Topic: Microphone Durability Expectations, Reasonable Care, etc.

[Gutbucket]

Agreed, always good practice to check and do so if necessary. 

Maybe I should have stated that differently. Should definitely time-align for time-of-travel through air to the SBD when mixing mics located back at the board with SBD.  But in my experience recording on-stage including a pair of directional mics pointed at the room/audience time alignment wasn't needed.  Granted those were included in semi purposefully designed mic arrays that included a pair of directional mics facing the audience/room, but the primary mics in the array were located directly beneath were the front-line stage mics would have been if these had been PA amplified events.  So possible to arrange so as to not require delay when all the mics are in more or less the same plane across the stage, give or take a few feet.

Those onstage audience facing mics need to be directional to reject as much stage and PA sound as possible though, omnis won't work there. Well, they will if boundary mounted under the stagelip facing out at the audience, but then the stage acts as baffle, and the omnis become hemispherical rather than omni.  Directional mics work better there anyway.

[morst]

Those onstage audience facing mics need to be directional to reject as much stage and PA sound as possible though, omnis won't work there. Well, they will if boundary mounted under the stagelip facing out at the audience, but then the stage acts as baffle, and the omnis become hemispherical rather than omni.  Directional mics work better there anyway.

I feel the same, and also exactly the opposite of this.

For my method of using close mics to the stage to pick up the stage sound, I am thinking omni mics would give me way too much of the room sound.
Wide cardioids pick up a nice total stage sound, while rejecting some close hooting/hollering of the overly excited up front crowd who might be more wowed by their location than the actual music!
(OMG it's my first time being so close, and I can yell all I want and the performers might hear me do so!? WOOOOOO!)


I've made mixes of SBD + stage mics without using room mics, and I like it a lot, but it takes the actual room sound out of the equation.
For really special rooms with quiet crowds, I'd consider pointing mics outwards...


Here's one of the 4-channel mixes where I elected not to use the room pair (a little less time smear this way). I find it to be tight and musical but agree that it sounds like it could possibly have been made anywhere, and doesn't necessarily sound like the sound of the room. (the venue, Great American Music Hall, is arguably a good sounding room, mostly rectangular, but with lots of little stuff on the walls to diffuse reflections.)
https://archive.org/details/MotherHips2023-12-15.KM143-SBD


Note also that I position my onstage mics below and away from stage monitors, to avoid that other mix getting into my work.

[Simultaneity]

I don't own any high quality omni mics, but am generally the most satisfied with my recordings made with a direct SBD feed, along with a directional pair at or near FoH, plus a pair of "wide cardioid" mics, split (6-12 feet apart typically), on or very near the downstage lip, and aimed approximately at the snare drum.
I find that the stage pair adds a lot of "impact" that is lacking in the close-mic board feed, and which is also not present in the room pair.
Since you have a MixPre6, you already have available channels for this, and since you control the stage, you could easily add a pair of stage mics, as long as your snake system is not already full.


My cards and sub-cards are Neumann KM100 series, with the AK40 and AK43 capsules respectively.


I've posted a good number of such recordings on archive. Here's an example where I replaced my iPhone movie sound with the 6-channel mix.
https://archive.org/details/MotherHips2023-12-16-Smoke-1080
(in fact, the room pair for this setup is not at FoH (back of the main floor, house right side) but rather upstairs, about 20-25' forward of the board, and similarly off to one side. I usually gain up one channel of the room pair to get a balance before the mix step.)


as for reliability, I've sent the KM140 set in for tuning once in 25 years, the KM143s are as I bought them off ebay in 2016... (from a church where they appear to have been well kept)

Ahhh yes the GAMH. Not a great FOH position for recording ha, though you ended up off to the side anyway. This recording sounds great though. I love the stereo image from, I assume, the on stage mics. I also love the band Cordovas! Went looking for some other stuff on archive and came across that recording. You're right, great energy in this method of recording.

Would you suggest using the "aux in" on the mix pre for the 3rd pair of channels? Unbalanced signals make me nervous so I rarely use those channels, I actually was using the MixPre as a headphone amp the other day and the Aux In was introducing noise to the signal so I had to switch to a pair of balanced line ins. That said all my tour packages use digital snakes over fiber or Cat5 but we do usually have some channels available and I could line out another pair of channels from my desk.

