks, you could always run a second set of mics in hyper/PAS, etc. as a backup, but I doubt it would be necessary.  If we could successfully run AKG 414s in Blumlein at Terminal 5, which can arguably be one of the worst sounding rooms in NYC, then I think you could pull some Blumlein heat from your spot in MSG.  My .02, YMMV, and all that ...

[Gutbucket]

Thanks FCB, looking forward to giving that a listen when I get a chance.

Could work, anything is possible, but it's too far back for Blumlein IME&O.  If feeling compelled to do something similar to that, consider running X/Y hypers with a bit more angle (say 110 degrees) instead of X/Y 8s at 90 degrees, which will provide a similar coincident phase-free stereo feel to Blumlein, with considerably more openness and ambient width than X/Y cardioids, but with a bit room reverberance and a more forward bias.  Those are two things I'm pretty sure you are going to want recording from that position.

Sure, PAS is a rather conservative taper technique as traditionally done, but the spacings suggested by the improved PAS table are pretty damn radical compared to how it is usually done.  If I'm off on assessing the angle between PA stacks as seen from the recording position indicated in the photo, and in actuality the angle is smaller than 60 degrees (which is entirely likely), these become the suggested spacings:

50 degrees between stacks, suggested spacing of 33"!
40 degrees between stacks, suggested spacing of 46"!!

And for most tapers, that's a more radical experiment than Blumlein!

[edit- remember that the width of a fist held at arms length, squinted at using one eye, covers about 10 degrees of arc, so 6 adjacent fists = 60 degrees approximately]

[second edit- a simplified explanation of the reasoning behind improved PAS table is this: the rapidly increasing spacing between mics as the angle between them grows narrower and narrower is what counters the tendency of PAS to be overly mono-phonic and narrow sounding, while still retaining the direct clarity of pointing the mics directly at the stacks.  Blumlein is excellent at enveloping and wide-sounding stereo, but has no forward preference or "reach" at all.  It is sensitive to pickup of sound arriving from all horizontal directions equally.]

[acidjack]

The conservative in me agrees with what everyone else has said so far: hypers in a PAS config.  That's a safe bet and you'll likely get a good tape. 

But the experimenter in me, looking at where you'll be situated in the venue (nearly dead-center and away from the walls), says you should be running Blumlein if figure-8 is a pattern option with the Telefunken LDCs.  Believe it or not, MSG sounds better than you would expect and is actually a pretty good sounding venue for it's size.  If you have the ability to record 4 tracks, you could always run a second set of mics in hyper/PAS, etc. as a backup, but I doubt it would be necessary.  If we could successfully run AKG 414s in Blumlein at Terminal 5, which can arguably be one of the worst sounding rooms in NYC, then I think you could pull some Blumlein heat from your spot in MSG.  My .02, YMMV, and all that ...

Technical reality aside, all I can add is that JFCB speaks the truth here... We ran a slew of mics at that show, Blumlein mostly just for kicks. It was a terrible situation for it -- not quite centered, back of a bad sounding room. I think it would be pretty interesting in MSG.

I don't tape in MSG much, but I've seen Scott Bernstein run from that spot with LDC cards before and thought the recording was quite good. Phish also has some of the absolute best FOH in the business, so I'd assume the sound in that spot will be awesome.

The other thing about LDCs is I believe that whole "inconsistent off-axis response" thing partly contributes to a lot of their hyper patterns not being quite as good. Certainly I did not like the sound of it with my 414s.

[Gutbucket]

Good points.  Although I've run the ADK TLs and the Peluso P-Stereo (both LDs) in Blumlein from in back as well as on stage, I've only really run the TLs in hyper on stage or stage-lip in various spaced configs, and not from further back in the room.

Want to get really experimentally radical if the hyper pattern of them isn't all that?  Try figure-8s PAS!  Just space them a bit less than PAS table suggests for hypercards, or as wide as you dare or can go on a narrow bar.  Full pickup to the front and rear, minimal from the sides.

[Fried Chicken Boy]

^  I like the way you think out of the box, GB.   And, radical as it may be for some, the PAS table you reference makes a lot of sense. 

[DSatz]

All multi-pattern LDCs, in fact nearly all LDCs in general, are dual-diaphragm microphones--a fact that has at least as much influence on sound quality as the diaphragm size.

Many people confuse the two--particularly the notion of being "warmer" or having more bass (particularly in the cardioid setting), which really comes from the fact that dual-diaphragm cardioids (regardless of size) don't maintain their directivity at low frequencies. In other words, they pick up low frequencies from a wider angle of acceptance than midrange frequencies. The effect, in a normal indoor environment, is to pick up more bass altogether, and for the low-frequency end of the recording to be somewhat more reverberant.

That's an advantage for many types of studio recording--it can make a solo voice seem "bigger"--and LDCs (as spot or soloist microphones) are a very important part of studio recording technique for just that reason.

But that same characteristic is a disadvantage for making stereo recordings with a pair of coincident or closely-spaced cardioids, since it reduces the stereo information (i.e. the difference between the signals in the two channels) at low frequencies; the feeling of spaciousness deteriorates.

