Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?  (Read 9714 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Hi all!
I'm looking for a proper set of hardware for stealth recording of operas and legal/stealth recording of chamber and symphony music.
The main question is whether I have to use mics with balanced cables. There are many light/sound and other devices in musical theatres and all of them can make interference and produce noises. I had a very disappointing experience with a MTII (the device was defective itself), when I tried to record with its own mic with the provided extension cord. I encountered very bad noise. So I figured to search for another solution. Is it true that any XLR connected mic has a balanced line? If so, I apparently need one of them and some recorder like ZOOM h4n with XLR inputs. Recently I've read a lot of messages on this forum and many articles on the net and decided to buy a Sony PCM-D50 because of its reliability. But there is a couple of things with it, that bother me: the recorder has only minijack input for mics, so I can't use a balanced line that reject interference. The second thing is its inability to drop markers (for a long opera spectacle that lack is sad) and susceptibility to handling noises plus an overpriced remote.
So, should I really use a balanced line or perhaps there are any shielded cables for such situations?
Actually I wish I had a device that I could use without an external mic. Unlike a h4n with its noisy mics, a pcm-d50 has a pair of decent mics that could be helpful to me in some non-critical chamber music cases. And I'm not ready to carry more than one box (may be two) and a pair of mics.
After this first-step decision on a recording gear I'm gonna look for some decent mics. Now I think it might be a pair of some binaural mics in croakie mount for convenient stealth recording. For such cases when one sits in a big hall of a theater it might be hypercardioid mics for picking the needed sound from the stage, but not from all hall's reflections.
What do you think? Opera tapers, please share your experience, if you can.

Offline StuStu

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2860
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2010, 08:26:31 PM »
Sorry to say, but I don't know of any recorder that offer a high quality internal mic. There are still lots of options to choose from that would physically be a small rig.
MK5, MK8, MK41, KM184D, CK77, B3 ---CMD 2U XT, KC5, KCY, AKI---KCY Tinybox, Ugly BB---AETA 4MinX, PMD661 MKII, R-26, M-10, MR-1

Offline SmokinJoe

  • Trade Count: (63)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4210
  • Gender: Male
  • "75 and sunny"... life is so much simpler.
    • uploads to archive.org
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2010, 10:38:00 PM »
I wouldn't get overly hung up on balanced inputs.  Most of that electrical noise is far enough away that it doesn't matter.  The only noise I've gotten is my own cell phone when I'm stupid enough to leave it on, and put my preamp/recorder in the same pocket.  I'm not sure what you got for noise, but that's not the norm.

The good news is that you probably don't have the same problem as the rest of us.  We have to be constantly concerned with chatty drunks at our shows, and I expect at opera and chamber music, people shut up and listen.

Your MT has balanced inputs I think, just rather than using XLR inputs it uses TRS (Tip/Ring/Sleeve) 1/4" jacks.  It also has and 1/8" stereo minijack for small mics.  Binaural croakies for stealth is probably a good start.  When I've taped an amplified rock band from the balcony of an old "opera house" type venue, I've found hypers to work great to avoid excessive reverberation.  If you are on the floor of the venue, cards work fine.  I would think the same might be true for you, even if the energy levels are less.
Mics: Schoeps MK4 & CMC5's / Gefell M200's & M210's / ADK-TL / DPA4061's
Pres: V3 / ST9100
Decks: Oade Concert Mod R4Pro / R09 / R05
Photo: Nikon D700's, 2.8 Zooms, and Zeiss primes
Playback: Raspberry Pi > Modi2 Uber > Magni2 > HD650

Offline fmaderjr

  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1966
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #3 on: February 17, 2010, 08:04:30 AM »
Recently I've read a lot of messages on this forum and many articles on the net and decided to buy a Sony PCM-D50 because of its reliability. But there is a couple of things with it, that bother me: the recorder has only minijack input for mics, so I can't use a balanced line that reject interference. The second thing is its inability to drop markers (for a long opera spectacle that lack is sad) and susceptibility to handling noises plus an overpriced remote.
So, should I really use a balanced line or perhaps there are any shielded cables for such situations?
Actually I wish I had a device that I could use without an external mic.