How high off the stage are those mics? I just worry about the visual component. That said, we use audience mics for IEMs, it wouldn't be crazy to use a small stereo bar and point a pair of mics back at the band, though they would probably be closer to 20-30' apart which might be too far.

I didn't realize Neuman made sub cards! Will look into 140s as I've had great reliability with my 20+ year old U87 and beat up 184s.

Spacing between the pair of mics (rather than using a coincident arrangement like X/Y or Mid/Side) makes a big difference in the perception of ambient room/audience pickup.  The SBD feed is mostly phase-free and more like a coincident pair, while a spaced pair produces time-of-arrival cues (particularly a spaced omnis) provides an "open spacious" sound.  The big open ambience stretching out toward the outer areas of the playback image is advantageous. A bit more spacing than one would normally use for a stereo pair can be good in that way, as a slight tendency toward "hole in the middle" from a somewhat overly wide spacing can sometimes actually work to advantage in that it sort of makes room for the coincident-stereo like SBD stuff to solidly sit in the middle of the playback image surrounded by the ambient stuff.  That spaced configuration advantage works for a cardioid pair as well as an omni pair.

Some will do like morst, running and mixing several different mic pairs with or without SBD, with the aim of combining the best elements of each in the subsequent mix.  That can work great.  One way of hedging the bet to insure it does is to have each pair contributing something different enough that the combination is positive rather than interfering, much like he describes.

I run an array of a bunch of mics that includes directional mics along with a pair of omnis spaced 5 or 6 feet apart.  When used on-stage or outdoors I use a lot of the omni content in the mix.  Indoors I tend to use less of the omnis, dialing in the mix to taste, but I almost always use a bit of them, even from farther back in the room without SBD access.

As you are probably well aware, an alternate common method of capturing audience/room-ambience for combination with a good SBD recording is spacing directional mics across the stage facing out at the audience. Not as quick and easy for you as just running a spaced pair of mics back at the board, but works pretty much everywhere regardless of how reverberant the room or distant the SBD location. There are a few advantages of that. Because the mics are on the stage, there is no need to manage time-of-arrival sync with mics back at the SBD location grows more distant.  And, the audience reaction is focused on the excited folks up front that are really into the music, rather than caching the more distracted folks talking back by the SBD.

I use an AEA bar to keep setup simple so I'll usually put the mics as far apart as I can but that's only about 43cm in this case. The idea of putting a pair 5 or 6 feet apart is cool! I could put a stand on either side of my console without much more difficulty.

I was having a similar conversation on Reddit about audience mics for IEMs and someone else was mentioning that they preferred a pair of cards or shotguns on stage, ideally aligned with but out of the influence of the main hang, pointed out at the audience for their recordings opposed to FOH mics. Of course it seems that just about every major artist with large budgets and manpower seem to have both a pair of shotguns paired with 414s on the stage lip but I always assumed that was primarily for audience applause between songs in post, not necessarily ambience to an entire recording. This would actually be very easy to achieve as all of my artists are on IEMs and use mics pointed toward the audience for ambience/audience in their mixes. I've always been skeptical (based on no objective data, just as a person whose majority of time is spent at FOH) that this would provide useful sound to my recordings but you're now the second person to mention it and it would take little effort to implement so I'll have to try this too. The chatty folks at FOH are the bane of my existence for sure.

Agreed, always good practice to check and do so if necessary. 

Maybe I should have stated that differently. Should definitely time-align for time-of-travel through air to the SBD when mixing mics located back at the board with SBD.  But in my experience recording on-stage including a pair of directional mics pointed at the room/audience time alignment wasn't needed.  Granted those were included in semi purposefully designed mic arrays that included a pair of directional mics facing the audience/room, but the primary mics in the array were located directly beneath were the front-line stage mics would have been if these had been PA amplified events.  So possible to arrange so as to not require delay when all the mics are in more or less the same plane across the stage, give or take a few feet.

Yes time alignment is its own art. I always get a "perfect" alignment using an FFT to measure the difference in arrival between the direct feed and the mics, but this doesn't always result in "perfect" sound. I had picked up the idea of putting the SBD ahead of the FOH mics from another taperssection user and sometimes in large or particularly ambient rooms I've found that to be a better result as long as the phase between the two sources is generally positive. Though sometimes it messes up the frequency response of the lows or low mids. Sometimes I can push it out of the range of being phasy but then the low end can end up being pumpy or beat-y. Time alignment is certainly its own art.

