Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Remaster my recording?  (Read 1678 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2022, 05:10:46 PM »

Thank you.  Yes, that was the mk4 in XY.  Would love a pair of mk41s!  I put it where I could (corner of the soundboard) but this venue has noise ordinances and a curfew so it isn't that loud and closer would have been much better.

try PAS (or very slightly wider), and failing that, get closer

Yes! But rather, get closer first as long as there is any way to do so within the limits of practicality, and in addition to doing that (or instead, if not practically possible to get closer) Point At Stacks, using a spacing between the two microphones that is derived from whatever that PAS angle between the mics ends up being.  See the >>Improved PAS table<< link below in my signature for details and an easy to refer to table indicating optimal spacing.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #31 on: September 29, 2022, 05:38:06 PM »
I stand corrected.  I thought headphones were made to be reasonably accurate, e.g., flat. 

So is there any headphone or speaker that is reasonably flat? 

Beyerdynamic DT 770, Sony MDR 7506, and Sennheiser HS 600 are three popular demands with studios here in Los Angeles, if you ask Coffee Sound aka Trew Audio which supplies many of the local studios.  Sony seems to have the edge, Trew sells more Sony MDR 7506 than any brand by far, and they come back for repair most often.  By coming back for repair, I mean the owners thought enough of the cans to replace pads and cords rather than tossing them out.  Yes, pads and cords wear out.

Some are intended to be and are closer to perceptually flat than others, at least in a generic sense, but for the reasons mentioned, how much closer that ends up being for each individual user is going to vary from person to person (sort of like how everyone has similar fingerprints, yet all fingerprints are unique), which is why it becomes necessary to use personalized corrections to make any good quality candidate headphone close to flat.  Even then, perception of low bass will be different than with speakers, due to the lack of bass vibration sensation in the body.

The headphones you mention are all good ones.  Most studio phones are used for isolated monitoring - folks listening while playing, or singing, or doing voice-overs or whatever - stuff where keeping outside sound out and inside sound in is important.  Same as tapers would need if attempting to actually monitor with headphones while recording at a show, except that in our case keeping the outside sound out is harder because its louder - so difficult that i don't consider bringing headphones along when recording worthwhile, unless needed for trouble shooting ahead of the show. Instead, just confirm things are working right via the visual meters and listen later.  The Beyers and the Sonys are both closed-back style headphones that can work for this kind of studio use. 

The Senn HD 600 and the other Senns I mention above, along with different models from Beyer, AKG, Sony, etc, are open-backed.  They won't keep any outside sound out at all, and others around you will be able to hear what you are listening to.  Open backed headphones tend to sound more natural and, well.. more open, which makes them a good choice for taper post-recording work as long as isolation isn't needed.

This open-backed / closed-back differentiation is the most important single differentiation in headphone types
« Last Edit: September 29, 2022, 05:48:29 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #32 on: September 29, 2022, 06:27:30 PM »
Yes! But rather, get closer first as long as there is any way to do so within the limits of practicality, and in addition to doing that (or instead, if not practically possible to get closer) Point At Stacks, using a spacing between the two microphones that is derived from whatever that PAS angle between the mics ends up being.  See the >>Improved PAS table<< link below in my signature for details and an easy to refer to table indicating optimal spacing.

I agree, thank you for the feedback. If not possible to get closer, would the mk41s help cover instead of the mk4s?  Thanks!

Offline opsopcopolis

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1988
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2022, 01:36:50 AM »
2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

At this risk of starting this whole thing up again, you don't need $1000 worth of software to work on audience tapes, sbd tapes, or any other kind of recordings. Unless you have something specific you need (like rx for de-clip/click/noise) the stock plugins on almost any daw will be more than enough to make great sounding tapes. RX is great, but definitely not necessary for day to day mastering of show recordings.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2022, 01:51:46 AM by opsopcopolis »

Offline DavidPuddy

  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1557
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2022, 07:13:47 AM »
2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

At this risk of starting this whole thing up again, you don't need $1000 worth of software to work on audience tapes, sbd tapes, or any other kind of recordings. Unless you have something specific you need (like rx for de-clip/click/noise) the stock plugins on almost any daw will be more than enough to make great sounding tapes. RX is great, but definitely not necessary for day to day mastering of show recordings.

Seconded. Although RX and other programs do a fantastic job at improving recordings, you can get the job done with free programs like Audacity and CDWAV if running Windows. Once you get the hang of it, I would then recommend to start branching out to the previously recommended programs.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #35 on: September 30, 2022, 10:59:35 AM »
If not possible to get closer, would the mk41s help cover instead of the mk4s?  Thanks!

Somewhat. If not as much as one might wish. 

The tl:dr-
Yes, supercards like mk41 can help from somewhat farther back if they are pointed directly at the source.  But the farther back you go the less effective microphone pattern directionaly becomes with regards to focusing on a distant source.


