Topic: 4 mic placement suggestions ?

[Tye]

Edited for update.
 
 Well I ended up running just my C3's xy dfc which came out real well for the room.
Ron couldn't make it to town to drop off the 184s so I ran without them.
We plan on running some here in the near future.
 Thanks again for the advice guys.
[/b]




Suggestions for a 4 mic mix?

 I plan on running a 4 mic mix tonight for New Monsoon in Reno
the only problem is that the room may not the best to mic .
 Here is what the room is like


Myself and another  member (Ron, I can't remember his ts name) were thinking of running his 184s split one on each pa and my C3's either stage lip omnis or dfc din.  He's not sure yet if he can make it. His ACM pmd 671 is showing up today so if he goes we will run 4 mics (483's>671 + C3'sBm2p+Ua5>Jb3) and do a post matrix.

 Anyway the problem is the room is basically an old garage complete with the rollup metal door ( to the far right)
and a raised ceiling shaped like this  ^ so the sound just floats up .

 I was hoping for some suggestions on placement that would work the best.

The easiest place to setup is dfc. The split mics in the back may be tight depending on if people are in the back haging out other wise we should be fine.  I have to talk to the band about onstage , I'm not sure what their policy is .

 
Should I run my C3's split omni and the 184's xy dfc, or stagelip C3's bluemin and dfc ortf 184's

 I just can't decide this is my first attempt at a 4 mic mix and this room is known for bad sound so I
just want to come at it with the best configuration .
 
Stage may be the best they never run the bass through the pa.

Any ideas on what would work the best for this room?

[RebelRebel]

I would do blumlein and flanking Cardiods. not stagelip though...Blumlein is meant to be farther back so that it can "see" the entire ensemble. This yields the best imaging. I would also consider ORTF with omni flankers.

[Shawn]

Bob Cogswell, a taper from San Francisco, runs cards on each PA main and a PZM mic on stage/ stage-lip all the time for different bands in different rooms and gets pretty good results fairly frequently. A fair approximation of that in this situation would be to run the 184's on each PA and stage-lip the c3's in x-y. That's probably what I would do.

Here is a link to a New Monsoon tape he did with a PZM on stage and a card on each PA stack: http://www.archive.org/details/nm2005-09-15.flac16

[edited so that it acutally makes sense]

[Tye]

I would do blumlein and flanking Cardiods. not stagelip though...Blumlein is meant to be farther back so that it can "see" the entire ensemble. This yields the best imaging. I would also consider ORTF with omni flankers.

 How wide would you say I could go with the cards running bluemin/cards
 I like the idea of ortf dfc and split omnis too

Bob Cogswell, a taper from San Francisco, runs cards on each PA main and a PZM mic on stage/ stage-lip all the time for different bands in different rooms and gets pretty good results fairly frequently. A fair approximation of that in this situation would be to run the 184's on each PA and stage-lip the c3's in x-y. That's probably what I would do.

Here is a link to a New Monsoon tape he did with a PZM on stage and a card on each PA stack: http://www.archive.org/details/nm2005-09-15.flac16

[edited so that it acutally makes sense]

 There is no way I can set up that close to the pa(cards) I would have to run in the back of the room I wonder how that would sound.


If Ron can't make it I might have to run bluemin dfc and flanking cards (C3 bluemin > Bmp2+ Ua5  + 184s>ps2 > Bm2p+ Ua5 > JB3)

[RebelRebel]

I would go about a meter or so., cards in the same line as the blumlein config, far enough back to see the whole ensemble. helps to solidify the center image. Blumlein, when done right , is the most natural, huge, stunning configuration there is. Same thing with the ORTF and flanking omnis, about a meter or so.
anything farther than 3m and you have to time align the mics to get the correct delay.

I would do blumlein and flanking Cardiods. not stagelip though...Blumlein is meant to be farther back so that it can "see" the entire ensemble. This yields the best imaging. I would also consider ORTF with omni flankers.

 How wide would you say I could go with the cards running bluemin/cards
 I like the idea of ortf dfc and split omnis too

Bob Cogswell, a taper from San Francisco, runs cards on each PA main and a PZM mic on stage/ stage-lip all the time for different bands in different rooms and gets pretty good results fairly frequently. A fair approximation of that in this situation would be to run the 184's on each PA and stage-lip the c3's in x-y. That's probably what I would do.