Those onstage audience facing mics need to be directional to reject as much stage and PA sound as possible though, omnis won't work there. Well, they will if boundary mounted under the stagelip facing out at the audience, but then the stage acts as baffle, and the omnis become hemispherical rather than omni.  Directional mics work better there anyway.

I feel the same, and also exactly the opposite of this.

For my method of using close mics to the stage to pick up the stage sound, I am thinking omni mics would give me way too much of the room sound.
Wide cardioids pick up a nice total stage sound, while rejecting some close hooting/hollering of the overly excited up front crowd who might be more wowed by their location than the actual music!
(OMG it's my first time being so close, and I can yell all I want and the performers might hear me do so!? WOOOOOO!)


I've made mixes of SBD + stage mics without using room mics, and I like it a lot, but it takes the actual room sound out of the equation.
For really special rooms with quiet crowds, I'd consider pointing mics outwards...


Here's one of the 4-channel mixes where I elected not to use the room pair (a little less time smear this way). I find it to be tight and musical but agree that it sounds like it could possibly have been made anywhere, and doesn't necessarily sound like the sound of the room. (the venue, Great American Music Hall, is arguably a good sounding room, mostly rectangular, but with lots of little stuff on the walls to diffuse reflections.)
https://archive.org/details/MotherHips2023-12-15.KM143-SBD


Note also that I position my onstage mics below and away from stage monitors, to avoid that other mix getting into my work.

Yes this recording does also sound good, definitely "tighter" than the version with the mics in the house, but it's missing the ambience I'm generally looking for from the mics. After listening to your examples I totally see your logic behind this method of recording and definitely want to try it out. It probably makes a ton of sense for someone who isn't the person also mixing the SBD. Unfortunately my next tour the band is entirely DI'd & on IEMs except the drum kit so it may be of little use there. That said, I'm excited to try it out with another one of my bands with full backline who prioritize their balance on stage.


Also just to make sure it doesn't come across like I'm dogging Earthworks in this thread, they have replied to my email and are again replacing the QTC30s free of charge. Can't argue with their support!

[Gutbucket]

It's been nearly 25 years since I was last at GAMH. Still recall holding tight to the side upper balcony rail as Kimmock's tape delay seemingly swirled the room around at that Zero show.

I feel the same, and also exactly the opposite of this.

Perfect!

Great value in recognizing and being capable of making those kinds of strategic adaptions to the particulars of the situation.  Understanding it at a high enough level to be able to choose and adapt the approach and successfully implementing that becomes something of a dance.

A great performance of great music stands tall on its own.  And a great recording that additionally conveys a visceral sense of being present at that performance is something special.  That's the hook that snared me long ago and later sent me down the rabbit hole of multichannel recording and immersive playback where one can wander about and sonically "look around" within a convincingly recreated illusion.  Even though I've only been mixing to stereo for the past 5 years or so, achieving a different more limited type of immersion via headphone playback, I will return to that someday and continue to record in ways that support it.  Thinking in that way and working toward that goal certainly made my stereo mix output richer than it otherwise would have been.  That's partly why I almost always run both a rear facing directional mic pair and a wide spaced omni pair in addition to the forward directional elements of my mic array, and pretty much the reason I'm still actively engaged here at TS.  Fun to talk shop in pursuit of the magic and try to help others in pursuit of similar goals.

A great performance of great music is transformed into something greater when the listener becomes an essential part of the live event.

[Gutbucket]

The idea of putting a pair 5 or 6 feet apart is cool! I could put a stand on either side of my console without much more difficulty.

Definitely try that.  Even a bit more should be fine.  5-6 feet works well in my arrays and is practically manageable, I prefer not go less than 3 feet wide.  The increased spacing helps in a few ways.  It will portray overall audience reaction in a more diffuse way, and decorellates the reverberant sound down to a lower frequency (lower diffuse field correlation = good) which is the frequency below which the reverberance essentially becomes monophonic.  Also, any nearby talkers which do get picked up will tend to ping one mic a bit more than the other, which on playback will tend to image somewhat more over toward the sides, making their unwanted contribution perceptually less attention grabbing if not actually any less loud - sort of pushes that obvious talking out of the way from the music somewhat, so that even though it's still there it's not as much directly in your face.  That said, raising those omnis up high is one of the best ways to reduce pickup of nearby talking and get a nice even, less close-sounding audience sound if you are able to do so.

