| Author |
Message |
Nudge
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Nov 24, 2004 2:03 pm Post subject:
general mic choice rule |
|
|
Hello you guys,
as a general tendency when recording (and
given a set of decent mics), is it
A) preferrable to vary the mic from source
to source to make room in the frequency scale
(at the risk of losing the big picture)?
Kinda motown-eq-micing.
or
B) better to use less mics to keep the
picture, at the risk to overload on the mic's
peak frequencies?
Thank you for any hint.
Nudge (totally confused)
--
Nudge // PCS Records Studio Leipzig
http://studio.lieber-media.de
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Karl Winkler
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:07 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
Nudge <big-chief@gmx.de> wrote in message news:<30j86jF31jv17U1@uni-berlin.de>...
| Quote: | Hello you guys,
as a general tendency when recording (and
given a set of decent mics), is it
A) preferrable to vary the mic from source
to source to make room in the frequency scale
(at the risk of losing the big picture)?
Kinda motown-eq-micing.
or
B) better to use less mics to keep the
picture, at the risk to overload on the mic's
peak frequencies?
I wrote a response to your post earlier today, but then an "Internal |
Server Error" ate my homework...
If I understand your question correctly, you are referring to
microphone peaks and the choice in terms of A) choosing different mics
with peaks in different places to avoid any buildups in certain
frequency areas, or B) trying to maintain more of an overall sonic
picture of the acoustic space?
First, I would say that it really depends on what kind of situation
you are dealing with. For a close, multi-miked setup, the "big
picture" really isn't all that possible anyway. You're only capturing
certain portions of each instrument's output, and without much of the
room tone. Added to that, the individual peaks and dips (formants) of
each instrument will dominate over the peaks in any good microphone.
However, with really peaky microphones, it may be possible to hear a
buildup if that same mic type is used on several different
instruments. True - this is probably one reason engineers can never
get enough microphones. Some mics suit some instruments better than
others. Avoiding placing a peaky microphone with a bump in the same
region as a big peak in the instrument... that is, unless you wish to
bring out the "character" in that specific instrument.
For your B) above, to preserve the overall sonic picture, such as with
classical recording where you want an acoustic blend of all the
instruments and the room must figure prominently into the sound,
generally the use of as few microphones as possible is advisable.
Mostly this is due to the need to preserve phase relationships. And
when doing so, using relatively flat mics is common, taking into
account that some absorption happens in air and from surfaces.
Diffuse-field equalized omni mics are often chosen for this purpose,
for these reasons.
Hope this answers (at least some) of your question.
Karl Winkler
Lectrosonics, Inc.
http://www.lectrosonics.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kurt Albershardt
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 25, 2004 6:07 am Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
Karl Winkler wrote:
| Quote: |
Some mics suit some instruments better than
others. Avoiding placing a peaky microphone with a bump in the same
region as a big peak in the instrument.
|
e.g. Don't use an SM-57 (or most of the Chinese condensers) on a violin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nudge
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:05 am Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
Hi there!
Karl Winkler wrote:
| Quote: | First, I would say that it really depends on what kind of situation
you are dealing with. For a close, multi-miked setup, the "big
picture" really isn't all that possible anyway. You're only capturing
certain portions of each instrument's output, and without much of the
room tone. Added to that, the individual peaks and dips (formants) of
each instrument will dominate over the peaks in any good microphone.
|
OK, sounds resonable.
I am thinking especially about SM57s on tom-toms, since I use them
on guitar amps and the snare already. And, you know, sometimes the
SM58 for vocals is a good choice - that leaves just the base drum,
overheads and the bass for other mics, ending with a recording
nearly fully done with the same and cheap mic.
I don't know if that is the way to go.
| Quote: | However, with really peaky microphones, it may be possible to hear a
buildup if that same mic type is used on several different
instruments. True - this is probably one reason engineers can never
get enough microphones. Some mics suit some instruments better than
others. Avoiding placing a peaky microphone with a bump in the same
region as a big peak in the instrument... that is, unless you wish to
bring out the "character" in that specific instrument.
|
Well, to me, both ways sound reasonable, thats why I am confused.
If I chose microphones that brings out the specific character of
each instrument, I could avoid a lot of masking problems and therefore
need less eq in the mixing. The downside would surely be a harsh
sound. But otherwise, choosing microphones that have peaks somewhere
else then the instruments, one gets a more flat and maybe uninteresting
sound where one instrument masks the others...?
Kind Regards
Nudge
--
Nudge // PCS Records Studio Leipzig
http://studio.lieber-media.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kurt Albershardt
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:58 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
Nudge wrote:
| Quote: |
If I chose microphones that brings out the specific character of
each instrument, I could avoid a lot of masking problems and therefore
need less eq in the mixing. The downside would surely be a harsh
sound. But otherwise, choosing microphones that have peaks somewhere
else then the instruments, one gets a more flat and maybe uninteresting
sound where one instrument masks the others...?
|
You could always choose microphones without significant peaks and let the instruments' characters speak unadorned... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ty Ford
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:18 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:56:45 -0500, Kurt Albershardt wrote
(in article <30mkmsF32g4u0U1@uni-berlin.de>):
| Quote: | Nudge wrote:
If I chose microphones that brings out the specific character of
each instrument, I could avoid a lot of masking problems and therefore
need less eq in the mixing. The downside would surely be a harsh
sound. But otherwise, choosing microphones that have peaks somewhere
else then the instruments, one gets a more flat and maybe uninteresting
sound where one instrument masks the others...?
You could always choose microphones without significant peaks and let the
instruments' characters speak unadorned...
|
I'll agree with Kurt here, and you. The downside would be an overly harsh
(and artificial) sound.
