Topic: My DIY bar for an alternate Tony Faulker array

[bryonsos]

SGTM - sounds good to me.

[alpine85]

I must be getting dyslexic in my old age... it's not actually 65 cm that I've been using on my omni spread, it's 56 cm!!

I found the document that I based this on:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Mic-University/Stereo-Techniques/AB-Stereo.aspx

The whole thing is definitely worth reading, but here's the relevant section:

Microphone spacing

An important consideration when setting up for A-B stereo recordings is the distance between the two microphones. Since the acoustic character of the stereo recording is very much a question of taste, it is impossible to give fast rules for stereo microphone spacing, although it is a good idea to keep some important acoustic factors in mind.

Since the stereo width of a recording is frequency-dependent, the deeper the tonal qualities you wish to reproduce in stereo, the wider your microphone spacing should be. Using a recommended microphone spacing of a quarter of the wavelength of the deepest tone, and taking into account the human ear's reduced ability to localise frequencies below 150Hz, leads to an optimal microphone spacing of between 40 and 60 cm. Smaller microphone spacings are often used close to sound-sources to prevent the sound image of a particular musical instrument from becoming "too wide" and unnatural. Spacings down to 17 to 20 cm are detectable by the human ear, as this distance is equivalent to the distance between the two ears themselves.

[alpine85]

I'm still curious about the 67cm number that Faulkner used (btw - maybe we could call this the Faulkner Tree?  Faulkner Split?  Faulkner Spread?)

Maybe it's the space BETWEEN the center and outer mics that he's interested in --- interesting that the difference between 67 and 17 is 50 (exactly in the middle of that 40-60 range)

[dlh]

I watched part of the interview again. Tony Faulkner mentions 66.5 cm spacing on the omnis with a sub cardioid 10 cm in from each one.  While he says this, he's holding his index fingers slightly outward.  So part of my memory was wrong and I'm "definitely unsure" about the config of the two cards.  Must be 46.5 cm between them, but are they angled or straight on?  He does say when questioned about xy, " . . . no, I face the race . . .".  It's at 17:00 into the interview.  More info is better.  Ideas?

Thanks
Dave

[Gutbucket]

I watched part of the interview again. Tony Faulkner mentions 66.6 cm spacing on the omnis with a sub cardioid 10 cm in from each one.  While he says this, he's holding his index fingers slightly outward.  So part of my memory was wrong and I'm "definitely unsure" about the config of the two cards.  Must be 46.5 cm between them, but are they angled or straight on?  He does say when questioned about xy, " . . . no, I face the race . . .".  It's at 17:00 into the interview.  More info is better.  Ideas?

Thanks
Dave

I just watched it again..  Listening carefully, when asked if he uses X/Y he doesn't say "No, I face the race" but "No, phased arrays", that he arrived at the spacing empirically and it's a starting point (also mentions Onno Scholtze of Phillips using a similar spacing). From the way he describes the 'reach into the band' the array provides from the antenna-like forward 3dB gain of the 'phased array' and the the way he balances the timbre of the live mix between the omni pair and the wide card pair- "fat and boomy or thin and scratchy, or a bit of each" I get the impression he mostly points them all forward as two sets of A-B spaced pairs, but maybe not.. probably doesn't angle them much anyway.

I also caught all kinds of other stuff I missed watching it last time- like the part where asked about compression around 16:00 and he talks about setting threshold down -20dB or lower and using a minimal 1.3:1 ratio.  Heh, I caught it this time since something like a 1.2:1 ratio with a low threshold is what's been working nice and transparently for me to bring out details without squashing everything.

[Hypnocracy]

Trying to find the interview with Faulker...is this the one?

http://www.rodetv.com/iwal/interview-with-a-legend-tony-faulkner/

he speaks of two Omni's at 67cm and ORTF Pair in the center at around 33 min in...

Here is a Mix using the BPA (BryonsosPhasedArray) at Donna the Buffalo Thursday night: DFC of Soundboard AKG 460b CK61 PAS/NOS & NAK CM300 CP3 JBMod on 1meter space bar

http://www.archive.org/download/donna2012-01-19.mix_AKG461_CM300CP3/dtb01191210.mp3

[dlh]

Trying to find the interview with Faulker...is this the one?

http://www.rodetv.com/iwal/interview-with-a-legend-tony-faulkner/

he speaks of two Omni's at 67cm and ORTF Pair in the center at around 33 min in...

Here is a Mix using the BPA (BryonsosPhasedArray) at Donna the Buffalo Thursday night: DFC of Soundboard AKG 460b CK61 PAS/NOS & NAK CM300 CP3 JBMod on 1meter space bar

http://www.archive.org/download/donna2012-01-19.mix_AKG461_CM300CP3/dtb01191210.mp3

This is the one I'm referring to:
http://www.recordproduction.com/tony-faulkner.htm

[Hypnocracy]

Screen shot for Gutbucket from the Rode interview at 33:42



If he is AB'ing it...this is some dis-information

[dlh]

Thanks, Hynocracy.
Maybe it's old-age, but that must be the interview I used to build the bar in the OP. (I don't feel quite so stupid now.)
I just arrived at 33:30 in the interview.  Now I just wonder what effect angling the omnis has.