Yes time alignment is its own art. I always get a "perfect" alignment using an FFT to measure the difference in arrival between the direct feed and the mics, but this doesn't always result in "perfect" sound. I had picked up the idea of putting the SBD ahead of the FOH mics from another taperssection user and sometimes in large or particularly ambient rooms I've found that to be a better result as long as the phase between the two sources is generally positive. Though sometimes it messes up the frequency response of the lows or low mids. Sometimes I can push it out of the range of being phasy but then the low end can end up being pumpy or beat-y. Time alignment is certainly its own art.

Agreed on that.  What sounds right and works best is right.  Fully aligned is a good safe place to start, and often all that's needed, but sometimes a slight intentional misalignment works best. The SBD slightly ahead thing can clear things up when needed like you say.  That will be most common for what we are doing. But interestingly there is also a good argument for slightly delaying it in some other situations, which comes from an orchestra recording technique that aims to better incorporate spot mics into a main stereo mic pair by slightly delaying the spots (more specifically, running each through its own digital reverb with both the dry sound and decay muted, only the stereo panned early reflections making it through) prior to mixing them in with the main pair output.  In that way the subtle imaging cues provided by the main pair are better preserved, while the spot mic'd content is reinforced via additional early reflections that better emulate a natural listening situation.  That doesn't apply to what you are doing so much, but I've wondered about playing around with that when an AUD stereo mic pair includes all those good imaging cues and serves as the primary source and SBD added to that is primarily used to reinforce clarity, tighten up the bass, etc. as in that case the SBD might be considered to be sort of a stem mix of close spot mics.

In the multichannel mic arrays I use there is some intentional misalignment incorporated between the forward and rearward facing mics, and a very slight intentional misalignment of the center mic or center coincident pair pushed a slightly forward of the spaced L/R mic channels and omnis.  That's somewhat analogous to aligning the SBD very slightly ahead in time, but is more concerned with imaging cues than achieving better clarity in a reverberant room.

Seems we've gone a bit off topic but remain on point in regard to the underlying goal.  Thanks for the good discussion!

[morst]

Ahhh yes the GAMH. Not a great FOH position for recording ha, though you ended up off to the side anyway. This recording sounds great though. I love the stereo image from, I assume, the on stage mics. I also love the band Cordovas! Went looking for some other stuff on archive and came across that recording. You're right, great energy in this method of recording.

Would you suggest using the "aux in" on the mix pre for the 3rd pair of channels? Unbalanced signals make me nervous so I rarely use those channels, I actually was using the MixPre as a headphone amp the other day and the Aux In was introducing noise to the signal so I had to switch to a pair of balanced line ins. That said all my tour packages use digital snakes over fiber or Cat5 but we do usually have some channels available and I could line out another pair of channels from my desk.

How high off the stage are those mics? I just worry about the visual component. That said, we use audience mics for IEMs, it wouldn't be crazy to use a small stereo bar and point a pair of mics back at the band, though they would probably be closer to 20-30' apart which might be too far.

I didn't realize Neuman made sub cards! Will look into 140s as I've had great reliability with my 20+ year old U87 and beat up 184s.

I do use the mini aux in of the Mixpre6 (I have the old version that only does 24 bit), but only when an unbalanced cable from the source is less than about 3 meters long.
When connecting to a long balanced line I've resorted to using a Zoom F3 to take the XLR inputs and then feed the MixPre with a 2.5mm "mini to mini" cable from the F3.
At GAMH, my buddy John brings an Edirol R44, and I run the board feed from the XLR snake into the R44 balanced inputs, and then go RCA > Mini to get that into the MixPre's unbalanced inputs. It's a bit of a routing pickle, but I feed the stage mics to the R44 from the unbalanced line out of the MixPre, so he's got a useful 4-channel recording as a backup.

The stage mic stands I use are very small; the mics end up no more than 4" high, which makes them able to fly underneath the blast of the monitor wedges.
Here's a photo for scale, that I call "Elf Help" which was taken at one of the GAMH holiday shows.