Stay away from anything by Zoom-there are many better options. The newer Sony M10 is getting rave reviews here. It is smaller than the D50, provides great sound quality, also has good internal mics (although you really should use externals no matter what recorder you buy), does allow you to drop markers (Adobe Audition reads them and probably many other editors), and has a small corded remote for starting stopping recording (though it seems useless to me unless you are using internal mics).

I agree with Joe you don't need balanced XLR mics and they make it harder to be inconspicuous. For your application you should probably select mics that are fairly sensitive so you don't have to crank the recorder up too high to get proper levels (meaning not Church Audio mics, which I love, but which are designed for recording loud music and not SP mics with the low sensitivity option). Some sort of SP mics without the low sensitivity option may be a good choice for you.  Someone who records opera could give you some better ideas here. Even with sensitive mics you may find you need to add a small preamp to the chain to get enough clean gain. The Church Audio ST-9100 is great and is quite small. The Church Audio UGLY is even smaller, but you can't easily adjust levels on the fly.

 
AT853's (all caps)/CM-300 Franken Naks (CP-1,2,3)/JBMod Nak 700's (CP-701,702) > Tascam DR-680
Or Sonic Studios DSM-6 > M10

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2010, 09:51:21 AM »
The second thing is its inability to drop markers (for a long opera spectacle that lack is sad) and susceptibility to handling noises plus an overpriced remote.

Stay away from anything by Zoom-there are many better options. The newer Sony M10 is getting rave reviews here. It is smaller than the D50, provides great sound quality, also has good internal mics (although you really should use externals no matter what recorder you buy), does allow you to drop markers (Adobe Audition reads them and probably many other editors), and has a small corded remote for starting stopping recording (though it seems useless to me unless you are using internal mics).

It's been a while since I tried marking tracks, but I personally wouldn't mess with any marking of tracks while the shows going on. Doing so only invites trouble IMHO, and you can track out the recording the next day without problems (and probably do a better job) just fine.
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline fmaderjr

  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1966
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2010, 10:32:35 AM »
I personally wouldn't mess with any marking of tracks while the shows going on. Doing so only invites trouble IMHO, and you can track out the recording the next day without problems (and probably do a better job) just fine.

I agree. i was just saying you can mark tracks if you want to because Don mentioned it was a feature he was looking for.

If you do mark tracks, there's no way you wouldn't have to readjust them later anyway.

AT853's (all caps)/CM-300 Franken Naks (CP-1,2,3)/JBMod Nak 700's (CP-701,702) > Tascam DR-680
Or Sonic Studios DSM-6 > M10

Offline boojum

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2010, 12:30:05 PM »
Recording is like NASCAR: speed costs money.  How fast do you want to go?
Nov schmoz kapop.

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5845
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2010, 01:21:20 PM »
Hi all!
I'm looking for a proper set of hardware for stealth recording of operas and legal/stealth recording of chamber and symphony music.
The main question is whether I have to use mics with balanced cables. There are many light/sound and other devices in musical theatres and all of them can make interference and produce noises. I had a very disappointing experience with a MTII (the device was defective itself), when I tried to record with its own mic with the provided extension cord. I encountered very bad noise. So I figured to search for another solution. Is it true that any XLR connected mic has a balanced line? If so, I apparently need one of them and some recorder like ZOOM h4n with XLR inputs. Recently I've read a lot of messages on this forum and many articles on the net and decided to buy a Sony PCM-D50 because of its reliability. But there is a couple of things with it, that bother me: the recorder has only minijack input for mics, so I can't use a balanced line that reject interference. The second thing is its inability to drop markers (for a long opera spectacle that lack is sad) and susceptibility to handling noises plus an overpriced remote.
So, should I really use a balanced line or perhaps there are any shielded cables for such situations?
Actually I wish I had a device that I could use without an external mic. Unlike a h4n with its noisy mics, a pcm-d50 has a pair of decent mics that could be helpful to me in some non-critical chamber music cases. And I'm not ready to carry more than one box (may be two) and a pair of mics.
After this first-step decision on a recording gear I'm gonna look for some decent mics. Now I think it might be a pair of some binaural mics in croakie mount for convenient stealth recording. For such cases when one sits in a big hall of a theater it might be hypercardioid mics for picking the needed sound from the stage, but not from all hall's reflections.
What do you think? Opera tapers, please share your experience, if you can.
Assuming you may be somewhat of an audiophile or at least care about sound quality more than some rock listeners do, I would strongly recommend the DPA 4060 mics.  They are not cheap ($600 or so used) but are the smallest mic you can pretty much get and offer absolutely outstanding detail and accuracy.  Worn on glasses near your ear, they should be virtually unnoticeable to anyone.  They are also quite easy to operate and store.  I have the 4061 (the version better suited to recording louder music) and love them. 

