Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Cello mic recommendations  (Read 14735 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline NorseHorse

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • Seeing Sound
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2011, 01:39:01 PM »
First off, you need two mics, not one.  The cello is a stereo instrument.

I would recommend picking up a Sontronics STC-1 stereo set: http://www.fullcompass.com/product/337368.html  For $400, you'll get the two mics, plus three capsules for each (card, hyper, and omni).  It's a special promotion from Sontronics -- email shawn@fullcompass.com, and he'll hook you up.   I don't know how long it lasts...

And of course, placement is even more important than the exact set of mics you use.  Make sure you have a nice space.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2011, 01:56:06 PM by NorseHorse »

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 853
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #16 on: January 21, 2011, 10:12:13 AM »
First off, you need two mics, not one.  The cello is a stereo instrument.

I would recommend picking up a Sontronics STC-1 stereo set: http://www.fullcompass.com/product/337368.html  For $400, you'll get the two mics, plus three capsules for each (card, hyper, and omni).  It's a special promotion from Sontronics -- email shawn@fullcompass.com, and he'll hook you up.   I don't know how long it lasts...

And of course, placement is even more important than the exact set of mics you use.  Make sure you have a nice space.

Would you recommend the Sontronics over a pair of MXL 603's?
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #17 on: January 21, 2011, 10:55:34 PM »
First off, you need two mics, not one.  The cello is a stereo instrument.

I would recommend picking up a Sontronics STC-1 stereo set: http://www.fullcompass.com/product/337368.html  For $400, you'll get the two mics, plus three capsules for each (card, hyper, and omni).  It's a special promotion from Sontronics -- email shawn@fullcompass.com, and he'll hook you up.   I don't know how long it lasts...

And of course, placement is even more important than the exact set of mics you use.  Make sure you have a nice space.

I find it strange to think of an acoustic string instrument as stereo in regards to how it radiates sound. Not that it doesn't benift from multi mic'ing in order to enhance and capture sound from differant places on the instrument but just strange to say that it is stereo.

Offline NorseHorse

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • Seeing Sound
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2011, 12:26:33 AM »
It's very clear when you record a cello, but of course, most of us don't get to record cello that often.  And I'm not really refering to multi-miking different parts of the instrument.  If you are thinking about trying to mic different locations of the cello, you are already too close.  (Live sound, excepted.)

For a visual demonstration, check out the Figure 3 in this article for some ideas on how sound radiates from a cello: http://emusician.com/tutorials/resonance_and_radiation/

To dogmusic: I haven't personally used the 603s or the STC-1s.  However, I have used products from both companies.  The STC-1 toolkit (if you take advantage of the special) is something I would have loved to take advantage of when I was first purchasing mics.  Great flexibility with the different caps, plus a high-pass filter and pad.  That way you can actually experiment with what you've got, instead of having to buy more mics.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2011, 12:40:28 AM by NorseHorse »

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #19 on: January 22, 2011, 07:28:21 AM »
All instruments radiant sounds in differant directions but it does not make it stereo, e.g. discrete two channel sound projectors. I think you maybe using the term wrong. Stereo mic'ing will create a better recorded image but to call it a stereo instrument is strange.
« Last Edit: January 22, 2011, 10:34:28 AM by raymonda »

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #20 on: January 24, 2011, 12:33:57 AM »
Acoustic instruments in real life ARE in stereo, if not also in stereo-surround.   Here are two sample tracks recorded by pro classical musician Jim Dukey using a custom Sonic Studios stereo-surround microphone rig.

Cello: http://74.208.10.48/mp3/hayden.mp3

A sampling of various acoustic performance instruments: http://74.208.10.48/mp3/dukeyguy.mp3
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

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

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #21 on: January 24, 2011, 11:39:28 AM »
Again, I think you are using the term stereo wrong. My understanding is that stereo is how we hear, e.g. how our ears create sound for our brains, (over simplification) and for reproduction (as in your home stereo) but not how sound radiates from an acoustic instrument. You can somewhat recreate the instruments sound field using stereo techniques or even surround techniques but it is not how the waves project from an instrument, e.g. two seperate sound sources.

Regardless of this I think we are in agreement that if you want to reproduce an accurate 3D sound from a cello, a stereo pair of mics would work best.


Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #22 on: January 24, 2011, 04:43:47 PM »
I would get away from defining the radiating pattern as stereo and maybe more like this which might help out a bit more on the subject.

