Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Microphones & Setup => Topic started by: svenkid on January 07, 2008, 12:07:07 PM
-
TS - I was perusing some LMA, and saw this
"Healy Method, 8' high, DFC @ center pillar, ~6' from stage"
What's the healy method? Just being up high and close, nice :P
-
Here a pair of omnidirectional microphones are placed approximately ear distance apart and oriented at 90 to the sound source, facing outward.
-
Here a pair of omnidirectional microphones are placed approximately ear distance apart and oriented at 90 to the sound source, facing outward.
Like so:
stage
O------ ------O
Where the O is the "head" of the mic and the ------ is the body. That's how they're oriented towards the stage. I use Healy a TON and really love it. It's got to be ideal omni conditions to use, however. When I run healy on stage it gives me the impression in playback that I'm sitting on stage in the middle of all the musicians.
edit: to make "graphic" look a little cleaner
-
really, that's pretty cool, but I don't see that as a good idea back 6 feet in a bar type venue, but on stage I can see, perhaps not stage lip, but actually on stage, definately. Thanks for the knowledge drop.
Carl
-
The Healy Method is a great way to do AB omnis on a really small footprint. Used it quite a bit when I was doing 4 channel mixes w/ my old Avenson's.
From Hartkopf's old page:
AB Stereo Setup
A setup to record whole ensembles. It uses two omnidirectional microphones, which have a distance from each other. Only the runtime difference between the two mics indicates the position in the stereo image. Runtime difference always means phase difference too. Therefore it is not allowed to convert an AB stereo recording to mono because phase cancellation will cause comb filter effects which will shift through the whole audio spectra. You can bet that this will cause bad sound. AB is prone to over-emphasize the stereo width. To avoid this, you should 1.) be sure that the distance among the mics is smaller than the distance of the source and 2.) the sound source is completely within the recording angle shown in the table below. The table bases on the geometric calculation that when a natural left ear sound from straight left, it takes 17 cm at the speed of sound to reach the right ear. In this distance, the recording angle is 180 degrees. For a larger mic distance the angle is smaller to ensure being inside the "17 cm at the speed of sound" border. It is just a trigonometric calculation that created the table.
-
I need to try this. I have been in a safe zone for too long. Need to experiment a bit. Next jazz gig or something with a good spread/image onstage.
-
really, that's pretty cool, but I don't see that as a good idea back 6 feet in a bar type venue, but on stage I can see, perhaps not stage lip, but actually on stage, definately. Thanks for the knowledge drop.
Carl
I've used it a few times 6' back in a bar and it was allright. It's all about high spl's at that point. I've also had KILLER luck with it at outdoor music festivals from a decent distance. Again, it's simply got to be a LOUD show for it to pay off. I've been very disappointed when too far away and not enough SPL's to sustain it. It's got to be good since you're forfeiting the directionality of the omnis (which, despite the name and reputation, are somewhat directional in nature).
-
really, that's pretty cool, but I don't see that as a good idea back 6 feet in a bar type venue, but on stage I can see, perhaps not stage lip, but actually on stage, definately. Thanks for the knowledge drop.
Carl
I've used it a few times 6' back in a bar and it was allright. It's all about high spl's at that point. I've also had KILLER luck with it at outdoor music festivals from a decent distance. Again, it's simply got to be a LOUD show for it to pay off. I've been very disappointed when too far away and not enough SPL's to sustain it. It's got to be good since you're forfeiting the directionality of the omnis (which, despite the name and reputation, are somewhat directional in nature).
what Dean said :)
-
I made some recordings this summer using the Healey method using 36" spacing and also using 14" spacing. Ran at 8' FOB about 60' from the stage. Those recordings smoked other recordings from the same festival using Card or Hyper. Overall, I think when the PA system is strong enough, I will utilize the Omni setting every time. One thing I was worried about was the crowd noise and luckily, there weren't too many people around us.
-
I made some recordings this summer using the Healey method using 36" spacing and also using 14" spacing. Ran at 8' FOB about 60' from the stage. Those recordings smoked other recordings from the same festival using Card or Hyper. Overall, I think when the PA system is strong enough, I will utilize the Omni setting every time. One thing I was worried about was the crowd noise and luckily, there weren't too many people around us.
Wouldn't it be considered something else if you're using 36" ? One part of the technique is defined by the "approximately ear distance apart".
I know it's semantics but someone else probably has the same thing at that particular spacing coined as something else.