Here is a link to a New Monsoon tape he did with a PZM on stage and a card on each PA stack: http://www.archive.org/details/nm2005-09-15.flac16

[edited so that it acutally makes sense]

 There is no way I can set up that close to the pa(cards) I would have to run in the back of the room I wonder how that would sound.


If Ron can't make it I might have to run bluemin dfc and flanking cards (C3 bluemin > Bmp2+ Ua5  + 184s>ps2 > Bm2p+ Ua5 > JB3)

[Tye]

Thanks for the help guys I am going to get there early and hopefully snag my spot.

Teddy
 Should I run both sets of mics at 100% or would you think 60% C3's / 40% cards gain should work for this configuration ?

 Just curious if the cards should be more of an accent or a full feature in the image.


- edited to make sense -

[RebelRebel]

well, the brunt of your sound should come from the main array, IE the ORTF pair of Cardiods or the Blumlein pair. The flanking omnis or cards outside of those pairs is simply to round out the sound and fill in holes. There isnt really a ratio, per say, but what you want to do is get that main pair right, and then bring up the supporting flanks and mix them in so that you will barely be able to notice if they are taken out of the equation.

Thanks for the help guys I am going to get there early and hopefully snag my spot.

Teddy
 Should I run both sets of mics at 100% or would you think 60% C3's / 40% cards gain should work for this configuration ?

 Just curious if the cards should be more of an accent or a full feature in the image.


- edited to make sense -

[Tye]

I figured that was the way to go.
 Thanks again +T

[RebelRebel]

I figured that was the way to go.
 Thanks again +T

no problem man. backatcha

[Brian Skalinder]

this room is known for bad sound

Might be too late, but...

If this is the case, I recommend NOT running Blumlein - it's a very revealing configuration and will simply reveal the bad sound in all its glory (or in this case lack thereof).  I think you're better off with a card or hyper stereo pair DIN or XY flanked by omnis.  The main card or hyper stereo pair will minimize the room acoustics while the flanking omnis will allow you to control how ambience to roll into the mix.

[Tye]

this room is known for bad sound

Might be too late, but...

If this is the case, I recommend NOT running Blumlein - it's a very revealing configuration and will simply reveal the bad sound in all its glory (or in this case lack thereof).  I think you're better off with a card or hyper stereo pair DIN or XY flanked by omnis.  The main card or hyper stereo pair will minimize the room acoustics while the flanking omnis will allow you to control how ambience to roll into the mix.

hmmm that is a good point
I should be there during soundcheck so I am going to try both configurations and see what the best result is.
 I will check in with an update to let you guys know how it went .

The worst part of the room sound boils down to a bad mix first off then the acoustics add to the mess.

[BayTaynt3d]

Same thing with the ORTF and flanking omnis, about a meter or so. anything farther than 3m and you have to time align the mics to get the correct delay.

Teddy, I'm intrigued by this comment because I've been running "flanking omnis" a lot more recently with the use of the R4. In these situations, I tend to run one of two scenarios: (1) SBD + Split Omnis on-stage or stage-lip, or (2) Card stereo pair plus split omni pair either stage-lip or on-stage. These tend to be small jazz gigs (usually some variant of #2), but sometimes more orchestral/big band gigs (some variant of #1).

Anyway, I'm a total wook when it comes to the split omnis thing, and your comment got my attention. I've been running pretty wide splits, like 8' on different stands. Is that stupid? Should I just run on a meter bar instead? I tend to just use these flankers as supplementary sound to the main pair, so I haven't worked out my config too much, but I do like my results thus far (better than without some of the omnis). Also curious about this "delay-adjustment" you mention, should I be delaying the one omni to be closer in time with the other omni when they are spaced kind of wide? Would that help my imaging?

THANKS!

[RebelRebel]

The time alignment is for mics spaced more than 3m Deep away from each other(that was a misleading comment on my part, my mistake..)..to give the correct delay ratio....in your case, they are in the same horiz. plane, so it is fine as is.. I never run more than a meter normally, whether using omnis as a main pair or when flanking another main pair. too much of a hole in the middle beyond those distances, at least with the stuff I record...

Same thing with the ORTF and flanking omnis, about a meter or so. anything farther than 3m and you have to time align the mics to get the correct delay.