Neumann KM140 is the designation for the KM100 preamplifier "body" paired with the AK40 cardioid capsule.
KM143 is KM100 + AK43 wide cardioid capsule

The KM184 is very similar to KM140, but the KM100 part allows for separation of the capsule from the "body" by way of extension cables, goosenecks, and other mounting options.
I stopped using the extension cables when I first tried the MixPre6 and noticed what I thought was RF interference. Removing the extension cables and screwing the capsules onto the KM100s resolved that, and so I have not recorded with the extensions since then.
My extensions are the old version, with Lemo connectors in the middle for quick release, and I suspect that the junction is where the RF was entering the signal.

[Simultaneity]

The idea of putting a pair 5 or 6 feet apart is cool! I could put a stand on either side of my console without much more difficulty.

Definitely try that.  Even a bit more should be fine.  5-6 feet works well in my arrays and is practically manageable, I prefer not go less than 3 feet wide.  The increased spacing helps in a few ways.  It will portray overall audience reaction in a more diffuse way, and decorellates the reverberant sound down to a lower frequency (lower diffuse field correlation = good) which is the frequency below which the reverberance essentially becomes monophonic.  Also, any nearby talkers which do get picked up will tend to ping one mic a bit more than the other, which on playback will tend to image somewhat more over toward the sides, making their unwanted contribution perceptually less attention grabbing if not actually any less loud - sort of pushes that obvious talking out of the way from the music somewhat, so that even though it's still there it's not as much directly in your face.  That said, raising those omnis up high is one of the best ways to reduce pickup of nearby talking and get a nice even, less close-sounding audience sound if you are able to do so.

Agreed on that.  What sounds right and works best is right.  Fully aligned is a good safe place to start, and often all that's needed, but sometimes a slight intentional misalignment works best. The SBD slightly ahead thing can clear things up when needed like you say.  That will be most common for what we are doing. But interestingly there is also a good argument for slightly delaying it in some other situations, which comes from an orchestra recording technique that aims to better incorporate spot mics into a main stereo mic pair by slightly delaying the spots (more specifically, running each through its own digital reverb with both the dry sound and decay muted, only the stereo panned early reflections making it through) prior to mixing them in with the main pair output.  In that way the subtle imaging cues provided by the main pair are better preserved, while the spot mic'd content is reinforced via additional early reflections that better emulate a natural listening situation.  That doesn't apply to what you are doing so much, but I've wondered about playing around with that when an AUD stereo mic pair includes all those good imaging cues and serves as the primary source and SBD added to that is primarily used to reinforce clarity, tighten up the bass, etc. as in that case the SBD might be considered to be sort of a stem mix of close spot mics.

In the multichannel mic arrays I use there is some intentional misalignment incorporated between the forward and rearward facing mics, and a very slight intentional misalignment of the center mic or center coincident pair pushed a slightly forward of the spaced L/R mic channels and omnis.  That's somewhat analogous to aligning the SBD very slightly ahead in time, but is more concerned with imaging cues than achieving better clarity in a reverberant room.

Seems we've gone a bit off topic but remain on point in regard to the underlying goal.  Thanks for the good discussion!

This has been GREAT. Can't thank you & morst enough for the discussion.  Not many of my peers are as interested in "taping" shows as I am so this has been fascinating for me and a blessing in disguise.

Wow no less than 3' wide?? I can't imagine there's any sort of bar that can accommodate that? Are you using just two stands? I've started using a C stand with a couple of adapters to get the bar about 10' in the air to get away from the chompers but tall boom stands can get almost that high.

I think part of what I'm going for by pushing the SBD forward is an imagine cue as well but I had never even considered putting the SBD behind the mics. I actually often do end up using a lot of the mics, sometimes something like 60-70% mic and only 30-40% feed if it's the right kind of show/venue, so it would be fun to actually try that as an alternative if I have a particularly good sounding room/well placed FOH.

Regarding the original topic, Earthworks sent out another pair of replacement mics this morning so I will have them right in time for my next tour. Hopefully these ones prove to be more durable! It seems they are constantly refining their products. I will bring a backup pair just in case and continue to look into the DPAs as an alternative choice for heavier use.

I do use the mini aux in of the Mixpre6 (I have the old version that only does 24 bit), but only when an unbalanced cable from the source is less than about 3 meters long.
When connecting to a long balanced line I've resorted to using a Zoom F3 to take the XLR inputs and then feed the MixPre with a 2.5mm "mini to mini" cable from the F3.
At GAMH, my buddy John brings an Edirol R44, and I run the board feed from the XLR snake into the R44 balanced inputs, and then go RCA > Mini to get that into the MixPre's unbalanced inputs. It's a bit of a routing pickle, but I feed the stage mics to the R44 from the unbalanced line out of the MixPre, so he's got a useful 4-channel recording as a backup.