I would think this technique would be wonderful for outdoor Bluegrass festivals, near stage, with an attentive crowd. Springfest comes to mind.
-
I made some recordings this summer using the Healey method using 36" spacing and also using 14" spacing. Ran at 8' FOB about 60' from the stage. Those recordings smoked other recordings from the same festival using Card or Hyper. Overall, I think when the PA system is strong enough, I will utilize the Omni setting every time. One thing I was worried about was the crowd noise and luckily, there weren't too many people around us.
Wouldn't it be considered something else if you're using 36" ? One part of the technique is defined by the "approximately ear distance apart".
I know it's semantics but someone else probably has the same thing at that particular spacing coined as something else.
I would think this technique would be wonderful for outdoor Bluegrass festivals, near stage, with an attentive crowd. Springfest comes to mind.
I believe, technically, that it is supposed to be closer to "ear width", but with everything Grateful Dead related, I don't think Healy will mind... ;)
-
Wouldn't it be considered something else if you're using 36" ? One part of the technique is defined by the "approximately ear distance apart".
I know it's semantics but someone else probably has the same thing at that particular spacing coined as something else.
I would think this technique would be wonderful for outdoor Bluegrass festivals, near stage, with an attentive crowd. Springfest comes to mind.
Hit the nail right on the head. The spacing makes ALL the difference. I experimented with the Healy method several times. Quite frankly this technique rides that fine line between either being a superb sounding tape and one that sounds terrible. Not a whole lot in between.
For me the spacing that I felt gave the best representation of the method was 8" from top of cap to top of cap. I ran the 482's and the bodies were over lapping each other to give you an idea of spacing. Anything over that 8" left not only a HUGE hole but the overall tended to make things super thin. I can't begin to imagine having a 36" spacing. I felt that I was pushing things at 8" as well.
What difference does a few inches make? Well if you look at the differences between DIN and DINa sound wise then there you're talking about 3 cm difference and that 3 cm is a noticeable difference in sound so imagine what 3 inches would do let alone 25 additional inches.
-
I've had luck with a Healy about 10", but David is directionally correct there, certainly. Once you get to 36" split, I think it's just a split omni recording, not a Healy. I run split omnis all the time, too, and LOVE 'em (I've split as narrow as 2', as wide as 10', all with excellent results to my ears). It just depends on what you're recording... :)
-
I've only run it twice, both with ~8" spacing. The first time (Avetts 6-13-07) turned out suprisingly well despite the at times overwhelming kick drum, which was easily remedied in post. The second (moe. 7-12-07) turned out rather crapily, at least to my ears. The high end just seems rather thin. You can check out the moe. here: http://www.archive.org/details/moe2007-07-12.teac.me80.ad20.flac16
The Avetts...well, I think we're all waiting on some sort of policy clarification ::)
-
Once you get to 36" split, I think it's just a split omni recording, not a Healy. I run split omnis all the time, too, and LOVE 'em (I've split as narrow as 2', as wide as 10', all with excellent results to my ears).
Yup sounds like a split omni to me as well albeit with the omnis facing incorrectly so maybe we'll call it a split healy omni config? ;D
As for split omnis i've run up to a 25' split with suprisingly good results.
I believe that the Healy method is really a specific way to run the omnis without a whole lot of wiggle room as far as the spacing is concerned. You can certainly experiment but if i'm going to split up to 36" or thereabouts I am most likely to run split omnis facing the PA stacks than I am running them to the outsides at that spacing. YMMV
-
when you start spacing the caps further, you want to start bringing the angle in from 180*
extendeding on the post above that I quoted from Hartkopf's page, first column is spacing in centemeters, second is angle from the soundsource.
from http://web.archive.org/web/20050314085929/members.aol.com/mihartkopf/lexicon.htm (http://web.archive.org/web/20050314085929/members.aol.com/mihartkopf/lexicon.htm)
17 180.0
20 116.4
25 85.7
30 69.0
35 58.1
40 50.3
45 44.4
50 39.8
60 32.9
70 28.1
80 24.5
90 21.8
100 19.6
of course this is all theory, do what sounds best to you in the applications you use. ;)
-
I made some recordings this summer using the Healey method using 36" spacing and also using 14" spacing. Ran at 8' FOB about 60' from the stage. Those recordings smoked other recordings from the same festival using Card or Hyper. Overall, I think when the PA system is strong enough, I will utilize the Omni setting every time. One thing I was worried about was the crowd noise and luckily, there weren't too many people around us.
