Topic: Mic Setup...Mounting Bars vs. Free Style

[stevetoney]

With actives options hitting the market like wildfire, I've noticed that the YS demand for mounting bars is sky high. 

Just thought I'd throw it out there that, while I respect the size and convenience of the bars, I'm not a fan of being limited to specific configurations.  Every recording situation provides a different challenge and I like having the flexibility to adjust.  The fixed nature of mounting bars takes the Stereophonic Zoom concept pretty much out of the equation, in terms of applying it on the fly at the venue.

That said, after using standard configs for a number of years, I've discovered lately that I'm a point-at-stacks guy because my recordings just sound better in the rooms here in Pittsburgh. 

Bottom line is that I like having a mount that allows me to adjust my angles based on the venue and my location.

[acidjack]

I think this is a great point.  There's no doubt that kwon/NOLA bars are an awesome option and are especially useful where weight is a big factor (clamping to big stands, balconies, etc.) and/or the lowest profile possible is needed.   But it is nice to be able to pick your own config and spacing when you can, and I often find I prefer a tighter pattern more like PAS as well. 

That said, it's great to have both in your bag if you can.  Nothing beats the convenience of Kwon/NOLA bars.

[Rob D.]

Nothing beats the convenience of Kwon/NOLA bars.

^ this ^

It's all I ever need

[cd2go]

But it is nice to be able to pick your own config and spacing when you can, and I often find I prefer a tighter pattern more like PAS as well. 

I agree; if I'm in the ideal spot for a certain config, I will use it, but most times it's just not the case.

[stevetoney]

So, when I started this thread, one of the things I was curious to ask people about is, why do people spend thousands of dollars on schoeps mics with active cables, then instead of going for the best IMHO sound, go for convenience of a standard configuration when the mics might be pointing at the walls of a boomy venue when a narrower config is called for.  I mean, if convenience is your thing, I agree nothing beats the bars, but I don't particularly understand the logic...at least not when you've invested alot for top quality sound.  It seems kinda counterproductive if getting the top sound is your priority.

[bryonsos]

In a really great sounding room, the standard configs work out great, but I often end up running something more PAS. I never get the caps closer than 20cm though.

[F.O.Bean]

Nothing beats the convenience of Kwon/NOLA bars.

^ this ^

It's all I ever need

99 out of 100 times I'm either FOB/DFC or DFC at the SBD, and IMO, my pulls sound just fine, if not stellar for the most part I do have options for running PAS and do so at a few venues here in Pittsburgh, but more often than not I'm in a good spot and wouldn't trade my active bars for anything

[Ultfris101]

This is definitely a YMMV topic. The place I've been taping the most is long and narrow. DIN would only work about 8ft from the stage and that's not going to be allowed by the venue most of the time. I end up putting my mics up about 9ft above the SBD and if I'm even getting 70 degrees when I PAS I'd be surprised. I also can't get more than about 17cm of separation without being straight ahead which I might decided to try for grins sometime to see. This place is a tough place to pull aud recordings. I'm thinking I'll try some stagelip/on stage stuff soon and that might well benefit from exact DIN/ORTF so I may adjust my thinking on how much use I get out of a set pattern bar.

Dopapod is playing there on 4/6. If my recording is half as good as NYE was I'll consider it a success.

I'm getting to do some orchestra recording soon which will be a good opportunity to run true ORTF but I haven't found I'm in that position often enough so far. The National here in Richmond is a notable exception and DIN if you're at the SBD is great. More often than not they're pushing tapers back behind the board these days so you're back to PAS with hypers.

I picked up long and short delrin bars from Robb so those are going to work for me for now. I'm considering an ORTF bar to simplify setup for perfect situations and when I want to keep profile as simple and clean as possible (like when running mics behind an orchestra conductor and in front of a big audience for example).

[F.O.Bean]

This is definitely a YMMV topic. The place I've been taping the most is long and narrow. DIN would only work about 8ft from the stage and that's not going to be allowed by the venue most of the time. I end up putting my mics up about 9ft above the SBD and if I'm even getting 70 degrees when I PAS I'd be surprised. I also can't get more than about 17cm of separation without being straight ahead which I might decided to try for grins sometime to see. This place is a tough place to pull aud recordings. I'm thinking I'll try some stagelip/on stage stuff soon and that might well benefit from exact DIN/ORTF so I may adjust my thinking on how much use I get out of a set pattern bar.

Dopapod is playing there on 4/6. If my recording is half as good as NYE was I'll consider it a success.

I'm getting to do some orchestra recording soon which will be a good opportunity to run true ORTF but I haven't found I'm in that position often enough so far. The National here in Richmond is a notable exception and DIN if you're at the SBD is great. More often than not they're pushing tapers back behind the board these days so you're back to PAS with hypers.

I picked up long and short delrin bars from Robb so those are going to work for me for now. I'm considering an ORTF bar to simplify setup for perfect situations and when I want to keep profile as simple and clean as possible (like when running mics behind an orchestra conductor and in front of a big audience for example).

I would get a DIN Bar over an ORTF Bar, IMHO. ORTF needs to be used with cards/hypers when in the PERFECT spot. DIN is a little more forgiving and can be run in good, but less than ideal spots. I would pick up an ORTF Bar too, but if I had to choose one first, it would def be a DIN Bar!