Masking, as it is usually defined, doesn't really apply here. The placement
of the microphone and the nature of the musical arrangement have as much or
more to do with what you mix anyway.
Sounds like you don't want to EQ.
Get over it and get into it.
Here are a few thoughts;
1. Overly bright mics can make mixing more difficult because they
artificially add HF to everything.
2. There's additive EQ and subtractive EQ. Instead of boosting the guitar
track 6 dB at 6kHz, try reducing it 3dB at 200 Hz and adding 3 dB at 6kHz.
The less you yank up or down, the better.
3. Put the mic where it sounds best. If you're doing a guitar rhythm track,
you might like a nice thick chunky sound. Well fine, but that may well NOT
work in an arrangement with a synth and left hand of a piano because they all
generate similar low -mid frequencies. ...which will add up to mud.
Regards,
Ty Ford
-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hank alrich
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 26, 2004 6:19 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
Karl Winkler wrote:
| Quote: | I wrote a response to your post earlier today, but then an "Internal
Server Error" ate my homework...
|
Your dog wants a new computer.
--
ha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ScotFraser
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:07 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
<< 3. Put the mic where it sounds best. If you're doing a guitar rhythm track,
you might like a nice thick chunky sound. Well fine, but that may well NOT
work in an arrangement with a synth and left hand of a piano because they all
generate similar low -mid frequencies. ...which will add up to mud. >><BR><BR>
To amplify just a bit on what Ty says here, always make your mic choice,
position, tracking EQ & compression decisions based on hearing the part with
the track. A great sound by itself can appear utterly crapulous when surrounded
by other instruments. You often have to trash an instrument's sound to get it
to sit properly in a mix, especially if the arrangement is somewhat unclear.
Scott Fraser |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nudge
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 28, 2004 6:21 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
ScotFraser wrote:
| Quote: | 3. Put the mic where it sounds best. If you're doing a guitar rhythm track,
you might like a nice thick chunky sound. Well fine, but that may well NOT
work in an arrangement with a synth and left hand of a piano because they all
generate similar low -mid frequencies. ...which will add up to mud. >><BR><BR
To amplify just a bit on what Ty says here, always make your mic choice,
position, tracking EQ & compression decisions based on hearing the part with
the track. A great sound by itself can appear utterly crapulous when surrounded
by other instruments. You often have to trash an instrument's sound to get it
to sit properly in a mix, especially if the arrangement is somewhat unclear.
Scott Fraser
|
I will print out Ty's answer and tape it above my mixer.
Thank you very much, Ty!
@ Scot: Thats an interesting point. I would love to hear some SOLOed
tracks of guitars and drums the way they are used in real mixdowns.
Maybe that way more of us (beginners) could understand when a sound is
good or useful, while standing with mic and headphone in the studio
searching for the hot spot. Since there is no direct feedback, and the
result of the micing comes clear sometimes many weeks later, I guess
it's one more of those years-of-experience things...;-)
Kind regards,
Nudge
--
Nudge // PCS Records Studio Leipzig
http://studio.lieber-media.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ty Ford
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 28, 2004 6:22 pm Post subject:
Re: general mic choice rule |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 16:19:48 -0500, Nudge wrote
(in article <30u1neF35jodsU1@uni-berlin.de>):
| Quote: |
ScotFraser wrote:
3. Put the mic where it sounds best. If you're doing a guitar rhythm
track,
you might like a nice thick chunky sound. Well fine, but that may well NOT
work in an arrangement with a synth and left hand of a piano because they
all
generate similar low -mid frequencies. ...which will add up to mud.
BR><BR
To amplify just a bit on what Ty says here, always make your mic choice,
position, tracking EQ & compression decisions based on hearing the part with
the track. A great sound by itself can appear utterly crapulous when
surrounded
by other instruments. You often have to trash an instrument's sound to get
it
to sit properly in a mix, especially if the arrangement is somewhat unclear.
Scott Fraser
I will print out Ty's answer and tape it above my mixer.
Thank you very much, Ty!
@ Scot: Thats an interesting point. I would love to hear some SOLOed
tracks of guitars and drums the way they are used in real mixdowns.
Maybe that way more of us (beginners) could understand when a sound is
good or useful, while standing with mic and headphone in the studio
searching for the hot spot. Since there is no direct feedback, and the
result of the micing comes clear sometimes many weeks later, I guess
it's one more of those years-of-experience things...;-)
Kind regards,
Nudge
|
I was just explaining the situation outlined above to a new client I was
working with yesterday. Several other thoughts tumble out.
Getting caught in "Repetitive Mixing Mode, Ad Nauseum" happens a lot to new
mixers. (It happened to me years ago. I can look back and laugh at it now.)
1. Get a great sound, record it.
2. Doesn't fit in the mix.
3. EQ it to fit the mix.
4. Solo it and think it sounds horrid.
5. While in Solo, de-EQ it to sound great again.
6. Put it in the mix, doesn't work.
7. While in mix, re-EQ it to sound good.
8. Solo it, sounds like crap.
STOP IT!!!! That great sound you get solo WILL NEVER FIT IN A MIX. The busier
the mix, the more neverer it will fit. (apologies to grammarians.)
This will be part of a whole chapter in the reworking of my 1993 book
"Advanced Audio Production Techniques." I just received the copyright back
from Focal press this month. Fortunately, I kept the files (found ALMOST LOST
on a 44MB Syquest platter!!!)
BTW, Amazon has a few copies, used and otherwise if you want to take a look
at the original. They are very cheap compared to the $32 list price which I
NEVER agreed to and thought was way too high.
Focal made the money. I think my annual royalty check never amounted to more
than $200.
Regards,
Ty Ford
-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in