I guess this would be split omnis. Hell that was the first time I had every used them. Either way, I was really happy with the recording whatever it was called. Thanks for the clarification guys.
-
From the Oade board: The Streicher - Healy Method
There are two more interesting coincident techniques we would like to cover.
One developed by Ron Streicher as a soloist pickup, uses omnidirectional microphones, which exhibit some directional characteristics at higher frequencies. This technique used with an included angle between 60 and 90 degrees yields a very stable center image with a good sense of space. The use of a pressure transducer (omnidirectional microphone) eliminates the pops and breath blasting problems associated with pressure gradient (directional microphones).
A variation of this technique, developed by Mr. Dan Healy, the living GOD of live sound, and a convenient segue into our next topic, is the near coincident 180 degree omnidirectional microphone method. Here a pair of omnidirectional microphones are placed approximately ear distance apart and oriented at 90 to the sound source, facing outward.
While the Streicher technique is suited only to close sound sources or binaural playback (headphone listening) the Healy method produces a recording suitable for playback on stereo speakers as well as headphones. We did some of these at the Greek Theater, they are labeled as "critically spaced omnis", enjoy !
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I never tried either of these methods, but those Greek recordings are the best I've ever heard. I've always been to chicken to run omnis, either in the above configs or spaced. Although if I ever make it back to Red Rocks or any similar outdoor venue, it will be omnis.
-
I never tried either of these methods, but those Greek recordings are the best I've ever heard. I've always been to chicken to run omnis, either in the above configs or spaced. Although if I ever make it back to Red Rocks or any similar outdoor venue, it will be omnis.
Do eeeeet! Seriously, if you're at a loud outdoor show or if your on stage at a quiet show, you'll love the results.
-
I really should. I've always had omni caps, going back 27 years and never used them as a pair. :o. I have used an omni cap for a center blend quite a few times though.
-
I really should. I've always had omni caps, going back 27 years and never used them. :o
Holy crap! We may rule you ineligible to use them after all this time!!! That's like an intentional foul! ;)
-
I prefer Healy (and by that I mean ~8" spaced 180 deg) up close or on-stage. From farther back I almost always prefer a bigger split with the mics facing forwards. I won't go so far as to generalize and say closer always=narrower though, since I also like to use larger A-B splits at stagelip.
I think it has alot to do with the high end directionality of the mics and also with the frequency balance of the sound and the venue. I find my TL's work better for Healy than the 4060's. The large diaphragm TL's are obviously much more directional at the top than the 4060's, which are so small that they're pretty much omnidirectional to up near dog whistle freq's. I do hear some very high freq directionality with them, but used that close together, you just don't get much kHz range stereo separation without a using a baffle. I tried various spacings with the 4060's from further back FOB at outdoor 'fests and found I usually end up around 36"-48" when adjusting the spacing and monitoring through 'phones at typical FOB distances to the stage.
I notice two things when varying the spacing from back there: 1) change of overall tone. Usually I find wider seems to emphasize the low end and narrower emphasises the treble, but that may only seem that way because.. 2) the spacing strongly effects the frequency range of the stereo separation. wider = more stereo separation at lower frequencies, closer = separation only at higher frequencies. With more stereo in the midrange and the mid-bass the bass sounds 'better' to me.
I know adjusting the spacing will also manipulate the stereo recording angle (cue boojum to reference the Stereo Zoom paper) but I'm standing in one spot adjusting mic spacing, not moving my stand forwards and backwards to hear the effect of the change of recording angle, so perhaps I'm listening both to the stereo separation and the recording angle when making the spacing adjustment.
If I was somewhere up front between the board and stagelip and had the opportunity to listen while adjusting the spacing, perhaps I'd end up with a narrower spread.
The only real generalization I can make is that when using more directional omnis, I'd tend to point the mics more forward as I move them farther apart - and conversely rotate them towards Healy's 180 degrees as I approached head-width spacing. The idea being that the increased HF directionality compensates for the reduced spacing.
(lots of posts since I started this reply and got caught in a meeting.. that last paragraph is basically agreeing with stirinthesauce.. in any case omni's absolutely rock outdoors, there is no need to fear! it's indoors where they get tricky IMO)
-
really, that's pretty cool, but I don't see that as a good idea back 6 feet in a bar type venue, but on stage I can see, perhaps not stage lip, but actually on stage, definately. Thanks for the knowledge drop.