Teddy, I'm intrigued by this comment because I've been running "flanking omnis" a lot more recently with the use of the R4. In these situations, I tend to run one of two scenarios: (1) SBD + Split Omnis on-stage or stage-lip, or (2) Card stereo pair plus split omni pair either stage-lip or on-stage. These tend to be small jazz gigs (usually some variant of #2), but sometimes more orchestral/big band gigs (some variant of #1).

Anyway, I'm a total wook when it comes to the split omnis thing, and your comment got my attention. I've been running pretty wide splits, like 8' on different stands. Is that stupid? Should I just run on a meter bar instead? I tend to just use these flankers as supplementary sound to the main pair, so I haven't worked out my config too much, but I do like my results thus far (better than without some of the omnis). Also curious about this "delay-adjustment" you mention, should I be delaying the one omni to be closer in time with the other omni when they are spaced kind of wide? Would that help my imaging?

THANKS!

[BayTaynt3d]

The time alignment is for mics spaced more than 3m Deep away from each other(that was a misleading comment on my part, my mistake..)..to give the correct delay ratio....in your case, they are in the same horiz. plane, so it is fine as is.. I never run more than a meter normally, whether using omnis as a main pair or when flanking another main pair. too much of a hole in the middle beyond those distances, at least with the stuff I record...

Same thing with the ORTF and flanking omnis, about a meter or so. anything farther than 3m and you have to time align the mics to get the correct delay.

Teddy, I'm intrigued by this comment because I've been running "flanking omnis" a lot more recently with the use of the R4. In these situations, I tend to run one of two scenarios: (1) SBD + Split Omnis on-stage or stage-lip, or (2) Card stereo pair plus split omni pair either stage-lip or on-stage. These tend to be small jazz gigs (usually some variant of #2), but sometimes more orchestral/big band gigs (some variant of #1).

Anyway, I'm a total wook when it comes to the split omnis thing, and your comment got my attention. I've been running pretty wide splits, like 8' on different stands. Is that stupid? Should I just run on a meter bar instead? I tend to just use these flankers as supplementary sound to the main pair, so I haven't worked out my config too much, but I do like my results thus far (better than without some of the omnis). Also curious about this "delay-adjustment" you mention, should I be delaying the one omni to be closer in time with the other omni when they are spaced kind of wide? Would that help my imaging?

THANKS!

OK, I see now. Seems like the risk of "hole in the middle" is low when you've got a stereo pair smack in the middle? At least in the "flanking" scenrio, it seems that almost implies that they are flanking something, and that something takes care of the hole doesn't it?

[RebelRebel]

exactly. I never run split omnis over one meter. if I do go over a meter I always add either a 3rd omni(Telarc uses this config, 3 omnis across the front) or just use them as flanks.

The time alignment is for mics spaced more than 3m Deep away from each other(that was a misleading comment on my part, my mistake..)..to give the correct delay ratio....in your case, they are in the same horiz. plane, so it is fine as is.. I never run more than a meter normally, whether using omnis as a main pair or when flanking another main pair. too much of a hole in the middle beyond those distances, at least with the stuff I record...

Same thing with the ORTF and flanking omnis, about a meter or so. anything farther than 3m and you have to time align the mics to get the correct delay.

Teddy, I'm intrigued by this comment because I've been running "flanking omnis" a lot more recently with the use of the R4. In these situations, I tend to run one of two scenarios: (1) SBD + Split Omnis on-stage or stage-lip, or (2) Card stereo pair plus split omni pair either stage-lip or on-stage. These tend to be small jazz gigs (usually some variant of #2), but sometimes more orchestral/big band gigs (some variant of #1).

Anyway, I'm a total wook when it comes to the split omnis thing, and your comment got my attention. I've been running pretty wide splits, like 8' on different stands. Is that stupid? Should I just run on a meter bar instead? I tend to just use these flankers as supplementary sound to the main pair, so I haven't worked out my config too much, but I do like my results thus far (better than without some of the omnis). Also curious about this "delay-adjustment" you mention, should I be delaying the one omni to be closer in time with the other omni when they are spaced kind of wide? Would that help my imaging?

THANKS!

OK, I see now. Seems like the risk of "hole in the middle" is low when you've got a stereo pair smack in the middle? At least in the "flanking" scenrio, it seems that almost implies that they are flanking something, and that something takes care of the hole doesn't it?