Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Ask The Tapers => Topic started by: TJL on April 02, 2013, 10:07:48 PM
-
Hey guys,
Just looking for some incite/advice for a Classical Horn Quartet I'm recording in a week.
It will involve 4 french horns performing in a fairly reverberant orchestral hall which has changeable acoustic wall panel to alter the acoustics (which will come in handy). In terms of Microphones i have: 4 x Scheops (2 Omni, 2 Cardiod); 1 x AKG 414; 2x Neumann 89; 1x Neumann 69i and 2x AT 4081 Ribbions.
The plan is to have two Scheops Cardiod 40cm to 1m from the performers, splitting them up into pairs. Then 3-4 meters back and a little wider place the two Neumann 89's (omni) to capture the room sound. Directly above them will be the Ribbons fairly high (ceiling height isn't an issue) to capture the high frequencies and natural air.
What i want to get out of the recording is a 3 dimensional high quality recording. I want the recording to have depth but without making the instrument sound physically far away.
If there are any opinions/improvements you guys have on the set up let me know!
Cheers
-
I'd use the AT ribbons crossed at 90 as the main pair. Space the schoeps Omni's back in the hall for room sound. Use the Schoeps cards as spots as necessary.
-
Do you know how they will be oriented on stage? When I did a french horn quartet, I remember them being in a rhombus with the front two parallel to the stage lip. The reason I say this is in terms of bleed between spots; if you put the two omnis as spots in the front, you can use them to get some room sound and then use the spots for the other two, but that's harder to do when they are in 2 rows that are offset (since you'll catch more of the second row in the omnis then compared to if they are just behind).
I'm inclined to just use 4 mics (spots), maybe 6 (an extra 2 for the room). My initial thought is use all of the schoeps as spots and the omnis in either the outliers pair (if they are all in a line) or in front to help with room ambiance. An odd thought would be to mix coloration and use the u89s (outer/back) and mk4s (inner/center) as spots and then use the schoeps omnis further out as an ambiance pair. That would create a unique color for each instrument (assuming 2 horns per channel in the mixdown) so localization might be easier on the listening to hear each person play.
Either way, I'd have to know what the config on stage is.
-
Funny horns that point the wrong way.
They certainly don't radiate like typical horns or even most other instruments, with a far greater proportion of indirect sound at the listening position out in front, even more than piano. Nice round sound in a good room, which is primarily what they need to sound best, a good room.
No real suggestion here, other than to use omnis somewhere in there. It may be interesting playing with the variable room acoustics.
-
If "3 dimensional" is high on your agenda, then IMHO you're throwing far too many mics at this. You could end up with a pea soup or pasteboard result, where there's little element of integrity, seamlessness or sheer "rightness" to the imaging.
Keep it simple and don't overthink it. Lose those elevated AT's. Concentrate on first miking the (sensibly arranged) ensemble as a whole with a single Schoeps pair, say, an omni AB (most likely) or cardioid ORTF, from a distance of ca. 2-3m. That may be all you need. Listen, adjust, listen... till you've optimized that as far as you can, before reaching for those additional mics.
-
Keep it simple and don't overthink it. Lose those elevated AT's. Concentrate on first miking the (sensibly arranged) ensemble as a whole with a single Schoeps pair, say, an omni AB (most likely) or cardioid ORTF, from a distance of ca. 2-3m. That may be all you need. Listen, adjust, listen... till you've optimized that as far as you can, before reaching for those additional mics.
Strongly agree. You must have a stereo pair as an option. That may end up as your best result.
When you combine multiple sources you will have arrival time and potential phase issues. It doesn't always work out. It may not result in a 3d sound stage.
Cards ORTF tend to have great depth and 3d imaging. Omni's or sub-cards A-B are a good choice. However, the objects between the mics can tend to be vague in the soundstage and the overall result. While very stereo, that result may lack depth compared to cards ORTF.
-
I agree with Tom's comments that either an ORTF pair or a pair of omnis could work well and may be all that is required and with 11's coment that ORTF imaging is sharper, yet I don't find an A-B pair of omnis to lack depth compared to ORTF cardioids. It's a different presentation but not one lacking in fore/aft depth. ORTF seems to have more aparent depth to my ear than other near-spaced cardioid configs however.
Since French Horn is more of a melodic steady state sort of something of a muted attack, it may be that the sharper imaging of ORTF may not be as advantageous as the big solid bottom, spaciousness and envelopment provided by spaced omnis, simply because of the nature of the instrument and the ensemble. That's all armchair speculation though.
If you have the setup time, you might consider running both pairs seperately, each optimized on it's own, with the primary idea of choosing between whichever works our better afterwards. You could also play with mixing them if you find it helps, but I'd probablyl lean towards optimizing each pair on it's own at the session.
-
When I did it, it was with a simple stereo pair about 4-5' above the performers and I couldn't get rid of the distant effect on the second row. That was my worry when I posted about using 6 mics for 4 horns.
I guess it depends on what you value in terms of sonic characteristics and what it will be used for.
-
Cards ORTF tend to have great depth and 3d imaging. Omni's or sub-cards A-B are a good choice. However, the objects between the mics can tend to be vague in the soundstage and the overall result. While very stereo, that result may lack depth compared to cards ORTF.
Yes, in terms of imaging sharpness, the pecking order would be Blumlein > ORTF > Omni AB.
But I was also looking at the result from the preferences of the performer. Let's face it: most musicians or singers don't care doodley squat* about esoteric concepts such as "holographic imaging". (Indeed, when I've had performers back home to hear their recorded concert, they rarely even bother to sit down centered between the speakers!) At heart, they're only really interested in the tone quality of the voice- or instrument, especially their own. And in general, unequalized Fig-8's will be a bit thin at the bottom end for their taste, while Omni's give a satisfying smoothness, solidity and woomph.
On a few occasions where I've been able - via rehearsal snippets recorded in parallel - to offer the performers an option between a Jecklin Disk (Schoeps MK2S) and a Blumlein (Schoeps MK8) version, they always plumped for the JD....even though the Blumlein imaging might be making the hairs stand on the back of my neck. :-)
* intentional double negative, in conformance with US grammatical usage :-)
-
But I was also looking at the result from the preferences of the performer. Let's face it: most musicians or singers don't care doodley squat* about esoteric concepts such as "holographic imaging". (Indeed, when I've had performers back home to hear their recorded concert, they rarely even bother to sit down centered between the speakers!) At heart, they're only really interested in the tone quality of the voice- or instrument, especially their own. And in general, unequalized Fig-8's will be a bit thin at the bottom end for their taste, while Omni's give a satisfying smoothness, solidity and woomph
This.
I like laser precision as much as the next nerd here (and i say sweet things to my 4015s), thats where I was headed with the "whats this for" remark.
-
Try one of these....
http://www.cascademicrophones.com/cascade_X-15.html
Scroll to the bottom and hear the recording done with a pair of horns....