I nearly always record with small-diaphragm microphones, but about ten years ago I made a series of recordings with a pair of closely-spaced Neumann TLM 103 that were angled rather widely apart--definitely greater than 120 degrees. Those are large-diaphragm/single-diaphragm cardioids, so their pattern doesn't "spread out" in the bass. I don't see a lot of people here claiming to use those microphones and I wonder why not; they're very good value for the price. If the idea of using cardioid LDCs appeals to a person, I think the TLM 103 would be a good choice.

--best regards

[noahbickart]

In general, the primary difference with LDCs used in this way is their less consistent off-axis polar behavior compared to an SDC of the same pattern.  Other differences you may notice are apt to be less categorical in nature and more attributable to differences between specific mics.

I'd suggest hypers/PAS.. with sufficient spacing between them to compensate for the very narrow PAS angle from that recording location.

That likely means as much spacing as you can achieve with the bar you are using.  Here's the simplified version of the improved PAS table for super/hypercards-



From the photo, I'll guess at a PAS angle of about 60 degrees total, but may even be less.  Optimal spacing for a PAS angle of 60 degrees is 48cm = 19".  However, you probably won't be able get them that wide (or maybe unwilling to do so). In that case, just push them out as wide as you can on the bar you are using and point a bit wider, outside of the stacks instead of directly at the stacks.

Here's the link to the later "improved PAS table" with more far more info, but the one above is easiest to read and interpret- http://taperssection.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=167549.0;attach=113567;image
And here's the discussion thread where both were posted- http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=167549.0

This chart looks like it is for cardioid microphones, as the shaded block is DIN, do you have a chart like this for hypers?

[Gutbucket]

Hey Noah,

The link in that post (here- http://taperssection.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=167549.0;attach=113567;image) points to a more extensive table which substitutes supers/hypers for cardioids. 

Supers or hypers will use a bit less spacing than cardioids to achieve a similar PAS=SRA.

In addition to substituting supers/hypers for cardioids, the more extensive table lists four spacing options for each PAS angle instead of just one.  That provides the option to vary the Stereo Recording Angle of the configuration from 20 degrees wider to 10 degrees narrower than the PAS/mic angle by adjustment of the mic spacing.  For the equivalent of the simple table where the angle between microphones always = PAS = SRA, just use the spacing indicated in the rows which contain SRA = stack angle in the column titled "SRA Note", and ignore the rows which contain SRA = +20 outside, SRA = +10 outside and SRA = -10 degrees inside in the "SRA Note" column.

I included those additional spacing options for a three reasons:
1) If someone finds the table useful and ends up using it regularly, they may find after a while that they prefer a slightly wider or narrower SRA than the stack angle.  The extra options make it easy to tweak the SRA in either direction, in an accurate and repeatable way.
2) Many typical mic bars won't go wide enough to achieve the spacing indicated, or are constrained to certain spacings, and the option of a narrower mic spacing (producing a somewhat wider SRA than the PAS angle) may be the only practical solution for the taper.  The +10 and +20 options help accommodate that, while accurately indicating how different the SRA will actually be.
3) As an indication of how significant the changes in mic spacing become when the mic angle is held constant and the desired SRA is increased or decreased incrementally.

Here's the table-

[OhioHead]

Wow, this is an informative thread!

Going to use my LDC's (single pattern) for the 1st time next week to tape SCI and WSP on the 10/27.......anybody have any photo's of the various suggest set ups?

[JiB97]

Wow, this is an informative thread!

Going to use my LDC's (single pattern) for the 1st time next week to tape SCI and WSP on the 10/27.......anybody have any photo's of the various suggest set ups?

http://taperssection.com/reference/images/JasonB%20LD%20Mic%20Configs/

[Jhurlbs81]

grabbing a 24" bar to get the 19" spacing.  I'll report back..

[chk]

Regarding Blumlein at msg, there are outstanding dead tapes from the sweet spot running the soundfield st250. Pretty much the whole '93 run. Check them out on the archive. They smoke

[Gutbucket]

Regarding Blumlein at msg, there are outstanding dead tapes from the sweet spot running the soundfield st250. Pretty much the whole '93 run. Check them out on the archive. They smoke

Is the virtual coincident-stereo microphone pair configuration indicated as Blumlein in the recording notes for these?

[Fried Chicken Boy]

^^  I can't speak for the Dead tapes from '93, but here's a pretty nice Black Crowes recording from '96 where Ron Keyser was running the ST250 in Blumlein. > http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=529698  In a venue where the acoustics could be as bad, if not worse, than Terminal 5 in NYC (I saw quite a number of gigs at the Capitol Ballroom, including this Crowes show) this pull sounds better than it ought to and was the impetus to get me to try Blumlein a handful of times.  The notes also indicate "FOB" and to the best of my recollection Ron was right in front of the board and not deep down in the thick of the pit.  Then again, it was a pretty hazy evening.

[chk]

blumlein at msg: https://archive.org/details/gd93-09-22.ST250s.brennecke-young.4533.sbeok.shnf

[Jhurlbs81]

"13th row, center?"

[ts]

"13th row, center?"

Could be wrong, memory is a bit hazy, but I think Section 2 in 1993 was front center, not back of floor like today.

[chk]

Correct. This was fob sweet spot.

[Gutbucket]

Just listened.
Good one.  Good spot for it.

I can confirm section 2 was DFC when I was there a few times in the late 80'.