I
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline fmaderjr

  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1966
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #8 on: February 17, 2010, 02:19:56 PM »
DPA 4060's are excellent general purpose mics when omnis are called for. They have around 10 dB more output than the 4061's so are great for stuff that isn't too loud, but are also great recording loud music. Unless you are right by the stacks at an ear crushingly loud show, they are not going to overload. 4061's get all the hype here, but I think 4060's are better mics for anyone but a stack taper (and stack tapes usually suck anyway) or for someone who never records quieter stuff.
AT853's (all caps)/CM-300 Franken Naks (CP-1,2,3)/JBMod Nak 700's (CP-701,702) > Tascam DR-680
Or Sonic Studios DSM-6 > M10

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #9 on: February 17, 2010, 04:07:31 PM »
Of course you could take advantage of the M10's excellent low noise preamplifier, and ability to directly power my DSM mics.  Useful for lowest profile and fullest 10-40,000+ cycle stereo-surround recording while sitting in the best seats in the house. 
This seems the highest recorded quality, and lowest costing solution if very natural sounding audio quality matters.  Something the very colored sounding DPA 4060 types cannot provide. 
You can also use the same headworn DSM mic placed on HRTF LiteGUY baffle for regular telescopic/boom mic stand purposes of remote mic placements 6-15 feet up away from audience noises, or best postions very close behind the conductor.

See TS thread details at: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=83254.0;all



DSM Classical Recordings at www.sonicstudios.com/mp3_2slp.htm
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

DSM HRTF STEREO-SURROUND RECORDING SYSTEMS WEBSITE: http://www.sonicstudios.com

Offline fmaderjr

  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1966
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #10 on: February 17, 2010, 04:20:34 PM »
Of course you could take advantage of the M10's excellent low noise preamplifier, and ability to directly power my DSM mics. 

That's probably an excellent suggestion. Guy's mics do sound incredible (at least in situations where there isn't too much audience chatter). They are less expensive than DPA's as well-especially if you get an M10 as a recorder and don't need the battery box. 

Now that I have an M10, one of these days I'll pick up a pair of Sonic Studios mics and give them a shot myself.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 04:25:31 PM by fmaderjr »
AT853's (all caps)/CM-300 Franken Naks (CP-1,2,3)/JBMod Nak 700's (CP-701,702) > Tascam DR-680
Or Sonic Studios DSM-6 > M10

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #11 on: February 17, 2010, 05:11:18 PM »
Sorry to say, but I don't know of any recorder that offer a high quality internal mic. There are still lots of options to choose from that would physically be a small rig.
I realize it. But for some non-critical cases those of D-50 could be proper.
I wouldn't get overly hung up on balanced inputs.  Most of that electrical noise is far enough away that it doesn't matter.  The only noise I've gotten is my own cell phone when I'm stupid enough to leave it on, and put my preamp/recorder in the same pocket.  I'm not sure what you got for noise, but that's not the norm.

The good news is that you probably don't have the same problem as the rest of us.  We have to be constantly concerned with chatty drunks at our shows, and I expect at opera and chamber music, people shut up and listen.