The longer story-
As supercardioids, the 41s are less sensitive to sound arriving from far off-axis than the cardioid 4s.  Seems obvious that would be a help when pointed at the PA and stage sources, and it can.  The problem from farther back is that the indirect reverberant sound arriving from all directions becomes louder than the sound arriving directly from the PA and stage, and because of that the difference in pattern sensitivity no longer makes a much difference as it would from closer.  Think of it this way- from closer, the sound arriving at the mics from the direction of the PA is strongly dominated by the direct sound from the PA, while the sound arriving from the back of the room is dominated by reverberant sound.   In that case, a supercardioid pointed at the PA will pickup a smaller proportion of reverberant sound than a cardioid. Moving farther back, the direct sound dominates less and less in comparison to the reverberant sound even in a straight line to PA. Remember, the reverberant sound is arriving from all directions, including from the same direction as the PA and stage.  Because of that, the choice of pattern to achieve "focus on the source", makes more of a difference when placed at a position close enough that the direct sound dominates sufficiently in that direction.

The distance from the sound source where the direct sound and reverberant indirect sound are equal in level is called the critical distance. In professional recording, that is were a main pair of microphones are typically placed so as to achieve a good balance of direct and hall sound. Any close-mics need to be much closer than that.  In non-PA amplified performances the critical distance varies with room size, but tends to be much closer than most tapers record from, unless recording from right up front at the stage-lip.

The use of PA amplification doesn't change that basic acoustic truth, however the directional nature of the PA pushes the critical distance much further out into the audience.  That's one of the primary reasons for using a PA, other than achieving sufficient loudness and a good balance between the sources.  And this is a large part of what makes amplified live concert taping different from non-PA amplified stuff such as classical music recording.  Take for example when a PA-amplified band walks out at the end of the night and does an non-amplified acoustic tune at the front of the stage at the encore.  From a close enough recording position it may sound great.  From a distant position that might have been satisfactory when the band was playing through the PA, that acoustic tune is likey to sound overly distant, reverberant and far too quiet.

Moving farther and farther back, at some point the more natural sound of more open patterns may end up being a better choice, as most of the sound is diffuse and more open patterns do a better job with that, but it might also depend on any reflected sound (another form of direct sound) arriving from other directions.  From way far back outdoors for instance, omnis often sound best.

[note- an additional complication to be aware of is the inherent low-frequency roll off of directional mics at at distance, which can serve to "reduce the apparent reverberant mud" in reverberant rooms.  Supercards have more of that roll-off than cardioids, omnis have none.  But this is a function of the inherent frequency response roll-off that comes along with the difference in pickup-pattern and not really related to the microphone's directional sensitivity in the room. You could achieve the same with a more open pattern if you EQ'd a similar roll off]
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline krowllaw

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 36
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #36 on: September 30, 2022, 03:21:34 PM »
I'm sure there is a reason but I don't know it. why not just use shotguns with PAS?  I suppose that's why back in the 90s sometimes the best recording for the tapers section would be a nak 300 shotgun, especially in stadiums. 

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 14903
  • Gender: Male
  • "and the rowers keep on rowing!"
Re: Remaster my recording?
« Reply #37 on: September 30, 2022, 05:05:56 PM »
It's that same issue of the fundamental acoustics problem described above which any microphone you choose to use is up against.  The situation is damned by that acoustic reality that the ratio of direct sound to indirect sound is just not high enough for even highly directional mics to clearly parse the clean direct sound out of the indirect sound arriving from all directions, including the same direction as the weak direct sound.  Being too far back just sucks.

But that doesn't keep us from trying to make a recording anyway, so lacking the ability to record from a closer position where the sound is good and the microphone's directional pattern is actually able to effectively help focus on the desirable direct sound, use super/hypercardioids or shotgun-mics in PAS (trying to get as much of that weak direct sound as possible) or go with less directional mics which are more likely to produce a recording that sounds distant yet more natural.. like it actually sounds to someone standing back there.

Sure shotguns can work, sometimes well. But in comparison to super/hypercards they generally have a very ragged, badly behaved off-axis response, which makes the reverberant indirect sound arriving from all directions other than directly on-axis colored and weird, and that indirect sound is the majority of what is being picked up at a distant position even with the somewhat increased directionality imparted by the interference tube.  Shotguns are intended to function as close spots where there is plenty of direct sound for them on-axis, and this situation is in many ways the direct opposite of that.  IMO, the cases in which they worked best back in the day for stadium shows was when they were combined with an omni in the middle, as that served to mask the off-axis problems of the shotguns and compensate for their lack of bass response. The omni provided the ambient naturalness that covered the ambient weirdness of the shotguns and two different patterns helped support the deficiencies of each other.

For that reason I think PAS shotguns can have a place in combination with other mics in an multi-microphone array.  But even then they can't work magic and overcome the underlying acoustic reality described above. Moving farther back just represents an increasingly uphill battle in terms of the underlying acoustics.  Super/hypercards that are better behaved in an overall sense are probably a better answer in most cases, particularly as a single pair.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.045 seconds with 30 queries.
© 2002-2022 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF