Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: percoplus on August 29, 2010, 11:27:56 AM
-
This chart has been up in this forum for a while and everybody raves about it. What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are the capsules on the ends pointing outward or in? Please clarify the instructions. What the hell am I doing with my knuckles? ???
-
This chart has been up in this forum for a while and everybody raves about it. What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are the capsules on the ends pointing outward or in? Please clarify the instructions. What the hell am I doing with my knuckles? ???
Caps always point outward.
The diagram illustrates a couple of things related to a series of popular stereophonic configurations:
1) Spacing of mic caps.
2) Angle of mic caps relative to each other.
Each color and line pattern (dots, dashes, etc) combination represent a given stereo pattern (ORTF, DIN, RAI, etc). Some people print this out and take it with them for when they record and they use it as a template to try and ensure they are setup the way they want instead of either just guessing or eyeballing it. In that regard, it works well if you are trying to use one of these stereo patterns.
To add some stuff:
When you point your caps, point them parallel to the lines, not the rectangles at the end of the lines (those exist so you can get the spacing correct). Ignore the hand/knuckle remark if it helps, you're using this purely as a guide to help you setup your stuff based on certain angles and spacing.
-
This chart has been up in this forum for a while and everybody raves about it. What exactly are you trying to accomplish? Are the capsules on the ends pointing outward or in? Please clarify the instructions. What the hell am I doing with my knuckles? ???
When you point your caps, point them parallel to the lines, not the rectangles at the end of the lines (those exist so you can get the spacing correct).
But the lines point inwards, except for the XYs. So, the rectangles are the caps?
-
Not indicated and somewhat confusing is that the orientation of the stage or sound source is off the bottom of the page, not the top.
Rectangles indicate the position and orientation of the diaphrams themselves, inside the capsules/mics. The similarly colored lines indicate the mic bodies extending behind the capsules, as would be the case for typical 'end-addressed' small diaphram mics.
The bottom half of the diagram is just an identical copy of the top.
-
DPA gives a good explanation of all this that I found useful.
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Download/Stereo%20Recording.aspx
edit: ha, oops. Just read the other thread and saw you've already read this.
-
I'm still not seeing it, man. But then i'm not a sound guy. And now the sound stage in in the other direction? On, Lord...
-
Look at page 2 of the following: http://www.taperssection.com/reference/pdf/Manual_ShureA27M.pdf
Much easier to understand.
-
Yeah, flipp, that one is easy to understand. And I get the other thing, too. It makes all the difference in the world if the sound source is at bottom of the page.
So, based on these two documents i count nine different 2-mic configurations. Now, I need to figure out which one to use where.
Thanks everyone
-
Nine specific points along the Stereo Zoom (http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=119057.msg1591490#msg1591490) infinite continuum.
-
Nine specific points along the Stereo Zoom (http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=119057.msg1591490#msg1591490) infinite continuum.
The Stereo Zoom article...talk about confusing! While the SZ article is well written, I think that even experienced TS members have stated that they had to read it multiple times before they really understood what it's saying.
For the sake of the Percoplus, the SZ article provides the reasons why DIN, DINa, ORTF, NOS etc are simply 'typical' popular mic configurations...with specific spacing and angles of incidence. The SZ article outlines a concept and corresponding methodology to optimize any given recording scenario, which leads to the potential for nearly any spacing and incident angle.
-
Caps always point outward.
Page, perhaps there's no need to belabor the point when the OP seems to understand the chart now, but this statement is easy to misinterpret.
When capsules are in X-Y coincident, the only way to set them up for coincident spacing is to have them pointing in a toe inward manner...which I'd translate as being pointed inwards. Therefore, caps don't always point outward.
-
..i count nine different 2-mic configurations. Now, I need to figure out which one to use where.
..the SZ article provides the reasons why DIN, DINa, ORTF, NOS etc are simply 'typical' popular mic configurations...
Stereo Zoom is helpful in understanding the inter-linked relationship between stereo mic spacing, angle and pattern. Understanding that relationship helps in developing a practical feel for what combinations to use in various recording scenarios. I'm throwing the Stereo Zoom information out there not for specifically applying it's charts directly (which can be rather confusing), but for helping to get a conceptual handle on the underlying relationship.. the why and where.
Although it often takes reading it a few times and a bit of contemplation to get that to sink in- the specifics are less important than the idea that under-pins them. It's not the end-all-be-all, but it's a good start.
-
When capsules are in X-Y coincident, the only way to set them up for coincident spacing is to have them pointing in a toe inward manner...which I'd translate as being pointed inwards. Therefore, caps don't always point outward.
But when in XY the mic on the right is capturing the left sound source and verse vica so once again the caps are pointing outward.
just to be argumentative :D
-
Nine specific points along the Stereo Zoom (http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=119057.msg1591490#msg1591490) infinite continuum.
This statement says it all, doesn't it? All of the acronyms like ORTF, DIN, NOS, etc., mean absolutely nothing because they do not take into account all of the variables necessary to make the best decision. There's a continuum of angles and distances that can theoretically produce the same result.
So, what exactly am I supposed to be trying to achieve? Please don't say, "do whatever sounds good to you" or "there's no right or wrong answer." While there may be more than one right answer, there are definitely wrong answers or you are all wasting your time here.
-
Nine specific points along the Stereo Zoom (http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=119057.msg1591490#msg1591490) infinite continuum.
This statement says it all, doesn't it? All of the acronyms like ORTF, DIN, NOS, etc., mean absolutely nothing because they do not take into account all of the variables necessary to make the best decision. There's a continuum of angles and distances that can theoretically produce the same result.
So, what exactly am I supposed to be trying to achieve? Please don't say, "do whatever sounds good to you" or "there's no right or wrong answer." While there may be more than one right answer, there are definitely wrong answers or you are all wasting your time here.
You want to study this information and realize what differing angles and spacing does to the sound, and then use that information consistently with achieving whatever your goal is. In my case, my goal is to replicate the sound and stereo image as accurately as I can. Your goal may be different; however, I believe that most people have a similar goal as me.
When you get to the field and you're confronted with such variables as distance from the stage, width of the PA speakers, volume of the sound, etc, understanding how different configurations best interacts with your recording scenario will help you achieve your goal.
For example, there are a number of 'rules of thumb'...ORTF has a wider angle of incidence, so use that when you're outside or in better sounding rooms (which have less reverberant sound waves)...NOS when you're close in...etc.
-
So, what exactly am I supposed to be trying to achieve? Please don't say, "do whatever sounds good to you" or "there's no right or wrong answer." While there may be more than one right answer, there are definitely wrong answers or you are all wasting your time here.
While there may be wrong answers, those are pretty obvious (e.g. don't arrange your stereo pair of cardioid mics both pointing precisely 180º away from the sound source). The vast array of "right" choices really comes down to what you're trying to accomplish. I know it's not the answer you want to hear, but the goal for most of us is to come home with a recording we enjoy personally, hence the suggestion to use mic configurations that sound best to our own ears (using our own playback systems / environments).
There's a continuum of angles and distances that can theoretically produce the same result.
I wouldn't say same. As Gutbucket points out in another thread linked in the stickied post previously referenced (http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=119057.msg1591490#msg1591490):
The Stereo Zoom is really about optimizing only one aspects [sic] of recording, namely getting the stereo-ness accurate.
So while two configurations having the same stereophonic recording angle (SRA) may produce the same "stereo-ness", they won't produce the same result. For example, using cardioids, both 23cm / 120º and 50cm / 20º have an SRA of ±40º. But 23cm / 120º will pick up much more reverberant and ambient sound, while 50cm / 20º will pick up less reverberant and ambient sound. So it's important to take into account other factors, aside from just "stereo-ness", as Gutbucket also notes:
There are other things to consider that are often more important such as the frequency balance at the mic position, clarity, the direct-to-reverberant ratio, the off-axis performance of your microphones, blathering drunks, the balcony overhang, the noisy bar on your left, the raucous mosh pit, the sqeaky chair where the guy that snores always sits, the HVAC exhaust that blows on your mics, etc.
And finally, a nice summary here:
The Stereo Zoom is a great tool, the trick is to understand the ideas behind it so you can decide when and how it is best applied, also realizing that there might be an better tool to do the job in some cases.
One of the challenges for a lot of concert taping is minimizing reverberant / ambient sound (e.g. in venues with cruddy acoustics, obnoxiously chatty crowds, etc.). In this context, one of the big ideas to take away from SZ is that if you know the SRA (i.e. the degree of "stereo-ness") you like, then to minimize reverberant and ambient sound select a mic configuration with the desired SRA that captures the greatest degree of on-axis sound from the source. This typically means using a configuration that has a narrower included angle and wider spacing. The narrower the included angle, the more on-axis your directional mics are with the sound source, the less off-axis -- i.e. reverberant and ambient -- sound they'll pick up. Just one example of factors to consider when selecting a configuration.