Your MT has balanced inputs I think, just rather than using XLR inputs it uses TRS (Tip/Ring/Sleeve) 1/4" jacks.  It also has and 1/8" stereo minijack for small mics.  Binaural croakies for stealth is probably a good start.  When I've taped an amplified rock band from the balcony of an old "opera house" type venue, I've found hypers to work great to avoid excessive reverberation.  If you are on the floor of the venue, cards work fine.  I would think the same might be true for you, even if the energy levels are less.
Actually my problem can be worse: I think most of quiet noises are masked by the loud rock music, but when one records some soft music (like a string quartet), there are many audible noises in quiet places of a piece.
My MTII is now returned to the strore, because it turned to be defective. So I look for some other device now.
Quote
If you are on the floor of the venue, cards work fine
Sorry, what cards are you talking about?
Stay away from anything by Zoom-there are many better options. The newer Sony M10 is getting rave reviews here. It is smaller than the D50, provides great sound quality, also has good internal mics (although you really should use externals no matter what recorder you buy), does allow you to drop markers (Adobe Audition reads them and probably many other editors), and has a small corded remote for starting stopping recording (though it seems useless to me unless you are using internal mics).

I agree with Joe you don't need balanced XLR mics and they make it harder to be inconspicuous. For your application you should probably select mics that are fairly sensitive so you don't have to crank the recorder up too high to get proper levels (meaning not Church Audio mics, which I love, but which are designed for recording loud music and not SP mics with the low sensitivity option). Some sort of SP mics without the low sensitivity option may be a good choice for you.  Someone who records opera could give you some better ideas here. Even with sensitive mics you may find you need to add a small preamp to the chain to get enough clean gain. The Church Audio ST-9100 is great and is quite small. The Church Audio UGLY is even smaller, but you can't easily adjust levels on the fly.
Thank you. I worry about the noises: what if I buy a recorder with non-balanced inputs and get an awful noise in a theater? If anyone is interested, I can post a sample of that recording with a horrible noise. I've done it with my MTII.
Quote
I agree with Joe you don't need balanced XLR mics and they make it harder to be inconspicuous.
AFAIK, there are tiny mics with an XLR outputs.

It's been a while since I tried marking tracks, but I personally wouldn't mess with any marking of tracks while the shows going on. Doing so only invites trouble IMHO, and you can track out the recording the next day without problems (and probably do a better job) just fine.
that's a matter of taste. anyway, what trouble do you mean?
Recording is like NASCAR: speed costs money.  How fast do you want to go?
I just want to do records without loud noises and with decent quality to listen them later with my headphones, nothing more. I need to have some seldom-performed pieces in my collection for educational purposes only.
Assuming you may be somewhat of an audiophile or at least care about sound quality more than some rock listeners do, I would strongly recommend the DPA 4060 mics.  They are not cheap ($600 or so used) but are the smallest mic you can pretty much get and offer absolutely outstanding detail and accuracy.  Worn on glasses near your ear, they should be virtually unnoticeable to anyone.  They are also quite easy to operate and store.  I have the 4061 (the version better suited to recording louder music) and love them. 

I
thank you for your advice, but that price is a little big for me. Although I'd like to do detailed records.
======================================
DEAR COLLEAGUES, THE OPINIONS ARE GREAT, BUT WHAT ABOUT BALANCED (XLR) CABLES AND NOISES?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 05:20:26 PM by Don Kazak »

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #12 on: February 17, 2010, 05:15:17 PM »
Hi. Let me try to save you some time and money here. I do legitimate, professional recording of opera and can tell you that stealth (or other technically casual) recording of opera is generally a hopeless cause. Much if not most of the time, you won't hear the voices clearly enough to make the recording worth listening to, except as a vague souvenir of an evening.

So don't bother investing a lot of time or trouble or money in equipment for that purpose, because even if you have full permission, it ain't easy getting a reasonable balance--especially given that the orchestra is generally in front of the stage. I'm all for two-mike recording wherever possible, but opera ain't in that category.

You asked about balanced connections. There's a very good reason that professionals use them exclusively, and that reason gets stronger every year nowadays. You could connect an unbalanced microphone to a balanced cable and the balanced input of a preamp, mixer or recorder, but why bother? Professional microphones all use balanced connections, and the microphones are the critical part of your rig. All properly functioning recorders (used correctly) sound absolutely alike; microphones definitely do not, and even the hypothetically best microphones in the world still depend hugely on how they're used.