The stage mic stands I use are very small; the mics end up no more than 4" high, which makes them able to fly underneath the blast of the monitor wedges.
Here's a photo for scale, that I call "Elf Help" which was taken at one of the GAMH holiday shows.

Neumann KM140 is the designation for the KM100 preamplifier "body" paired with the AK40 cardioid capsule.
KM143 is KM100 + AK43 wide cardioid capsule

The KM184 is very similar to KM140, but the KM100 part allows for separation of the capsule from the "body" by way of extension cables, goosenecks, and other mounting options.
I stopped using the extension cables when I first tried the MixPre6 and noticed what I thought was RF interference. Removing the extension cables and screwing the capsules onto the KM100s resolved that, and so I have not recorded with the extensions since then.
My extensions are the old version, with Lemo connectors in the middle for quick release, and I suspect that the junction is where the RF was entering the signal.

Yes I think you're right to keep the unbalanced signals under 3 meters. Hopefully I can keep these ones under 3 feet as I'll be doing something similar by doing the pre-amplification with my audio console and just capturing with the MixPre. I hadn't considered that as an option, very excited to try it out!

Oh wow! I never would have guessed those mics were only a couple inches high by the sound of the recording. Would be no problem to try that out and I will definitely keep it in the back pocket. Love the idea.

It looks like the KM140s are discontinued though perhaps they have been replaced by the KM A? I love the idea of an interchangeable SDC with a sub cardioid option that is at a different price point from the Schoeps ha.

[morst]

Yes I think you're right to keep the unbalanced signals under 3 meters. Hopefully I can keep these ones under 3 feet as I'll be doing something similar by doing the pre-amplification with my audio console and just capturing with the MixPre. I hadn't considered that as an option, very excited to try it out!

Oh wow! I never would have guessed those mics were only a couple inches high by the sound of the recording. Would be no problem to try that out and I will definitely keep it in the back pocket. Love the idea.

It looks like the KM140s are discontinued though perhaps they have been replaced by the KM A? I love the idea of an interchangeable SDC with a sub cardioid option that is at a different price point from the Schoeps ha.

Correct about KM100 being a legacy (discontinued) item.
The new KM A + KK184 is the cardioid kit, with the KK143 you get wide cardioid
https://www.neumann.com/en-us/products/microphones/kk-143--km-a

[morst]

I was just thinking about how my use of on-stage mics stems from work that Picklemic did for a long time before I started taping shows with him.


Here's the kick down thread for his latest stage + SBD recording
https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=208384
Joe Krown at the Maple Leaf Bar


He started out with an AKG 422 M/S stereo point mic, and a Mackie mixer, running four input channels into a 2 channel DAT.
He didn't use any live delay processing, so he achieved sync by placing his stereo mic amongst the stage mics and instruments.
Usually downstage center so as not to miss anything.
Once 4 channel recording was practical, he was able to align pairs more carefully in post, and make the most of the Mid/Side post production options.


So most of my early experience regarding stage mics + SBD stems from what started as his work.


Years before that, when I was starting out mixing a band, I would record from SBD when possible, or do left channel mono SBD + RCH mic > cassette.
I experimented a lot this but didn't ever focus on mixing them down.
Now I have an idea of what to do, but that's in a whole other thread...
https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=198253.0


Just popped into my head that Picklemic is how I got started setting up mics on stage to record.
One time in Madison in the early 2000's I remember pointing the KM140's out at the crowd to mix with the SBD, but I didn't really like it and just started bringing two DAT machines.

[datbrad]

Earthworks said that I probably damaged the ICA inside the mic so that potentially rules out my moisture theory. "The key issue is that if phantom power is on, and either voltage-carrying pin connects a split-second before the other, you can potentially damage the ICA circuitry inside a condenser microphone." We use CPC/W1/Veam multipin connectors with all of our mics on stage and they get hot plugged every day, but maybe it's different with a straight XLR than the multipin, though I can't actually believe it makes a difference and if it does I'd be willing to bet the multipin connection (which the EW were never subjected to) would be worse.

The QTCs primarily were used with a Sound Devices MixPre 6-II that is bus powered from my laptop, which to be fair I only use for this purpose and none of my other mics get used with the MixPre....