Carl
What did you think of the recording? I am assuming this is mine as you quoted my text file (and I think you also like tND and their side projects). I think it came out just OK, I can't wait to compare w/ JAson who ran MG m200s DIN. I will definately run it from there again, I just might bribe JAson into increasing the hight of the stand so the chatter is cut a bit. All in all, I love the m270s and this is the only config that will work at this venue (The Paradise in Boston)
For those that want to check it out:
http://www.archive.org/details/tnd2007-12-27.healy
-
I've been meaning to check in with you on that. Sounds better than I thought it would, but I've never gotten good results with Healy.
There's not that much less chatter on my tapes. Your buddy was wasted, and you can hear him in a couple spots :P
My recording has more energy, seems more punchy for lack of a better word.
If you want the raw files to track and seed, send me your addy and I'll toss a couple dvd's in the mail along with those New Deal shows we were talking about.
JAson
-
This sounds intriguing. I'm always wanting to use my omni caps but I'm never able to setup a proper split. I'll have to try it sometime. How does one go about mounting mics for this? Does anyone have any pictures of this setup?
-
This sounds intriguing. I'm always wanting to use my omni caps but I'm never able to setup a proper split. I'll have to try it sometime. How does one go about mounting mics for this? Does anyone have any pictures of this setup?
Here's a shot of me (in hat) running Healy (with dead rats) at 10KLF 2006.
-
Ah, okay. I was thinking that perhaps I could use the supplied OKtava mounts on my A27M vertbar and just run my mics one right over the other, but that only gives me a 7 inch split at most. Pardon my ignorance, but what kind of mount setup do you have going there? Looks like RA XLR and shockmounts attached to some kind of bar.
-
Ah, okay. I was thinking that perhaps I could use the supplied OKtava mounts on my A27M vertbar and just run my mics one right over the other, but that only gives me a 7 inch split at most. Pardon my ignorance, but what kind of mount setup do you have going there? Looks like RA XLR and shockmounts attached to some kind of bar.
Just a t-bar. That's correct on the RA XLR's & shocks.
A 7 inch split will be acceptable here, at least for you to try it out. Some people's heads are skinnier than others, and the ears still work, so I'd give it a shot.
-
Ah, okay. I was thinking that perhaps I could use the supplied OKtava mounts on my A27M vertbar and just run my mics one right over the other, but that only gives me a 7 inch split at most. Pardon my ignorance, but what kind of mount setup do you have going there? Looks like RA XLR and shockmounts attached to some kind of bar.
Just a t-bar. That's correct on the RA XLR's & shocks.
A 7 inch split will be acceptable here, at least for you to try it out. Some people's heads are skinnier than others, and the ears still work, so I'd give it a shot.
Which leads to.... measure the spacing on your own noggin for your attempt and then listen back on your favorite headphones!! ;D
Looks like I'll be shopping for the CK62's this spring.
-
Ah, okay. I was thinking that perhaps I could use the supplied OKtava mounts on my A27M vertbar and just run my mics one right over the other, but that only gives me a 7 inch split at most. Pardon my ignorance, but what kind of mount setup do you have going there? Looks like RA XLR and shockmounts attached to some kind of bar.
i use a vert bar it, it works for me - here is an attempt FOB at Camp Bisco, too much crowd chatter here though
(http://taperssection.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=94966.0;attach=73932;image)
-
I run my omnis Healy almost all the time, or at least whenever I can't split them wide. I think that the results sound good when mixed with my cards but generally don't sound too good on their own. They lack detail in the higher frequencies. My Josephsons are bright enough so that the combination when mixed at the right ratio sounds good to my ears. I usually mix the Healy omnis in pretty low, just enough to give a little extra punch to the bass. I think the sound I get from Healy compliments my (pretty bright) Josephsons well.
On it's own, I greatly prefer the sound of split omnis to Healy. However, Healy is very easy to set up, captures the low frequencies well and still provides stereo separation.
As we all know, it's all a matter of personal preferrence. If you haven't tried it before I say give it a go.
-
I have one of my healy recordings on right now. it was my fisrt time doing it, but it sounds f'in good to my ears. But the venues sounds fucking great too.
-
Can this be Healy be accomplished if the mics are side by side and not one on top of the other? I'm going to try it tonigh for Phish on the Rocks. I'm going to put them side by side, the rear mic on a small riser so it's taller than the mic infront of it, caps split about 8" apart.
Would that work? I can't figure out how to get them over one another with the long bodies and get about 8" separation. Ah well, just experimenting but would like a decent pull.