In other words, worrying about balanced vs. unbalanced as an isolated issue, rather than the quality and best placement of your microphones, is the wrong tree to be barking up.

--best regards
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 05:22:42 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #13 on: February 17, 2010, 06:11:19 PM »
Hi. Let me try to save you some time and money here. I do legitimate, professional recording of opera and can tell you that stealth (or other technically casual) recording of opera is generally a hopeless cause. Much if not most of the time, you won't hear the voices clearly enough to make the recording worth listening to, except as a vague souvenir of an evening.

So don't bother investing a lot of time or trouble or money in equipment for that purpose, because even if you have full permission, it ain't easy getting a reasonable balance--especially given that the orchestra is generally in front of the stage. I'm all for two-mike recording wherever possible, but opera ain't in that category.

You asked about balanced connections. There's a very good reason that professionals use them exclusively, and that reason gets stronger every year nowadays. You could connect an unbalanced microphone to a balanced cable and the balanced input of a preamp, mixer or recorder, but why bother? Professional microphones all use balanced connections, and the microphones are the critical part of your rig. All properly functioning recorders (used correctly) sound absolutely alike; microphones definitely do not, and even the hypothetically best microphones in the world still depend hugely on how they're used.

In other words, worrying about balanced vs. unbalanced as an isolated issue, rather than the quality and best placement of your microphones, is the wrong tree to be barking up.

--best regards
thank you!
So, do you recommend me not to use external mics at all? Frankly speaking, I find a quality of opera recordings done with ZOOM 2 built-in mics sufficient to me (I hear such records). But it's not convenient to use internals when you try to do a stealth job; that's why I started to look for some external solution, but the interference from theatrical devices bothers me. I had a sad experience with it and wondered about a balanced line as an effective noise rejector. What do you think of this feature of a balanced line?
p.s.: I mentioned ZOOM 2 as an example. Of course I'd pick some better device.

Offline StuStu

  • Trade Count: (40)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2860
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #14 on: February 17, 2010, 06:59:54 PM »
I believe DSatz is advising that you'll be hard pressed to make a decent, stealth or open, 2 channel recording of an operatic performance.
MK5, MK8, MK41, KM184D, CK77, B3 ---CMD 2U XT, KC5, KCY, AKI---KCY Tinybox, Ugly BB---AETA 4MinX, PMD661 MKII, R-26, M-10, MR-1

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #15 on: February 17, 2010, 11:22:53 PM »
As a long-time member of the Musicians' union, I'm not eager to help you make stealth recordings of live opera performances. The musicians' contract guarantees them royalties if their work is used for any recording other than a single one for archival purposes ONLY. There are also issues of copyright for many operas.

Otherwise, on a technical level, what StuStu said. People are used to hearing the words on an opera recording. You can't get that by putting two microphones at audience distance, at least for loudspeaker playback. It works for human listeners who are there in the hall only because we have two ears and a brain, but no recording company has ever recorded an opera that way. When live opera performances are picked up for broadcast there usually are dozens of microphones, including body mikes on singers and shotgun mikes hidden in the scenery and proscenium. I watch lots of opera DVDs and the range of sound quality is from appallingly bad to OK. But none of it is ever "naturally" miked with a single pair.

Also, just in general, internal mikes are the last resort for almost any purpose. No one builds high-quality condenser microphones into recorders; to do so would raise the cost of the recorder by literally thousands of dollars, and would deprive you of the choice of which type of microphones you prefer to use for a given recording.

--best regards
« Last Edit: February 21, 2010, 09:14:09 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline boojum

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3629
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #16 on: February 18, 2010, 02:42:50 AM »
Amen.     8)
Nov schmoz kapop.

Offline pafnuzzi

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #17 on: February 18, 2010, 04:39:09 AM »
AAAAAAAAAaMMMMMMMMMMeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeN :P
Recorder: Sony PCM M10 red

Offline pafnuzzi

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 90
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #18 on: February 18, 2010, 04:50:49 AM »
Hi

I also record classical music. You can take the Sony PCM M10 which would be the perfect choise for you applications anyway what mic you use. Forget about zoom and don´t matter about XLR. I tried all this and don´t want this monsters in my pocket for nothing.