Sorry to chime in late on this, but if read the part I quoted correctly, you fried both pairs of Earthworks by plugging them into a hot cable with 48v phantom on it. I'm surprised they actually replaced the second pair. That's some fine New Hampshire customer service you received...

[morst]

Sorry to chime in late on this, but if read the part I quoted correctly, you fried both pairs of Earthworks by plugging them into a hot cable with 48v phantom on it. I'm surprised they actually replaced the second pair. That's some fine New Hampshire customer service you received...

Sounds like the shop knows it is not a practical design.
I can not possibly count the number of times I've hot plugged the KM140s.
Just don't know.
Didn't even know it was a thing until pretty recently maybe?


Consider when you are hooking things up to a (old analog maybe) mixing board which only has a phantom power ON/OFF switch.
You gotta kill all the phantom mics to plug in one more?
Really?
I have never done that or been advised to do that.

[Simultaneity]

I was just thinking about how my use of on-stage mics stems from work that Picklemic did for a long time before I started taping shows with him.


Here's the kick down thread for his latest stage + SBD recording
https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=208384
Joe Krown at the Maple Leaf Bar


He started out with an AKG 422 M/S stereo point mic, and a Mackie mixer, running four input channels into a 2 channel DAT.
He didn't use any live delay processing, so he achieved sync by placing his stereo mic amongst the stage mics and instruments.
Usually downstage center so as not to miss anything.
Once 4 channel recording was practical, he was able to align pairs more carefully in post, and make the most of the Mid/Side post production options.


So most of my early experience regarding stage mics + SBD stems from what started as his work.


Years before that, when I was starting out mixing a band, I would record from SBD when possible, or do left channel mono SBD + RCH mic > cassette.
I experimented a lot this but didn't ever focus on mixing them down.
Now I have an idea of what to do, but that's in a whole other thread...
https://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=198253.0


Just popped into my head that Picklemic is how I got started setting up mics on stage to record.
One time in Madison in the early 2000's I remember pointing the KM140's out at the crowd to mix with the SBD, but I didn't really like it and just started bringing two DAT machines.

Ooh he’s using a 4050ST now, love that mic.  Wonder what happened to that AKG? They’re worth a pretty penny now. I’ve always drooled over them but hard to beat the practical pricing and availability of the AT. And wow this is an INCREDIBLE recording too. I’ve been to the maple leaf a few times and this is maybe not a great representation of the room itself, but for a recording of the band it’s incredibly pleasant to listen to. That first “yeahhhh!!” at the top of the first song ha.

Clever to place the mic on the same line as the stage mics. Amazing what creative solutions people are able to come up with when presented with limitations. Though I guess at that time it’s just the way it was. I definitely take for granted being able to record 64 channels over an Ethernet cable with the multitrack, the ambience mics, the stereo mix, and the live printed matrix all in one file.

This recording is a strong sell to try a 6 channel recording with the SBD, ambience omnis at FOH, and stage mics facing the band as opposed to the audience.

Earthworks said that I probably damaged the ICA inside the mic so that potentially rules out my moisture theory. "The key issue is that if phantom power is on, and either voltage-carrying pin connects a split-second before the other, you can potentially damage the ICA circuitry inside a condenser microphone." We use CPC/W1/Veam multipin connectors with all of our mics on stage and they get hot plugged every day, but maybe it's different with a straight XLR than the multipin, though I can't actually believe it makes a difference and if it does I'd be willing to bet the multipin connection (which the EW were never subjected to) would be worse.

The QTCs primarily were used with a Sound Devices MixPre 6-II that is bus powered from my laptop, which to be fair I only use for this purpose and none of my other mics get used with the MixPre....

Sorry to chime in late on this, but if read the part I quoted correctly, you fried both pairs of Earthworks by plugging them into a hot cable with 48v phantom on it. I'm surprised they actually replaced the second pair. That's some fine New Hampshire customer service you received...