The four main instruments of the string section — the violin, viola, cello, and double bass — emerged in their current form around the start of the 17th century, so they are very 'mature' instruments. Like all acoustic stringed instruments, the string vibrations are much too weak on their own to move enough air to be audible at any distance, so a 'mechanical amplifier', namely the body of the instrument, is used to boost the sound intensity. The string vibrations are coupled to the body of the instrument through the bridge, and that body is essentially a resonant box (albeit of a complex shape and construction) designed to amplify the appropriate range of frequencies generated by the vibrating strings.
Given the complex panel shapes and sizes, different parts of the instrument's body resonate at different frequencies, and thus both the tonal character and radiation pattern of the instrument vary considerably with frequency. The diagrams in this box give some idea of the average polar responses of the violin and cello at a range of different frequencies, and illustrate how the bulk of the instruments' sound comes from the top or front panel. However, the width of sound dispersion and the dominant axis vary considerably with frequency — sometimes in most unexpected ways!
The nature of stringed instruments is that they are all slightly different in their construction, and so the actual radiation pattern of a specific instrument may well be slightly different to the typical plots here. Consequently, it is important to listen to the actual instruments and position the microphones accordingly. Moving a mic a few inches can make all the difference between a bright, detailed sound or a rich dark tone.
 
Typical dispersion characteristics of string instruments at different frequencies.
Typical dispersion characteristics of string instruments at different frequencies.
It is interesting that the body resonances play a big part in determining the harmonic structure of the instrument. When playing high notes on a violin, for example, the fundamental is the strongest component (the highest being around 2.6kHz). However, in the lower registers the fundamental can be as much as 25dB below the strongest second or third harmonic, simply because the body is not large enough to resonate efficiently at the true fundamental frequency — the lowest open string on a violin, for example, vibrates at 196Hz, which has a wavelength of around 0.6 metres. The audible effect of the weakened fundamental is that the upper strings tend to have a slightly more mellow sound than the lower ones.
The distinctly nasal tone of the viola is due to the same effect. The viola is tuned a fifth lower than a violin (the lowest fundamental is 130Hz), and thus the wavelengths are 1.5 times longer. If the viola body were also 1.5 times larger than a violin it would have a similar tonal character, but in fact the body is only about 1.2 times larger. This means that the fundamentals are even weaker across the lower registers and the harmonics are an even more dominant part of the sound.
The cello is tuned an octave below the viola, with the bottom open 'C' string producing a fundamental at 65Hz. However, the body of the instrument is again undersized and poor at amplifying such low fundamentals. In fact, the enclosed volume of air in the body resonates at around 110Hz, which amplifies the first overtone extremely well.
The double bass produces fundamentals as low as 31Hz, but the lowest resonance peak in the body (air resonance again) is an octave above this. Hence the fundamental is a relatively weak component of the sound of the lowest strings, and the majority of the sound energy is contained in the band between 70Hz and 250Hz.
At the top end of the spectrum, the violin can generate strong harmonics that extend up to 10kHz or so — although the level of these is very dependent on the playing technique. The type of strings and the dimensions of the panels in a double bass work to restrict it's harmonic structure to about 2.5kHz, while the cello goes a little higher, as you would expect, to about 3kHz.
Open strings produce a full harmonic structure because the ends of the string are defined precisely by the bridge and nut. However, stopped strings (in other words, those shortened by pressing a finger on the fingerboard) produce a smoother sound with fewer harmonics, purely because of the less well-defined string end under a relatively soft finger! Pressing harder against the finger board can boost the harmonics quite significantly.
The more critical element of harmonic balance is the position of the bow. Drawing it over the strings close to the bridge produces a harmonically rich sound, whereas a position over the fingerboard gives a softer quality.


Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #23 on: January 24, 2011, 06:15:39 PM »
Acoustic instruments in real life ARE in stereo, if not also in stereo-surround.   Here are two sample tracks recorded by pro classical musician Jim Dukey using a custom Sonic Studios stereo-surround microphone rig.

Cello: http://74.208.10.48/mp3/hayden.mp3

A sampling of various acoustic performance instruments: http://74.208.10.48/mp3/dukeyguy.mp3

HUH?? NO they are not in stereo.. They are a sound source.. We dont hear in stereo... our hearing is way more complex than that.. STEREO Surround??? huh??? No we hear sound from all directions Stereo is just the "best" we could do to try and recreate it.. Surround sound is also another "attempt" to recreate what we actually hear but again it falls short of how complex our hearing really is. All sound sources unless they are directional.. Are somewhat omni directional in real spaces.. but they are NOT stereo... They are multi-directional. big difference....
« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 02:26:49 PM by Church-Audio »
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #24 on: January 24, 2011, 08:39:31 PM »
Chris,

I cut some slack on the hearing in stereo. I think what he really meant was binaural hearing. As I stated, I found the stereo comment regarding a sound source radiating pattern strange and miss placed. However, I agree, as would most, that in the spirit of what he is trying to convey, that capturing a solo cello with acurate tone. frquency and body, as with all instruments, is best done with a stereo pair of mics.

Ray
« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 12:25:49 PM by raymonda »

Offline NorseHorse

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • Seeing Sound
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #25 on: January 25, 2011, 11:39:49 AM »
You are playing semantics.  Calling something a "stereo instrument" implies that you are missing a significant portion of the character of the instrument if you record or playback in mono.  This is why suggesting one mic to the poster is ridiculous.  Get a pair.  Live happy.

