For anyone lurking, or wondering what the OMT hubbub is all about, Rocksuitcase and Kindms's recording of JGB with Melvin Seals last Sat is an excellent example of what this technique is capable of, and is in my opinion indeed quite kickass! Its comparatively easier to make a recording of this quality from well FOB in the sweet spot, but not so easy from 50' back near the back of the room in an indoor hall.
Link to that recording (again)-
https://archive.org/details/jgb2018-03-24.akgck3_ck22What I noticed between the two days differing setups is the wide spread omnis certainly have more "uniqueness" to the signal with very little correlation between the two channels.
Yes, exactly. Low correlation between the wide omnis providing the big open ambience, fat bottom, and a nicely diffuse representation of the audience + High correlation between the coincident PAS hyper center pair providing clear focus and imaging of the direct sound from the PA and stage.. with the right amount of blend between the them. Two complementary pieces of the puzzle which go hand in hand and work especially well in combination partly because they are
sufficiently different enough from each other. This is the core essence from which the technique is constructed - each part contributes something different, and no part works optimally on its own without the other (which is the necessary leap of faith in really taking the technique to the next level and making the most of it), so that in combination the sum of the separate elements produces something greater than any of the individual parts.
That
leap of faith thing is the tough part, yet is essential to really wring the most from OMT. It's much more comfortable to build upon 2-channel stereo techniques we've a preference for from personal experience and general practice, which are certainly true for for 2-channel recording in general (things like near-spaced stereo pairs in the center, wider X/Y angles in the center, pointing all the mics toward the stage, not overly-wide omni spreads, etc). It's really ingrained in us. I still find myself convincing myself to push further outside the envelope of "known good" stereo practice sometimes with regards to advancing the technique further in pursuit of the sound, man, the sound!
I gave a quick listen to the Friday GGW for comparison, and yes the difference in sound quality in PA optimization is apparent. I can mentally "listen around" that when listening for other attributes of the recording which correspond the differences in your recording setup over the two days and I suspect others reading this can mentally do the same, as long as I know what variables didn't change. With that in mind, can you clarify a bit on what was different other than the much wider omni spacing (15' verses 42"), the bands themselves, and the PA optimization?
Seems you were quite close to the same recording location both days.
Center X/Y pair in PAS both days? (same approximate 50 degree angle between mics to PAS both days or are you saying you made it a bit tighter on Saturday than on Friday?)
^Just want to make sure before I draw conclusions.
BTW for folks reading, there is more discussion on these two recordings and photos of the setups used in this alternate thread-
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=185887.msg2259795#msg2259795 And here's 'Suitcase's photo from that thread showing the 15' split omnis + PAS hyper center pair setup used to make this recording-