Then add a good mic with or without bbox. I personally prefer omni mics since they sound rounder and in opera there is not a lot audience noise.

Regards
Recorder: Sony PCM M10 red

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #19 on: February 19, 2010, 03:50:12 AM »
Experience shows you can make a very satisfying Opera recording using headworn DSM mics, and even if way, way back in one of the worst audience locations (like underneath the mezz!).   

Here's the above discussed example (see image below) from the sample recordings page found at: www.sonicstudios.com/mp3_2slp.htm


Download the recording directly from http://74.208.10.48/mp3/carmelit.mp3
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

DSM HRTF STEREO-SURROUND RECORDING SYSTEMS WEBSITE: http://www.sonicstudios.com

Offline Myco

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7572
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #20 on: February 20, 2010, 07:06:06 PM »
if you're going to run xlr's into a pre-amp and keep the rig somewhat small and compact, then I can suggest the Nevaton MCE400'S>Aerco MP2, it's worked great for me. I haven't recorded any opera, but I bet this setup would be sensitive enough to pick it up pretty decent.
Microtech Gefell M200: M20/M21/M27 caps> Bumblebee MiAGi-II/Darktrain silver cable's/"Chuck" Belden cables> Aerco MP-2 or Busman modded DR-680 pre-amps> Darktrain cables & interconnects> Tascam DR-680 (Busman mod)
AT853's(card's/hyper's)>AT8533x>Aerco MP-2>Sony M10

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #21 on: February 21, 2010, 12:10:51 PM »
I wouldn't be too judgemental. What one might find unexceptable to listen to another can find satisfaction! It appears that the OP wants recordings for his own personal use. I say, go for it and enjoy!

He will learn much through out the process, have documentation of his progress for his enjoyment and have some fun, too. I wouldn't be too haed on him by raining on his picnic. Not everyone is fortunate enough to run multi-track open taping.

 

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #22 on: February 21, 2010, 02:03:02 PM »
Thank you, guys, but I'm still not able to figure out, which kind of cables (balanced or may be any shielded) I have to use to do a guaranteed interference-free record.

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #23 on: February 21, 2010, 02:53:45 PM »
Thank you, guys, but I'm still not able to figure out, which kind of cables (balanced or may be any shielded) I have to use to do a guaranteed interference-free record.
Best to start with knowing exact mics you're using, then decide if needing external preamplifier for powering those mics and inputting to your choice of recorder having features (or not) for supporting running intended mics.
Then decide distance from mics to preamp or deck. 

If over 2 meters distance, then maybe best to use balanced mic-to-preamp/deck, or balanced preamp-to-deck cable if preamp is over 2 meters distance from deck input.

Best cable is type having 100% metal foil shield (usually plenum type has this), but typical flexible balanced mic cable with braided weave with ~85% shield is more than capable of working as needed if connectors are in prestine clean condition (good advice for ALL signal connections). 

If working with mics <2 meters distance from preamp input, then balanced cabling not usually necessary. 

My DSM mics use custom star-quad braided mic cabling known to exceed most normal (even balanced) type cabling, even though wired as 'unbalanced for inputting minijack mic inputs such as found on M10 deck.
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

DSM HRTF STEREO-SURROUND RECORDING SYSTEMS WEBSITE: http://www.sonicstudios.com

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #24 on: February 21, 2010, 04:44:00 PM »
Great! Guysonic, have you got an idea, what could be a cause of humming in my recording? I did it with a MTII and its own mic with a cord extension. It was in the middle of a chamber hall of a music theater. The recorder and the mic were on my lap. I can provide a sample of that.

Offline DSatz

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (35)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3349
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #25 on: February 21, 2010, 06:48:05 PM »
I have a very different reply from Guysonic's. I wouldn't recommend foil shielding for 99% of the people on this forum, and the 1% (if they exist here at all) know who they are. For one thing it is extremely important for the shield to have the lowest possible series resistance, but foil shielding has considerably higher resistance per unit length than braided copper, which is the preferred type for professional location recording. That's why the drain wire is included--but because it generally isn't wound symmetrically with respect to the signal pair, it can actually become a pathway for interfering signals to get into the audio.