[Hypnocracy]

This may shed some light on the different spacing for the center pair...sounds like he uses ORTF for Cards but spreads the pattern out for Sub-Cards

Faulkner: One always tries to reason why certain things work. I would hate to come over as some kind of waffler re. 27" or otherwise. I have always favored using relatively small interspacing between microphone capsules; ie, spacing the main mikes on a bar rather than 10' or more apart on separate stands.

If figure-8 capsules are angled at 90 degrees, I like them as coincident as possible. If the figure-8 capsules are parallel, I use the "phased-array" arrangement of a few inches' spacing. With cardioids, the spacing I like is different again, and there is, of course, the famous technique from ORTF that follows the same concept. With subcardioids, for me the spacing increases, while with omnis the spacing increases to around 27".

I think the spacing has to increase because we are battling against too much sense of "in-phase" in the critical frequency area where the ear-brain combination is switching between timing-phase and amplitude methods of determining source position. With omnis spaced, say, 6" apart, the timing-phase-amplitude differences would be too small to relate with what the human ear spacing normally works with, and I would have to use some kind of intervening processing to modify the difference signal. (There is such a system described in the 1931 Blumlein stereo patent.)

LINK
http://www.stereophile.com/content/project-k622-page-2

[dlh]

http://www.rodetv.com/iwal/interview-with-a-legend-tony-faulkner/
That interview has been a great "relisten".  I have nearly no experience compared to him, but our philosophies are congruent.
Loved his comments about "five point naught" and "four point naught" surround.  It also reinforces my decision to keep my audio listening system separate from my movie surround system.
Also mp3, " . . . a bit sad really."  " . . . peeing in the soup syndrome . . ."
He keeps up with all technology, even refers to the Tascam 680.
Regarding backups and redundancy, ". . . in my business, in order to survive, you become an old woman . . ."
So many soundbites make it great fun to watch.

[Gutbucket]

That Rode interview was great, thanks for the link.

I stand corrected on the mic angles, thanks for clearing that up.  Angling the omnis makes sense as they become directional at the highest frequencies where the wavelengths become similar to the capsule's diameter, so doing that produces some intensity based stereo up there where the time of arrival phase differences which work for lower frequencies based on spacing alone become so large they are more or less random and meaningless.

I really enjoyed all his comments and listened closely to his thoughts on surround and how he loves it but his main problem with it for music is crappy center speakers and improperly setup playback sytems of most people. I record a lot of surround just for my own listening really, and I use the same system for movies, but I have good quality full-sized speakers all around and identical ones for left/center/right- the same setup which he describes as sounding glorious. Everything he says about all that rings true to my far more limited experience, including how the benefit is not just surrounding envelopment and ambience but that instruments just sound right and more natural.  I do like recording for and using the center channel, which can also be very helpful when I mix it all down to 2 channels to hear it anywhere else, but unlike Tony I'm not even attempting to record surround for release and playback on variable and often crappy systems.  I can understand what a nightmare that could be.

What a cool guy.

Off to tread the Stereophile article linked above..

[phil_er_up]

Adjusting the depth of the center channels can "spread or accentuate"* the resulting mix. It is often preferred to run the center channels slightly forward of the flanking pair. A good product example is the Grace Spacebar Overbridge attachment is designed to make such an adjustment.

*shameless stolen from the SB-CMB product literature

I have the grace bar with the Spacebar overbridge.
How far forward do you run the center channels on the bar?

Unfortunately, I don't yet have my overbridge attachment. I had ordered it from Posthorn, but Jerry couldn't seem to locate it in his backstock. Going to order it from Grace's website today to remedy my situation.

I will probably run it mostly forward. More than anything, I'm just excited to experiment with some three mic setups to better isolate the performance from crowd noise. I imagine I will run it more forward, but not really sure till I do some trial and error.

I love that there is another spacebar owner on this forum. The build quality is nothing short of superb; well worth the scratch if you can afford it!

I have run my center channel in various forward postitions on the  overbridge bar. From almost as far forward on the overbridge bar to almost even with the 2nd set of mics. There is a difference but have not be able to narrow it down to what that is due to venue and would have to do more tests.

One thing I don;t like is not an easy way to get the omni spread to 3 feet on that gracebar. Was thinking of building or modifiy one. How do you guys fit a 3 foot bar in your bag? It would not fit in mine. Guess could carry it with the mic stand.

Thinking of maybe trying to build arms on to my current gracebar that would swing out and to 3 feet and then fold them back in when not using them, my bar foot print would stay the same.

[Hypnocracy]

CliveStaples a member on TS made mine...it was two standard boom extensions that were leftover from a project...It folds to a little over 1.5 ft long...

[Gutbucket]

I'm typically using DPA 4060 miniature omnis which are light enough to be supported on arms made from telescoping antennas.  They provide great flexibility for any desired spacing of up to 2 meters and store in just 15" or less in the bag, but aren't substantial enough to support larger/heaver mics.