I have to agree with morst on this one. I’ve owned dozens and dozens of condenser mics in my career, I have upwards of 20 of them on stage at a time, sometimes over 50 if we’re doing large ensemble shows. They get hot plugged at LEAST twice a day every day, often on a multipin connection which looks worse on the meters than a straight XLR hot plug, and not a single one of them has ever failed. The only mics I’ve EVER had that have failed for any reason other than blunt force mechanical trauma have been the Earthworks. I’ve been through 3 QTC30s in 15 months and yet haven’t had a single other condenser fail in 15 years. If you look back at older QTC30 manuals they even say that it’s no problem at all to hot plug the mics. Now that literature has disappeared from the manual, but they still only specific to plug without phantom power to avoid damage to the SPEAKERS, not the microphone. Hot plugging a condenser mic shouldn’t hurt it, at least if it’s expected to be used next to microphone manufacturers who figured out how to protect their microphones from their power supply at least  30 years ago like Shure, Audio Technica, Neumann, Schoeps, AKG, Beyerdynamic, DPA, Telefunken, and every other Chinese manufacturer reproducing classic microphone designs.

[Gutbucket]

Wow no less than 3' wide?? I can't imagine there's any sort of bar that can accommodate that? Are you using just two stands? I've started using a C stand with a couple of adapters to get the bar about 10' in the air to get away from the chompers but tall boom stands can get almost that high.

Yeah, I find 3' works well in general for a stereo omni pair.  When mixed with SBD or an additional directional mic pair in the center you can place them wider.  If not mixed with SBD or any other mics, it's okay to go narrower and that may be safer for some more acoustic situations, but recording a PA with mics placed back at the SBD is something of an acoustic oddity and surprisingly very wide omni splits can work without producing a "hole in the middle" as would otherwise be expected due to most of the PA content being monophonic and that wavefront arriving at both mics simultaneously.  So even with a wide split you still get a solid center, and the ambient audience part is perceptually spread out more widely/diffusely.  For myself mixing the omnis with a directional mic array placed in the center, and for yourself mixing that with SBD filling the center, 5-6 feet is going to be very comfortable soundwise, but even 8-10 feet or more is not likely to be problematic for you as long as the omnis are positioned "square to the PA".

Will probably be easiest and least cumbersome for you to use two mic-stands, one on either side of the SBD.  I'm using the miniature DPA 4061 lavalier omnis mentioned earlier, which are so tiny and lightweight I'm able to attach them to the ends of a set of telescopic TV "rabbit ear" antennas so small in diameter they are visually unobtrusive and can be extended out as far as practical, anywhere from about 2 feet minimum up to about 6 feet max.

I think part of what I'm going for by pushing the SBD forward is an imagine cue as well but I had never even considered putting the SBD behind the mics. I actually often do end up using a lot of the mics, sometimes something like 60-70% mic and only 30-40% feed if it's the right kind of show/venue, so it would be fun to actually try that as an alternative if I have a particularly good sounding room/well placed FOH.

That's the kind of ratio I tend to like best when everything is working right.  Mics primary, reinforced as necessary by the SBD feed.  The opposite is also common with tapers-  SBD as primary source with some added ambience from the mics.  Really depends on the quality of each and which approach happens to translate best.

I've not specifically tried the trick of treading the SBD like more like reinforcing early reflections when the mics are primary though.  Mostly just tweaking the alignment by ear and letting it fall where it may.

[morst]

Ooh he’s using a 4050ST now, love that mic.  Wonder what happened to that AKG? They’re worth a pretty penny now. I’ve always drooled over them but hard to beat the practical pricing and availability of the AT. And wow this is an INCREDIBLE recording too. I’ve been to the maple leaf a few times and this is maybe not a great representation of the room itself, but for a recording of the band it’s incredibly pleasant to listen to. That first “yeahhhh!!” at the top of the first song ha.

Clever to place the mic on the same line as the stage mics. Amazing what creative solutions people are able to come up with when presented with limitations. Though I guess at that time it’s just the way it was. I definitely take for granted being able to record 64 channels over an Ethernet cable with the multitrack, the ambience mics, the stereo mix, and the live printed matrix all in one file.

This recording is a strong sell to try a 6 channel recording with the SBD, ambience omnis at FOH, and stage mics facing the band as opposed to the audience.

He can tell the story better than I can (since I don't recall the details!) but I believe the 522 failed and no parts are available to fix it? Or an expensive fix would be likely to fail the same way again perhaps?
He got a different 522, the X/Y ENG version, and ran that for a while (like while the M/S one was in the shop) but it may have also failed. I know he didn't like it as much cause it was not M/S...
We need to hear it from Team Pickle...
Anyhow he switched from the PickleMic (that 522MS) to his AT 4050ST which he calls The Potato.
https://www.audio-technica.com/en-us/at4050st