Doug is opinionated...strongly.
as we know, and he despises LD recordings done in any way other than coincident technique. "anything else just doesn't sound right to me".
So, that is where his general statement comes from...his own ears.
that said, it is standard in the world of LD recording that they are run coincident. why...exactly, i'm not sure. I believe it has to do w/the way LDs off axis perform, and that whatever problems arise from this are not present with coincident techniques.
I ran my 414b ULS's every which way you could imagine. All of my favorites were coincident recordings...and mostly all of them blumlein. I made some recordings that were very nice with NC techniques.., one particular ORTF recording in a small room comes to mind as being exceptionally juicy.
Still...I prefer the coincident methods. Look at all the stereo mics in production today. All of them are coincident LD (except the cheapies from AT and Rhodes..and mics that are more video orientated like the beyer and and the vp88..etc). Sure...stereo "kits" from schoepps are not this way..but thats a little different as, to me, none of them are a true stereo mic.
so...in short, this discussion is why the LSD2 kicks so much ass. I wouldn't hesitate to get one of those over a pair of 414s. While the AKGs are better mics overall, and certainly more studio friendly and versitile, the LSD makes more consistent "good" recordings when in our hands.
coincident is where its at, and it makes sense when you think of it.
sound locations are pinpoint. someone plays a guitar in front of you, the sound comes from the source.
so, why would you record w/the diaphragms wayyyyy off axis, where they dont' perform as well, so that you get this sense of space that your brain has to "work on" to mix it and approximate the locations of the sounds as you perceive them.
Coincident recording captures everything in front, well within the sphere of those cardioid lobes. Timing cues are captured perfectly..the brain has no work to do when listening to it. Its presented just as it happened.
For some reason...those NC techniques work well with small diaphragm mics. I think it has to do with off axis response being much better than w/the LD type mics. Not so much with the LD mics though.
BUT....i'm a blabbering idiot..so take that to the bank as thats the only provable thing I've sputtered here.
Topic: c414 / LD Owners - Configuration Questions / Opinions (Read 8285 times)