-
Not sure I follow you. Healy has the mics side by side, one facing left, the other right, angled 180 degrees apart. That angle and the near-spacing give it a very wide pickup angle that de-emphasizes the center part of the image which works well on-stage. Both mics are the same distance in the forward/back dimension, what do you mean by 'rear mic'?
OK after thinking about it I think I can picture what you're doing now, Healy Method generally uses side-addressed large diaphragm mics, one next to the other facing opposite directions. I assume you are using small diaphragm end address mics and the bodies/cables would interfere with the narrow spacing?
I could be wrong, but as I understand it part of what the Healy Method relies upon is the tendency for large diaphragm mics to become more directional at higher frequencies when set to the omni pattern. A small diaphram mic will be more omni than that may translate as less separation between channels in the higher frequencies.
How far back from the stage will you be? I'd suggest spacing the mics more and angling them less from an audience location.
-
so healy is intended for LD mics? i had no idea.
-
I've run Healy method several times at Red Rocks. I love the way it mixes with another pair of mics. On it's own, I find it a little too boomy and lacking in the high end. If I plan to use just a single pair of omnis I prefer splitting them, as I mentioned in my previous post in this thread. Both methods can sound good or bad at Red Rocks depending on the conditions. If the wind is strong, I tend to go with Healy because split omnis frequently have phase issues in strong winds there.
I put my Avensons end-to-end on a T bar. They end up being a little over 8" apart, but not too much. The stereo separation is pretty good.
Amaro, if you're interested in listening to some Healy method recordings I can put some samples up on my FTP server, along with some recordings with the same mics split.
-
healy recordings (mostly stage lip, or just infront of band)
http://www.archive.org/details/rumpkemb2008-03-28
http://www.archive.org/details/rumpkemb2008-05-15
http://www.archive.org/details/rumpkemb2008-08-16
http://www.archive.org/details/rumpkemb2009-04-18.b
http://www.archive.org/details/rumpkemb2009-06-26.stagelip.16bit
-
so healy is intended for LD mics? i had no idea.
That was the original way Dan Healy set it up, not sure if that's the 'intent' or how most here do it.
-
Not sure I follow you. Healy has the mics side by side, one facing left, the other right, angled 180 degrees apart. That angle and the near-spacing give it a very wide pickup angle that de-emphasizes the center part of the image which works well on-stage. Both mics are the same distance in the forward/back dimension, what do you mean by 'rear mic'?
OK after thinking about it I think I can picture what you're doing now, Healy Method generally uses side-addressed large diaphragm mics, one next to the other facing opposite directions. I assume you are using small diaphragm end address mics and the bodies/cables would interfere with the narrow spacing?
I could be wrong, but as I understand it part of what the Healy Method relies upon is the tendency for large diaphragm mics to become more directional at higher frequencies when set to the omni pattern. A small diaphram mic will be more omni than that may translate as less separation between channels in the higher frequencies.
How far back from the stage will you be? I'd suggest spacing the mics more and angling them less from an audience location.
That's exactly it. The cables, the mounts, the big ass Shure windscreens make it difficult with the AKG 482 bodies and caps to get a perfect separation.
So instead of this:
~STAGE~
O----- -----O
It looks like this:
~STAGE~
O-----
-----O
The second mic in the above diagram I put onto a taller riser than the one in front of it so the cable wouldn't be blocking anything. I took pictures tonight, we'll see how it turns out. Not much for wind until the second set and then there was a few gusts but not too bad.
Thanks for the info. And Bob, Barrett dropped your name when he saw what I was attempting and he said you've pulled some great show using Healy. We'll see how mine turned out.
EDIT: Listening to the first file of set one. Damn this sounds good! I may have lucked out. I'll run the same mics/configuration but through the Aerco MP-2>MTII tomorrow. Wow! A really "full" sound. Not too boomy at all and that's what I was afraid of.
(http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m11/pixie129/amaros%20stuff/DSC04076.jpg)
-
Cool.
One thing I've noticed when spacing omnis while listening through headphones is that changing the spacing has a big effect on apparent frequency balance of the sound - at small spacings like this I notice that more than the effect on the pickup angle. If you've got a set of decently isolating phones, give a listen while setting up to the low level music playing on the PA or the opening act while sliding the mics a bit closer and farther apart. You can dial in the sound you want, almost like an EQ.
-
so healy is intended for LD mics? i had no idea.
That was the original way Dan Healy set it up, not sure if that's the 'intent' or how most here do it.
The important bit is the side-address cause that allows for an easier setup without vertical discrepancies in addition to the horizontal ones. The LD part just naturally seems to come along for the ride, since most LDs are side-addressed. (I can't think of one that isn't...)
-
You're going to have a problem if you can't get your capsules aligned in the plane parallel with the stage. This type of recording relies primarily on differences in arrival times to create the stereo image. If one capsule is in front of the other you're going to skew the image and perhaps invite some phase issues. Do what you can to get them in vertical alignment as you look down from above!
-
You're going to have a problem if you can't get your capsules aligned in the plane parallel with the stage. This type of recording relies primarily on differences in arrival times to create the stereo image. If one capsule is in front of the other you're going to skew the image and perhaps invite some phase issues. Do what you can to get them in vertical alignment as you look down from above!
would it be a problem to have one over the other?
-
You're going to have a problem if you can't get your capsules aligned in the plane parallel with the stage. This type of recording relies primarily on differences in arrival times to create the stereo image. If one capsule is in front of the other you're going to skew the image and perhaps invite some phase issues. Do what you can to get them in vertical alignment as you look down from above!
would it be a problem to have one over the other?
Nope the sound will arrive at the same time on the vertical axis in this case.
-
That makes perfect sense actually. I'll have to figure out a way of mounting one over the other. I just didn't have time this weekend and this was just one of those "hey, why don't I try this.." moments. It sounds good via the system? So I think I just got lucky. My original intent was to get them over one another and not side by side like I had to do.
Question: If I'm outside, I wouldn't be able to keep a close separation, in this case 8" AND put on the heavy windscreens. I'd have to slide them out some more in order to get them on. I would end up with about >10" separation. Would that still be okay? Or would it be better to get some headphones and listen for position like suggested above?
-
Sure, 'OK' is in the ear of the listener. You might like 10" better. Listening with the phones is just a way of dialing it in right there at the venue instead of trying various spacings over the course of several recordings to see what works well. It's a big time saver if you care to play around with the spacing.
-
try the Shure A27M to align the 480s on the same vertical plane
or try to find some AKG a61 swivels
-
try the Shure A27M to align the 480s on the same vertical plane
or try to find some AKG a61 swivels
Yup the A27 would allow you to move the whole thing in front, put on your windscreens and adjust to any spacing you like with one mic over top of the other.
-
You're going to have a problem if you can't get your capsules aligned in the plane parallel with the stage. This type of recording relies primarily on differences in arrival times to create the stereo image. If one capsule is in front of the other you're going to skew the image and perhaps invite some phase issues. Do what you can to get them in vertical alignment as you look down from above!
would it be a problem to have one over the other?
That's what i thought. Thanks.
Nope the sound will arrive at the same time on the vertical axis in this case.
-
so healy is intended for LD mics? i had no idea.
actually know, the opposite actually. LDs don't have a truely omni directional cap, its two caps used to create the omni effect. From what I've read over the years (Moke knows more about this) on this board true healy requires SD mics.
-
so healy is intended for LD mics? i had no idea.
actually know, the opposite actually. LDs don't have a truely omni directional cap, its two caps used to create the omni effect. From what I've read over the years (Moke knows more about this) on this board true healy requires SD mics.
Just use a pair of these babies with 90-degree XLR connectors:
http://www.naiant.com/xqspecification.html
-
So I've been tinkering with some DIY ideas and this is what I came up with. I can't remember the part names but most came from Home Depot and all together I think materials without the shock mounts was under $10. This is just the prototype that will be flying at ABB @ RR tomorrow.
Got a question though, is it okay for the mic connections to barely touch the windscreens? I've got a 9" split going there and the mics are 1 1/4" apart...in case you would like to know that. Here are some pics...
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/manitoumonty/Random%20Stuff/Healy%20Method/View1.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/manitoumonty/Random%20Stuff/Healy%20Method/View2.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/manitoumonty/Random%20Stuff/Healy%20Method/RearVeiw.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/manitoumonty/Random%20Stuff/Healy%20Method/LeftMicConnection.jpg)
(http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz70/manitoumonty/Random%20Stuff/Healy%20Method/RightMicConnection.jpg)
-
That looks great Amaro!
-
Looks exactly how I run Healy with my 480's except i'm using a Shure Vert Bar instead of a homemade mount.
-
That looks great Amaro!
-
Windscreens on omnis = belt w/suspenders*... don't worry about the gear touching.