[hi and lo]

Schoeps/Nola/Kwon bars provide certain convenience that I enjoy, but I like to think of their convenience as a minor perk rather than the main benefit. For me, it's all about the ability to accurately reproduce a 'standard' configuration and use it as a land mark for all other configurations. Think of them as a learning tool rather than an absolute best practice because, as tonedeaf points out so well, the 'perfect' setup will almost always be somewhere in the middle and we're leaving something on the field by choosing convenience over perfection.

[Rob D.]

So, when I started this thread, one of the things I was curious to ask people about is, why do people spend thousands of dollars on schoeps mics with active cables, then instead of going for the best IMHO sound, go for convenience of a standard configuration when the mics might be pointing at the walls of a boomy venue when a narrower config is called for.  I mean, if convenience is your thing, I agree nothing beats the bars, but I don't particularly understand the logic...at least not when you've invested alot for top quality sound.  It seems kinda counterproductive if getting the top sound is your priority.

Don't assume everyone who runs active mics are restricted to just the actives config. If none of the DIN, DINa, NOS or M/S Kwon bars I have are adequate for the situation I'll just run the full bodied mics/caps on the Shure vert bar I keep in my bag.

[Gutbucket]

Just a reminder that if you typically like DIN but your PAS arrangement at any particular venue has you using less angle between mics, which it will in most situations, it will be advantageous to compensate for the narrower angle between mics by introducing more spacing between them.  The moral to the story is this: If you use PAS a lot, figure out a way of achieving adjustable mic spacing with your mounting setup which can place the mic capsules wider than a typical 7” to 12" bar.

It's that increased spacing part of optimizing a PAS setup which most people either neglect entirely or compromise on.  Some may be unaware of the basic relationship, but others here who are aware of the relationship are constrained by the limitations of their mounting system and/or simply unsure of how much additional distance between mics is appropriate. 


About a year ago I started a thread about that, which went into far more technical detail than most here probably care to immerse themselves in.  It was a good discussion, but the complexity was unfortunate in a way, because my primary motivation was to derive simplified tables which easily indicate the optimal microphone spacing for whatever PAS mic angle the user ends up with.

Here's that thread- http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=153112.0

And below is the resulting table, which is based upon the standard 'DIN' configuration (cardioids @ 90 degrees, 20 cm). The idea is that if you like what you hear from a DIN setup when that is an appropriate choice, but wish to use PAS instead in a compromised situation, you can get a recording with some similar attributes by first pointing your mics at the stacks (or just outside them) and estimating the resulting angle between the mics, then checking the table to find the appropriate spacing for that microphone angle.

You really only need the first two columns.  The first column indicates the angle between mics and the second indicates the suggested spacing to arrive at the same recording angle as a DIN setup. Note that the mic spacing indicated in the second column is specified in centimeters.  For most PAS situations where the angle between mics is narrower than 90 degrees, you would be referring to the bottom half of the table. DIN is in the middle-

[Ultfris101]

Thank you! Perfect timing.  I'll see what I can do Thursday night. After my classical recording I'm planning to hit the narrow bar. I'll see if I can rig something up to get the wider spacing. The largest of my current mic bars is about 12" I believe.

Seems like  somewhere around 29-33cm is where I need to be looking at the chart. Just slightly longer than my current bars but I'm way short of that spacing now so I can at least get a lot better.

[achalsey]

Just a reminder that if you typically like DIN but your PAS arrangement at any particular venue has you using less angle between mics, which it will in most situations, it will be advantageous to compensate for the narrower angle between mics by introducing more spacing between them. [snip]

Avoiding the "explain this like I'm 5 years old" question, this is based on a relatively specific relationship between the mic spacing and your speaker playback system correct?  If you are playing back through headphones, or have a specific spacing of speaker playback, that will change the relative angle/spacing of your mics, will it not?

In the end, if you're taping primarily for yourself, it should all be calculated in reference to your playback system right?

[Gutbucket]

Just a reminder that if you typically like DIN but your PAS arrangement at any particular venue has you using less angle between mics, which it will in most situations, it will be advantageous to compensate for the narrower angle between mics by introducing more spacing between them. [snip]

Avoiding the "explain this like I'm 5 years old" question, this is based on a relatively specific relationship between the mic spacing and your speaker playback system correct?  If you are playing back through headphones, or have a specific spacing of speaker playback, that will change the relative angle/spacing of your mics, will it not?

In the end, if you're taping primarily for yourself, it should all be calculated in reference to your playback system right?

Well technically yes, however the same applies to any microphone setup: X/Y, ORTF, NOS, or what have you, each of which assume a more or less defacto 60degree speaker angle stereo listening triangle setup.  In a practical sense, variations in specific playback system speaker setup angle don’t matter as much as one might be lead to believe.  The resulting Stereo Recording Angle from any of those setups effects the position at which sounds appear to be reproduced somewhere between the two speakers or directly from them- the relative position doesn’t change much if the speakers are setup at a different angle than 60 degrees, within reason.

The table I posted above is based on the Williams’ Stereo Zoom (a link to the Stereo Zoom paper and explanatory thread here are stickied at the top of this forum) and the values in the table were derived from this on-line calculator- http://www.sengpielaudio.com/HejiaE.htm