Reducing the cello to a single sound source is over-simplified.  A cello is sound sources.  Infinite sources contained in a finite space to be precise...  8) Yes, stereophony is a compromise and only approximates the real world, but it is a very important and engaging approximation which helps our ears and brain immensely in the listening experience.

And let me make the obvious connection between sound radiating patterns and stereo: the more distinct the radiating patters are, the more apparent "stereo-ness" an instrument will seem to have.  For instruments where the radiating patterns are more uniform, we do not hear the left and right so distinctly, creating a more mono-like image.

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18873
  • Gender: Male
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #26 on: January 25, 2011, 11:42:17 AM »
The four main instruments of the string section
...
gives a softer quality.

Link / source?
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) > Roland R-05

Offline NorseHorse

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 40
    • Seeing Sound
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #27 on: January 25, 2011, 12:10:10 PM »
And for those of you interested in stereophonic playback from a single point, take a look at Ted Fletcher's "AirSound" approach: http://www.tfpro.com/index.php/page/Perceptions%20in%20record%20production

It basically uses radiating patterns to create the stereo image from three speakers in a single enclosure, only one of which is facing the listener.  Think "m/s" speaker.

Offline raymonda

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1631
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #28 on: January 25, 2011, 12:47:20 PM »
You are playing semantics.  Calling something a "stereo instrument" implies that you are missing a significant portion of the character of the instrument if you record or playback in mono.  This is why suggesting one mic to the poster is ridiculous.  Get a pair.  Live happy.

Reducing the cello to a single sound source is over-simplified.  A cello is sound sources.  Infinite sources contained in a finite space to be precise...  8) Yes, stereophony is a compromise and only approximates the real world, but it is a very important and engaging approximation which helps our ears and brain immensely in the listening experience.

And let me make the obvious connection between sound radiating patterns and stereo: the more distinct the radiating patters are, the more apparent "stereo-ness" an instrument will seem to have.  For instruments where the radiating patterns are more uniform, we do not hear the left and right so distinctly, creating a more mono-like image.

Norsehorse,

Just clarifying your missplaced discription, which is not a matter semantics, e.g. "you say tomayto, I say tomato" but rather based in physics. Maybe to you it is a small detail but to others with less knowledge than you, your discription as "stereo instrument" could be confusing.

I don't think anyone disagrees with your point about using two mics, or more, to record this instrument or any instrument of perfromance.........and was spot on when this wasn't pointed out right out of the gate.

Although I always record with the purpose of stereo or multi-channel playback, historically there were plenty of excellent recordings done in mono, which are engaging, and in some cases preferred, both in classical, jazz and rock genre's. Time moves on and recording in mono is not something I find interesting. Also, I have on a number of occassions recorded the cello, "Hank Roberts" being one artist, and sometimes I use only one mic on his instrument, with a stereo pair in the far field with excellent results. Although, he is also playing with other instruments, e.g. drums, bass, horns, etc. In cases like this placing a stereo pair closer to his instrument would compromise the recording due to bleed through from the other player's instruments. But then again, this is in a live situation which you clarified as a different sort of beast.

Happy tracks!

Ray
« Last Edit: January 25, 2011, 04:34:51 PM by raymonda »

Offline Church-Audio

  • Trade Count: (44)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 7571
  • Gender: Male
Re: Cello mic recommendations
« Reply #29 on: January 25, 2011, 02:26:04 PM »
You are playing semantics.  Calling something a "stereo instrument" implies that you are missing a significant portion of the character of the instrument if you record or playback in mono.  This is why suggesting one mic to the poster is ridiculous.  Get a pair.  Live happy.

Reducing the cello to a single sound source is over-simplified.  A cello is sound sources.  Infinite sources contained in a finite space to be precise...  8) Yes, stereophony is a compromise and only approximates the real world, but it is a very important and engaging approximation which helps our ears and brain immensely in the listening experience.

And let me make the obvious connection between sound radiating patterns and stereo: the more distinct the radiating patters are, the more apparent "stereo-ness" an instrument will seem to have.  For instruments where the radiating patterns are more uniform, we do not hear the left and right so distinctly, creating a more mono-like image.

Many MANY sources are recorded in Mono in a mix matter of fact most sources are recorded in mono.... actually. Its how they get panned in the stereo image that makes them jump out.. IN A MIX but for the sake of recording an instrument to listen to it and it alone a binaural recording might be the most pleasing to the ears. I have still heard some pretty amazing sounding single mic recordings out there all of the old blues guys from the early 30's and 20's GUESS WHAT ? MONO recordings.. they still have depth and still sound amazing. Not everything has to be "stereo" the most important question to ask is where will the tracks end up that determines the proper technique to capture them.
for warranty returns email me at
EMAIL Sales@church-audio.com

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.071 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF