Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Backwards DIN  (Read 2283 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kuba e

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • *
  • Posts: 322
  • Gender: Male
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2019, 11:19:31 AM »
It looks like they wanted to run xy, but they have no spacer to elevate one mic. The microphones block each other high frequencies coming from the sides. Maybe there are some unwanted reflections too. But I don't think it sounds very different from the correct xy.

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 333
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2019, 12:49:06 AM »
I tend to stick to things that I know will give me the result I'm looking for based on previous experience but I definitely do not stick to the conventional wisdom all the time.

Yes, I totally agree with this. Some rooms desire strange solutions I have found.

It looks like they wanted to run xy, but they have no spacer to elevate one mic. The microphones block each other high frequencies coming from the sides. Maybe there are some unwanted reflections too. But I don't think it sounds very different from the correct xy.

I am thinking along the same lines about "wanting" to run X/Y. I am not sure how many high freqs are getting blocked though, SDCs are fairly small sound walls.

Thanks for the input everyone, I would like more. My historian/anthropological brain got the best of me recently and I figured there has to be some illogical or experiential reason folks are setting up this way. By folks, I say that in uncommon observation. The fact I have never heard a recording from this setup from shows I have been to is saying something, I would like to. If they sound good, great! I am just amazed that someone can spend so much money on gear and can't buy a riser. We are a weird bunch, hobbyist, and that brings out personal idiosyncrasies amateur hobbyist persuasions do. I guess I need to run two rigs and figure this one out.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2019, 08:52:48 AM »
As long as the capsule diaphragms are kept relatively tight together it probably won't matter too much for X/Y.  Note that the X/Y arrangement of internal mics on handheld recorders is frequently setup that way because its easier to fit the microphones next to each other rather than one atop the other in that small format.  Essentially, issues of practical setup dominate over the minor influences in sound pickup.

However, in a near spaced setup such an arrangement will cause the level-difference between channels to contradict with the time-of-arrival difference between channels rather than accentuating each other in the way near-spaced configurations are intended to work.   Same if using shotgun mics that way since the diaphragm is located at back of the interference tube and if arranged such that the front ends of the tubes are coincident, the back ends of the tubes where the diaphragms are located will be spaced apart to the opposite side in relation to the level difference imparted by the pickup pattern directionality.

What will be the influence on the sound?  Tonally, such an arrangement should not have much if any affect in comparison to the same spacing between capsules with the mics angled the other way.  It is imaging aspects where one would expect to hear a difference.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline noahbickart

  • phishrabbi
  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (32)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2379
  • Gender: Male
  • So now I wander over grounds of light...
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2019, 09:19:53 AM »
This thread would be more useful with audio.....
Recording:
Capsules: Schoeps mk41v (x2), mk22 (x2), mk3 (x2), mk21 & mk8
Cables: 2x nbob KCY, 1 pair nbob actives, GAKables 10' & 20' 6-channel snakes, Darktrain 2 & 4 channel KCY and mini xlr extensions:
Preamps:    Schoeps VMS 02iub, Naiant IPA, Sound Devices Mixpre6 I
Recorders: Sound Devices Mixpre6 I, Sony PCM m10

Home Playback: Mac Mini> Mytek Brooklyn+> McIntosh MC162> Eminent Tech LFT-16; Musical Fidelity xCan v2> Hifiman HE-4XX / Beyerdynamic DT880

Office Playback: iMac> Grace m903> AKG k701 / Hifiman HE-400

Offline kuba e

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • *
  • Posts: 322
  • Gender: Male
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #19 on: December 10, 2019, 06:18:29 AM »
Thanks for input Gutbucket and for pointing to the problem with near spaced setup. It never occurred to me that there is a hidden problem. When I forget the raiser, I know what to watch out for.

Limit35, I remember Gutbucket answered this in the past. An object that has a dimension of 1/4 wavelength of sound is already starting affects that sound. For example: The mic's diameter is 0.8''. Then sound of frequency 4200Hz and higher (wavelength 3.2'' and lower) is starting to be affected by the mic's body. In our particular case, this is a trifle because the paired mic only influence the side sound. Direct sound is not affected.
http://www.mcsquared.com/wavelength.htm
Just teoretically, this is the reason why omni patterns are directional at high frequencies.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2019, 08:02:08 AM by kuba e »

Offline mjwin

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Gender: Male
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #20 on: December 10, 2019, 01:08:43 PM »
At a local classical music festival a few years ago, just out of curiosity I was peering at the mics flown above the stage. They appeared to be AKG C414s, but were arranged in a strange config.  Spacing was approximately ORTF (around 20cm), but each mic was pointing inwards, so that their axes crossed in just the manner described above.  I studied the arrangement for quite a while before starting to feel quite embarrassed on behalf of the recordist!  I can't help wondering how it actually sounded, but probably no one ever noticed: these recordings are for archival purposes only, with the mics set up & remaining in the same configuration for the whole of the week long festival...   

This thread would be more useful with audio.....
Yeah, it would be interesting to try sometime: use a second pair of mics & deliberately get it wrong!

For a lot of recordings the imaging  isn't that important.  But I'm curious to know whether it would manifest itself as "so-so imaging", or "something bad is happening here".

Offline morst

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4040
  • (see snopes.com for more info)
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #21 on: December 10, 2019, 03:58:10 PM »
At a local classical music festival a few years ago, just out of curiosity I was peering at the mics flown above the stage. They appeared to be AKG C414s, but were arranged in a strange config.  Spacing was approximately ORTF (around 20cm), but each mic was pointing inwards, so that their axes crossed in just the manner described above.  I studied the arrangement for quite a while before starting to feel quite embarrassed on behalf of the recordist!
What would make that sound bad? Shadowing? You'd have a hole in the middle if you didn't cross them!? #OrtfHole
hey now!

Offline mjwin

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Gender: Male
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2019, 05:13:27 PM »
At a local classical music festival a few years ago, just out of curiosity I was peering at the mics flown above the stage. They appeared to be AKG C414s, but were arranged in a strange config.  Spacing was approximately ORTF (around 20cm), but each mic was pointing inwards, so that their axes crossed in just the manner described above.  I studied the arrangement for quite a while before starting to feel quite embarrassed on behalf of the recordist!
What would make that sound bad? Shadowing? You'd have a hole in the middle if you didn't cross them!? #OrtfHole

Sorry if i didn't make myself clear. What I should have said was that, in my example,  the right-hand mic was pointing left, and the left-hand mic pointing right. 

Because the mics were spaced at around 20cm, although sounds coming from the right would reach the right-hand mic first, they would actually be louder in the left-hand mic since it was pointing that way (and vice-versa). So the level difference and arrival time difference would  give  opposite directional information, and so potentially lead to poor, or weird sounding(?) spatialization. As I said, I don't know how bad it would sound in practice, even if the problem would be audible when listening casually.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2019, 05:16:43 PM by mjwin »

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #23 on: December 10, 2019, 05:55:12 PM »
At a local classical music festival a few years ago, just out of curiosity I was peering at the mics flown above the stage. They appeared to be AKG C414s, but were arranged in a strange config.  Spacing was approximately ORTF (around 20cm), but each mic was pointing inwards, so that their axes crossed in just the manner described above.  I studied the arrangement for quite a while before starting to feel quite embarrassed on behalf of the recordist!
What would make that sound bad? Shadowing? You'd have a hole in the middle if you didn't cross them!? #OrtfHole

Shadowing effect is one concern, conflicting imaging cues is another, different concern.

Not sure what you mean by the part in bold, which is not the case.
If it is ORTF teh microphones are presumably angled (crossed?) with an angle of 110° between them.
If they aren't angled apart at all, it's a narrow A-B setup.
 
The problem is crossing them such that the level cues tend pull the left side sources to the left on playback, while the timing cues pull the same sounds to the right on playback.  If they aren't crossed but angled outwards, the level cues and timing cues both work together to pull a left located source to the left side on playback without conflicting each other.  Hole in the middle isn't really an ORTF thing when done properly, although the center can have less definition and clarity in situations where ORTF isn't the best choice.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2019, 06:48:12 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #24 on: December 10, 2019, 06:45:33 PM »
In thinking about all this, it occurs to me that imaging conflicts between stereo pair spacing (time cues) and angling (level cues) will be most significant with regards to near-spaced microphone configurations, and won't negatively affect coincident nor wide-spaced AB configuration imaging to the same degree.

With respect to coincident arrangements, even though one should strive for the maximum practical coincidence and preferably err toward mics pointing away from each other rather than across each other when not vertically arranged (one placed directly above the other), lack of perfect coincidence is more likely to affect things tonally (via combing determined by the non-coincident distance between microphones) and in a general sense of producing less sharp imaging rather than causing an outright conflict between perceptual imaging cues.  Maximum time of arrival difference between channels of a close but not perfectly coincident arrangement can be significant enough to produce combing at higher frequencies, while not being large enough to produce a significant perceptual image shift.

It also won't matter much for very (overly?) widely spaced arrangements, where angling the microphones inwards can actually help unify central pickup and solidify the middle by placing center sources more on-axis with both microphones and by reducing the level difference between channels for off-center sources to some degree.

For the most part, in both the coincident and wide-spaced cases perceptual imaging is dominated by one imaging cue over the other.

Its near-spaced configurations where two relevant aspects come into play:
1) Near spaced configs are intended to achieve a certain degree of balance between timing cues and level cues- both are intended to work together.  This makes direct conflict between the two types of cues are problematic, at least with regard to imaging.
2) And now I can't remember the other one.. uh, time to go eat.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline kuba e

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • *
  • Posts: 322
  • Gender: Male
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #25 on: December 11, 2019, 01:03:09 PM »
Unfortunately I have no idea what should be the second aspect for near-spaced configuration.  But I would like to ask about the combing.

Maximum time of arrival difference between channels of a close but not perfectly coincident arrangement can be significant enough to produce combing at higher frequencies, while not being large enough to produce a significant perceptual image shift.

Do you mean to produce the combing because summing stereo to mono? Or is it combing because some unwanted reflection?

It also won't matter much for very (overly?) widely spaced arrangements, where angling the microphones inwards can actually help unify central pickup and solidify the middle by placing center sources more on-axis with both microphones and by reducing the level difference between channels for off-center sources to some degree.

This thread remind me one of my older recording. I know that tapers don't use cardiods in AB configuration. I tried it only one time. It was for PA music in small club. I pointed the mics at the stack, almost parallel. Spacing was near, about 12'.  The recording was not good, the stereo image had solid center but no sides. I rescued it by changing Mid/Sid ratio in DAW.
But maybe wide AB cardiods should do better results. Sometimes I am using wide AB omnis with one cardiod mic or two coincident in the center. When the acoustic in the club is bad or I am not in a good location, I can mix only very little of omni pair in the final track.  I wanted to try a wide AB cardiods. Wondering if they would behave better in a room with poor acoustics and let me to mix wide spaced pair more in the final track.

Offline EmRR

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 518
    • ElectroMagnetic Radiation Recorders
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #26 on: December 11, 2019, 01:32:06 PM »
Reminds me of my one experiment with PAS near coincident shotguns in a medium sized room.  Strange imaging.  Yeah, that’s a bit apples to oranges. 
Mics: DPA 4060 w/MPS 6030 PSU/DAD6001/DAD4099, Neumann KM 131, KMR 81i, Oktava MK 012, Sennheiser MKH 105, MKH 20, MKH 30, MKH 40, MKH 800 TWIN, lots of other studio appropriate choices
Recorders: Zoom F8n, Sony MZ-R50, portable MOTU based multitrack DAW for client work

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #27 on: December 11, 2019, 01:39:36 PM »
Do you mean to produce the combing because summing stereo to mono? Or is it combing because some unwanted reflection?

Yes the two channels summing together, yet not electrical summing (mixing) which is the more straightforward case and how it is normally thought about, but rather at the ears when listening over speakers.  Likely to be perceived as some high-frequency cancellation or fuzzier high frequency imaging of center content.. if it is audible.

Quote
This thread remind me one of my older recording. I know that tapers don't use cardiods in AB configuration. I tried it only one time. It was for PA music in small club. I pointed the mics at the stack, almost parallel. Spacing was near, about 12'.  The recording was not good, the stereo image had solid center but no sides. I rescued it by changing Mid/Sid ratio in DAW.
Makes sense that 12 inch parallel spacing would not produce much stereo width when recording from a distance, and that increasing M/S Side ratio could help that.
 
Quote
But maybe wide AB cardiods should do better results. Sometimes I am using wide AB omnis with one cardiod mic or two coincident in the center. When the acoustic in the club is bad or I am not in a good location, I can mix only very little of omni pair in the final track.  I wanted to try a wide AB cardiods. Wondering if they would behave better in a room with poor acoustics and let me to mix wide spaced pair more in the final track.
Sounds like a good plan. Give that a try sometime.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #28 on: December 11, 2019, 01:58:08 PM »
Reminds me of my one experiment with PAS near coincident shotguns in a medium sized room.  Strange imaging.  Yeah, that’s a bit apples to oranges.

I can see that. I have not tried but have suggested PAS coincident shotguns as a way of maximizing direct-sound pickup from a stereo PA while minimizing the phase-interaction-weirdness of a stereo pair of shotguns, ideally combined with a less directional wide pair contributing good decorrelated indirect / ambient / room / audience sound that would also help bury the off-axis misbehaviors of the shotguns.  I suspect that might respond well to a re-adjustment of stereo-width of the coincident PAS shotgun pair in the mix in a way similar to how kuba e corrected his near-spaced parallel cardioid pair.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: Backwards DIN
« Reply #29 on: December 11, 2019, 02:03:25 PM »
^ Really just a special case of a wide-spaced omni pair + X/Y PAS center pair.  Even if the wide-pair aren't actually omnis.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.061 seconds with 56 queries.
© 2002-2020 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF