[Tom McCreadie]

John Williamson wrote:

You could try altering the EQ on the S channel to alter the relative
levels of the HF percussion. If it moves in and out, you've got a
frequency response problem.
But altering the HF equalization on the S channel - or the M channel, for that
matter - will _always_ make the imaging of HF components move in or out. That's
pure physics, and such a phenomenon would also occur with perfect mics, so one
can't use such an experimental outcome to draw a conclusion on Gary's case.

His AT mics may well have an uneven off-axis response, but he was employing two
fig8 mics, so if the AT manufacturing process results mainly in a systematic-
rather than random frequency response skew in the mic patterns, there may be a
fortuitous "close-tolerance unevenness-matching" :-) between M and S mics, that
would provide a mitigating effect.

An ideal Fig8 MS with -3dB S gain equates mathematically to a Fig8 XY pair
splayed at ±35.3°. That would have a Sengpiel SRA of ±47.7° (with the
ambiophonic region beginning beyond ±54.7°). The front desks subtended an angle
of ±50.2° to the mic array, and the drummer lay within that angle. So it seems
unlikely that the drummer's wide positioning contributed to the perceived weird
imaging.

I can't listen with any Dolby surround set-up, but I'd first suspect the dismal
room geometry and reflections as the main culprit for any imaging anomalies
(Fig8's might actually have helped here against that the low ceiling?) Actually,
I didn't find the image shifting very distracting...and thought Gary did a
pretty credible job, considering the tools he had and the hall he had to contend
with.

But wow, those heavy mics supported by that lone, dinky stand-base
thread!...that does make me shiver. Also, those Fig8 mics may be vulnerable to
stand-borne resonances. And perhaps consider relocating the bass amp, not the
player, to a more central position?