In other words, if anyone assumes that foil shielding should be the ultimate in RFI protection because of the 100% shield coverage, there are plenty of seasoned professionals who can point out the error of that assumption. Big time.

Foil-shield cable is designed for permanent, built-in, physically protected installations--not for the situation in which the cable has to be unwound, might well get stepped on, and then gets wound up again at the end of the night. Stay well away, unless you are an electrical contractor (the possible 1% that I referred to earlier).

The whole shielding thing has been totally overemphasized; much if not most noise from RF interference isn't affected one way or the other by the presence of a shield. There are very widespread misunderstandings about this whole topic, and I hesitate to open the can of worms, but someone should at least say quietly and modestly (the way I always do) that most of the whole audiophile belief system concerning shielding and grounding is for crap.

The main responsibility for rejecting noise due to interference falls on the balanced input that your signal cable is connected to--but depending on the configuration of that input circuit, its ability to reject noise may depend considerably on how well balanced the driving circuit is as well (i.e. the microphone and cable). If those factors are well squared away then (and here is where the audiophile assumptions are so wrong) you can remove the shield from the cable completely, and the noise rejection of the balanced input will still work. (I'm not suggesting that anyone really do this; it's just to make the point that it's the balance that matters in most cases, NOT the shielding.)

The other thing that falls onto the shoulders of the input is exactly how the shield contact from the cable is connected to the chassis ground of the receiving equipment (the recorder in this case). This must be done at a single point as close to the connection point of the cable as possible; otherwise any current flowing in the shield will inevitably leak into the rest of the circuitry. And approximately 0% of the lower-cost, Far-Eastern-manufactured preamps and recorders that people use here are constructed appropriately in this respect (the so-called "pin 1" problem), so the production design of the equipment is pretty much begging for noise and interference problems. These can often be mitigated by the use of Neutrik "EMC" (XLR) connectors on the cables, but analog audio circuit designers need to do their homework better in the future.

Enough lecturing; you've got a well-known piece of troublesome gear (the MicroTrack) whose analog inputs simply suck, though they suck less when driven at line levels by balanced sources and cables than unbalanced sources and cables. Still, I would advise you to feed the thing a digital signal instead. Second choice is to use a preamp with balanced outputs and to feed a line-level signal through balanced cables to the analog inputs of the MicroTrack. I would never advise using that recorder for anything critical anyway--it's far too unreliable--but I certainly wouldn't advise connecting microphones to its analog inputs.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2010, 01:17:12 PM by DSatz »
music > microphones > a recorder of some sort

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #26 on: February 21, 2010, 07:21:45 PM »
Actually I got rid of my MTII after five days of owning it and one recording session. I only described my experience, and now I plan to get D50.
DSatz, your lecture is very informative. What do you think of D50's internal mics? And could you give me an advice on what kind of mics should I get with it for interference-free recording?
I'm just a musician and sometimes want to do recordings of rare-played music for my personal educational purposes only. So I don't care of all audiofile finenesses, I just want to make noise-free recordings with a decent dynamic range (SNR).

Offline audBall

  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • Posts: 6479
  • Gender: Male
  • Feel brand new about it
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2010, 09:59:34 AM »
Speaking of opera, we've got some original Rossini vocal scores at the ASU Music Library now.  Neat stuff.  I love the fact that I can check out just about any opera in circulation as well. 
mg m20.21.23 ■ akg ck61.62.63 »  nbob■naiant
aercomp2 ■ v2∞3 ■ sx-m2d2
d100 ■ pmd661 ■ r44ocm ■ f3

Offline earmonger

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
  • 20-20000 Hz
@Don Kazak--

There are many levels of experience and fussiness on this board.  It sounds to me like you want to make a decent-sounding audience recording with a basic stealth rig.

Here's what I would try:

The Sony PCM-M10
and a pair of Sound Professionals BMC-2 mics with clips.

 Put the sensitivity at High, the recording level on Manual, the input recording level knob at 5, or 6 if you're further back in the hall.