I thought that the wind at 10KLF was howling a little more than usual this year. There were several where I ran "dead ratz + big ass shures" on omnis... :o Looking forward to seeing you there in 2010.
-
been trying out the healy method onstage. i really like it. i wanna get some better omnis but overall these Sonic Studios DSM-6P arent so bad
recent uploads http://archive.org/details/hotsoup2013-04-18.mtx.kindrec
http://archive.org/details/bigwu2013-04-27.mtx.kindrec
-
Here's a recent show i recorded using the Healy method. I like how it came out, New Mastersounds, onstage recording. Despite some loss of imaging, you do get some separation on the highs (due to the inherent properties of omnis).
I think this setup can have some advantages over more directional mics in this type of setting (onstage, with a band that has a setup such as theirs, i.e. the drummer not centered on stage - he's on the far left, and rather close to the front of the stage). While a set of cards or sub cards would provide better separation, you'd end up with a recording that is a bit less balanced in terms of the drums on the left channel. This is where relatively close-spaced omnis such as this setup can shine. The drums end up sounding reasonably centered, but you still get a nice stereo image.
https://archive.org/details/nm2014-06-12.flac16.onstageCA11Omni
-
What are peoples thoughts on using 4061s in the Healy Split?
-
^^
The miniature DPAs are so tiny they are more or less a truly omnidirectional omni across all audible frequencies. Unlike larger omnis, they have hardly any directionality at all even up into the highest regions.
With a pair of omnis that close together, the resulting recording is going to be quite mono-phonic. Heally method is predominantly monophonic from the lows up into the midrange. Using larger omnis which are more directional up top, and pointing them 180 degrees apart provides some stereo difference at the highest frequencies. With microphones as small as the 4061, a 180-degree orientation instead of a 0-degree orientation will make very little difference.
If I needed to use the 4061 that close together I'd place some sort of baffle in between them, tape them to the opposite sides of something, or mount them in the foam balls I use as DIY acoustic pressure equalization spheres. All of those things will make them more directional at high frequencies. Barring those things, I'd mount them farther apart.
-
I gotta resurrect this thread with some perspectives. I've been utilizing Healy on stage (CA-14 Omnis) pretty steadily for about 5 years at this point. I first started taping with a zoom in my shirt pocket and had one experience in particular early on where I taped a set from the front row of a venue with no front fills -- the tape was overall rough and lacked paramount vocals but I was struck by just how goddamn good the direct sound from the drum kit & amps on stage sounded, even to the shitty zoom h4n internals.
Once I stepped up to external mics I tried out CA-11 cards and CA-14 Omnis and immediately fell in love with the CA-14s. Head as a baffle, omnis clipped to shoulders, extremely forgiving of positioning, and more or less just a matter of finding a decent spot in the venue to hit record. I've always preferred the omni sound since.
Did that for a bit and stepped up to going for matrixes. At this point, I picked up everything I'd need for the 'conventional' FOB PAS approach - but I'd often be disappointed with these captures due to 1) lack of excitement 2) increase in chattiness/bar clanking 3) lack of direct sound from the stage (drums!!) and 4) lacking that pull-you-back-into-the-moment omni sound. Also ran into one or two cases where I was taping in a packed room with a tiny tiny sound cage, even clamping being a dubious prospect -- enter this thread. The comment from stirinthesauce early on about Healy being great for running omnis on a small footprint stuck out at me. At this point I had been taping my favorite band (the Mountain Goats) a bunch and had some rapport with their engineer/tour manager, got the ok to plop down a rig akin to the one attached below (though seen here w/ 4060s rather than CA-14s) and from that point on I was hooked. I like to have my cake and eat it too, up front is where I want to be. Getting absolutely thrashed by the drummer. Enveloped by the sound of the venue, hearing all the excitement directed *at* the stage. If I could only capture one source, I'd probably run FOB - I've ran into situations where the venue was so tiny, someone with jangly clothing near the front could more or less kill a tape. Used my PAS 184s that I was running as backups in that actual case. But when combined with a SBD, with the right conditions, binaural up close - or its practical counterpart, healy, is far and my personal favorite sound.
I've ran the CA-14s for years but finally picked up some 4060s and I similarly adore how it turned out. I'll attach an example below -- healy only, SBD only, and then the combination of the two, as an illustration. Audio captured from the pic seen. I think this is a perfect illustration of the potential of this technique that I love so much!
-
I am surprised that the Healy method works well with 4060s given their small size. The point at which they become somewhat directional occurs at a very high frequency; even at 20 kHz, they are only down a couple of dB at 180°. Compared to an SDC, such as the 4006, I wouldn't expect much extra information from Healy versus AB (see the polar plots for each). In my own tests, it didn't really matter which way you point 4060s...
-
I am surprised that the Healy method works well with 4060s given their small size. The point at which they become somewhat directional occurs at a very high frequency; even at 20 kHz, they are only down a couple of dB at 180°. Compared to an SDC, such as the 4006, I wouldn't expect much extra information from Healy versus AB (see the polar plots for each). In my own tests, it didn't really matter which way you point 4060s...
Yes, I understand that in theory the directionality has little to do with it regarding the 4060s especially. The sense of space and positioning is due to the sound travelling between the capsules, right? It still sounds great to my ears. Still feel surrounded by the crowd during applause, still hear the sound sources as they were in the room e.g. the bass sounds left justified, etc. A stark difference from toggling mono, for example!
I want to play with healy + gutbucket's DIY APE spheres but had a bit of trouble reliably affixing them for my purposes.
-
Haven't had a chance to listen to your samples yet but look forward to doing so.
Yes, Healy isn't really much different from small A-B, especially when using tiny mics that are more or less truly omni all the way up.
Adding a baffle.. or not-
If you haven't messed around with it much, try playing around with putting something between the mics and comparing that to having empty space between the mics. Pretty much anything that blocks sound can act as a baffle- your bag, a drink special card, a menu, a floor monitor wedge, a chair back.. You might like it better, you might not. The main thing is to familiarize yourself with the difference in sound so you can make a decision about what may work best in later situations. At relatively narrow Healy-like A-B spacings, I hear the difference as being more open, diffuse, a bit brighter, and a bit phasier with no baffle, and a bit clearer, less bright, with wider and sharper imaging when there is a baffle between the mics. When the spacing is a bit wider you might use two baffles, one relatively close to each mic, rather than a single big one.
I think of baffles, APE balls, dummy-heads, and boundary mounting as all being closely related.. sort of various points along a continuum. They all alter the pickup pattern primarily, and frequency response secondarily, by placing a surface in close proximity to the microphone. The biggest variables are how large the surface is how close it is the microphone, and it's orientation.
Besides baffling between the two mics, you can also baffle behind them. A chair back, front row church pew, or a bag placed on-stage can often attenuate nearby audience behind the recording position just enough to make a big difference. And you can use both forms of baffling at once..
My preferred method for recording jazz and classical in good sounding rooms with attentive audiences from the best seat in the house, relies heavily on baffling. It's an arrangement of four 4060's boundary-mounted to the faces of a rectangular baffle, such that the microphones face directly Left, Right, Forward and Back. The baffle is longer in the L/R dimension, so the L/R mic pair is spaced a bit farther apart but baffled less, while the front/back pair are spaced less far apart yet separated by a larger and wider baffle. That L/R spacing + baffling is intentionally a bit too much for just the L/R pair alone in isolation without the forward-facing center mic, the presence of which fills and anchors the center, while it's wide baffle increases forward-clarity and focus and attenuates pickup of audience and reverberant room sound arriving from behind. Likewise the rear-facing mic is baffled from too much sound bleeding around from the front, making that channel far more useful than it would otherwise be. When mixing it, after balancing Left/Right levels, dialing in exactly the right amount of Center content to get a clear and solid image is always super rewarding, and the rear-facing channel gets added to taste to provide a bit more depth and room impression as long as the acoustics and audience allow for that.
Not the way most folk choose to record, but is a good example of how baffled omnis can work really well in the right situations.
-
I want to play with healy + gutbucket's DIY APE spheres but had a bit of trouble reliably affixing them for my purposes.
I think the primary advantage of the spheres is they are essentially the smallest-possible yet still effective baffle. They aren't as influential as a larger baffle, but are more convenient. The tricky thing is mounting the mics in them such that the mic-grid is flush with the surface of the ball and not recessed into it, with no significant gap around the mic body. Otherwise the response can get peaky, similar to how switching between the different length grids changes response by varying the size of the small resonant space around the capsule.
The spheres do change response, bumping up the on-axis presence range a bit. They might be just the thing for Healy with the pair facing in opposite directions.. likely somewhere between the sound of the naked mics with no baffle verses a full baffle between them. Open, but with a bit more definition. Definitely worth a try I think, and their minimal foot print should make it easy and practical to run if you like it.