Topic: c414 / LD Owners - Configuration Questions / Opinions

[branas]

Just got my 414b XLS/ST pair, going to run them tonight for the first time (Oteil @ Skippers in Tampa). I have everything I need to run vertical X/Y, haven't tried seeing if everything can be put together for horizontal X/Y yet. Oade brothers states several times throughout their site that all LD mics should be run coincident no matter what. Though as I look through my torrents I see a few that show 414's run ORTF. The stereo bar that AKG sells with the mics would indicate that the ORTF/DINsih approach is acceptable. I am currently planning on running vertical X/Y unless you guys have reasons to run otherwise (M/S??). The venue is outdoor, though the area that the mics will be setup will probably be under a tarp or metal roof, approximately 50-75ft from stage. On another note, DPA's mic university states "But as the off-axis attenuation of a first-order cardioid microphone is only 6 dB in 90°, the channel separation is limited, and wide stereo images are not possible with this recording method." in referring to X/Y. So, I would love to hear you guys chime in on your favorite LD mic configs.

[Brian Skalinder]

Unamplified audience or amplified on-stage, I like coincident, near-coincident and split techniques.  For PA audience, I prefer coincident and am not terribly of near-coincident.  I don't think I've tried my 414s split in the audience yet, so can't speak to that one.

Coincident:  XY, M/S, Blumlein
Near-coincident:  ORTF, DIN, DINA and variants
Split:  AB (obviously)

Really, it's all going to come down to what your ears like.  Over time, try 'em all and see what you like.

[Javier Cinakowski]

I am interested in more input to this topic.  I just got a pair of LD's (C3's) and have only run them ORTF, because that is the only bar I have.  I would think that LD's in xy would be good because it would tighten the bass and give more high frequency detail, something that SD's are better at.  But, near-coincident might be nice for shows that are lacking in bass, like bluegrass...

[TNJazz]

Oade brothers states several times throughout their site that all LD mics should be run coincident no matter what.

That's just plain stupid right there.

[Brian Skalinder]

Oade brothers states several times throughout their site that all LD mics should be run coincident no matter what.

I'm curious to see precisely what they say, as they often qualify their statements with "trust your ears" or the like.  Got a link?

[TNJazz]

Oade brothers states several times throughout their site that all LD mics should be run coincident no matter what.

I'm curious to see precisely what they say, as they often qualify their statements with "trust your ears" or the like.  Got a link?

Just to be clear on my previous statement, any qualifications such as this that they might make would render my prior observation moot.

Experimentation is where it's at.  Not everybody likes the same thing, and some situations are best solved with an unorthodox approach (those are my favorites!)

[branas]

quote from Oade brothers:  (http://www.oade.com/Tapers_Section/coincident.html)

"Coincident techniques are the most popular type for stereo recording. These are most often implemented using directional microphones vertically aligned on a common axis and set at an angle to each other in the horizontal plane.
The advantages this method offers are minimum phase differences between the two capsules for sound sources lying within the horizontal plane. Another is the angular accuracy of the stereo image not being affected by the distance of the microphones from the sound source. All large diaphragm (1 inch and larger) microphones should be used in this manner for satisfying results. Some small diaphragm microphones , most notably the Schoeps Collette series, suffer from a lack of "sense of space" utilizing this method, due to the lack of interchannel delay time. The Microtech Geffel small diaphragm mics do not exhibit this problem. Near coincident techniques are recommended for microphones with these problems, where they can yield very good results."

And in another area: (http://www.oade.com/Tapers_Section/micsetup90xy.html)

"We find that all large diaphram microphones must be set up in this manner to assure satisfing results." referring to X/Y

[Brian Skalinder]

quote from Oade brothers
< snip >

All large diaphragm (1 inch and larger) microphones should be used in this manner for satisfying results.

< snip >

We find that all large diaphram microphones must be set up in this manner to assure satisfing results.

Thanks for the links / quotes.  I guess I can read their statements one of two ways:  no one can achieve satisfying results running other than coincident (which the former kinda suggests), or they don't find the results satisfying (which the latter suggests).

At any rate, try both, and go with what sounds best to your ears. 

[branas]

Thanks guys, I will be definitely running different combinations to see what I like, I just wanted to poll the group and see what you guys had found. 3 bands tonight so I will probably experiment with the first two bands for sure. I also will be running three sets of mics: 414's->V3->Line In on 3&4 on the 744 and then Shure SM81's->744 on 1&2 using the 744 pre's. Then just for kicks it will be the last run for my C-1000's->Microtrack 24/96, just to hear the difference between the 414's and my new rig 

After that the Microtrack will become bitbucket behind the V3.

I guess I could ask one more thing, if you were going to be running the first two sets of mics I listed at the same time, for comparison's sake, would you run the same config on both or would you change it up for each pair and run a different config? I am assuming I should run the same configuration.

[Javier Cinakowski]

I would run the same config for compairison purposes.  You want to remove as many variables as possible. 

:-)

[rowjimmytour]

So far I have found three formations I like best w/ my LDS's. For festivals semi far away or bad sounding bars I like DIN. Up in close FOB smaller out side stages I go w/ MS or J-disc. Good luck!!! And try all the configurations and caps and see what your ears like best. +t on your new LD's.

Peace

[BobW]

Oade brothers states several times throughout their site that all LD mics should be run coincident no matter what.

because of the diaphram size, near coincident techniques are thought to be rendered ineffective
I don't think it "breaks" the recording, but opens the door for bar failures, and stand imbalances, etc, that aren't a neccesary risk

Nick'sPicks has run 414s hyper near-coincident and may have a comment.
Hyper may be the exception, I'm not sure

[beanstalk]

My late opinion...
I only really liked the 414s in XY when running Blumlein which I think is where these mics shine. I've run the hypers and cards each once in XY and was didn't like the results. I think it takes a bit of the fattness from the 414's which is the reason I got these. The one thing about skippers is the crowd is always chatty (actually I think the Tampa crowd is chatty everywhere) and is a place I always wanted to run Blumlein but never did it. I'm may try M/S next time I'm out there though.

[Busman Audio]

Being that the 414s are somewhat brighter than a lot of other LD mics I would say DIN or ORTF would best suit these. I have run XY with a few pairs of LDs (not 414s) and liked it very much the image was extremly well centered since the phase of the capsules was as close as it can get, with the nice large soundstage that LDs can give.

tapermark runs his 414s ORTF a lot and they always sound very nice.

[BobW]

Being that the 414s are somewhat brighter than a lot of other LD mics

I suppose someone should say that the 414 B-ULS/comb/EB/TLS and 414B-XLIIs have notably different presence curves, but you all know that     

I'd guess that brighter is the TLIIs, with the others being essentially flat, and sweet
The XLS and XLII have the wide-card(sub) pattern that I'd love to have for near stage work.
As a matter of fact, a pair of XLIIs front of stage may be something that I have to try soon.

The diaphram on these mics are noteably bigger than the eardrum/ear canal, on which the near-coincident techniques are based.
Perhaps there is a correlation there?