Wear a black shirt to camouflage the little mics, clip the mics to your shirt collar at the width of your ears,  and start recording. Look down at the recorder's LED's if you can--like if you have it in a camera case on a belt--and they should be either dark or green. If they start flashing red, turn the input volume knob down just a little bit (and don't do it often--you'll hear the volume change in the recording).

Don't worry about balanced cables. Just plug in and go.

I don't know why you got hum in your recording, but having the recorder in your lap probably gave you a muffled recording. (Try listening with your head down there.) Maybe there was a ventilation fan or something under the floor. Just a guess.

This will not give you an opera recording worthy of a radio broadcast. But it will give you a reasonable facsimile of what you heard.

Offline Don Kazak

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Gender: Male
earmonger, thanks for your advice.
I'll try to do it. Actually I'm waiting for a D50, which I've ordered lately.

Offline federer.fan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: The best equipment for opera/chamber music? Should I use balanced cables?
« Reply #30 on: November 04, 2011, 06:44:43 PM »
Hi. Let me try to save you some time and money here. I do legitimate, professional recording of opera and can tell you that stealth (or other technically casual) recording of opera is generally a hopeless cause. Much if not most of the time, you won't hear the voices clearly enough to make the recording worth listening to, except as a vague souvenir of an evening.

I do a lot of stealth recordings, mostly of opera.  I've used a Tascam for a while with internal mics, which provided decent, listenable but not high quality recordings.  I decided I wanted to upgrade and, in doing some research, stumbled across this thread on the site (while deciding that probably the M10 + external mics would be the best option).

Anyway, I doubt anyone was losing any sleep over this issue, but I thought I'd throw my two cents in.  No, if you're sitting two rows back in the orchestra, using a recording device, it's not going to sound like a radio broadcast.  But that's obvious, and I don't think anyone is oblivious to that fact when they do that.

I'm a huge opera fan, and I have thousands of recordings.  Of those, maybe four or five are studio recordings.  The rest are live performances, probably around 70% radio broadcast and about 30% stealth/in-house recordings, of quality ranging from horrible to is-that-really-from-someone's-pocket?-it-sounds-perfect. 

There are several distinct advantages to doing stealth recordings of classical music, particularly opera.  If you hate opera this probably will seem like splitting hairs, but if you really love it you'll know what I mean.

1) vocal size/quality.  On live broadcasts, the mics are on stage and are so close up that you can't tell a lot of things about the singers.  When companies hold auditions, a lot of times if it is done in the actual opera house the people listening will sit in the middle or back of the theater.  Why?  because they want to hear how big the voice is, how it carries, and, very important, squillo.  These are all things that you can't tell from five feet away.  But if you are sitting in the back, you can tell in a heartbeat.  Vocal squillo is a bit more difficult to pick up on the microphones no matter where you're sitting, but believe me, the difference between the sound from up close to the sound from in the back of the house can be immense.  And with stealth recordings, you get that feeling much better, because you can hear how small/big/bright/dull voices are much better than just listening over the radio.

2) the availability of opera broadcasts is not that high.  First of all, the vast majority of opera companies in the world never do ANY radio broadcasts, so it's a bit of a strawman to say radio broadcasts are better than stealth recordings, because.... what if you want a given performance recorded and it is never going to broadcast it in the first place?  Well, tough luck.  In that case your only option is an in-house recording.  On top of THAT, a lot of companies that DO broadcast actually DELAY their broadcasts, and record from a series of performances and then splice together based on what they think sounds good.  So you might not even be getting a single, discrete performance, but instead a little from Monday night, some from Thursday night, a couple of arias from Saturday's matinee, etc. 

3) the unpredictability of opera.  If a given company does a production of, say, Rigoletto, and they have 10 performances over a few months, it's entirely possible they will have multiple casts, could happen that someone gets sick and some new talent steps in and saves the day.  If it's not being broadcast, you missed it.  But if you're there in the house, you could be part of history, and have it all in a nice, convenient WAV file to play back once you get home...

Anyway.  That's the motivation behind it.  Now I'll go invest in my M10 to take care of the practical side of it.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.284 seconds with 55 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF