[[email protected]]

If you were going to mic a chorus with very low stage volume (no
monitors, no band, etc.), it seems to me a pair of SM-81's in a
coincident pair about 6 feet up and away should be just fine.

I see people talking about choir mics in church settings. But these
posts seem to be centering on jacked-up stage settings with shout-to-
hear-your-neighbor volumes in the crowd area (what happened to
"sanctuary" anyway?).

So I'm trying to approach this from a reasonable volume, not hyped
situation.

[Tim Perry]

wrote in message
...
If you were going to mic a chorus with very low stage volume (no
monitors, no band, etc.), it seems to me a pair of SM-81's in a
coincident pair about 6 feet up and away should be just fine.

I see people talking about choir mics in church settings. But these
posts seem to be centering on jacked-up stage settings with shout-to-
hear-your-neighbor volumes in the crowd area (what happened to
"sanctuary" anyway?).

So I'm trying to approach this from a reasonable volume, not hyped
situation.

Is this sound reinforcement or for recording?

Either way in church settings visual esthetics often preclude optimal
placement and larger mics.

Personally I have has satisfactory results micing choirs with a wide variety
if condensers. everything from crown PCC to shotguns.

The only thing that I can recall that I was quite dissatisfied was an omni.
I found I wanted to hear the choir not choir+ room.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 18:46:53 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

If you were going to mic a chorus with very low stage volume (no
monitors, no band, etc.), it seems to me a pair of SM-81's in a
coincident pair about 6 feet up and away should be just fine.

I see people talking about choir mics in church settings. But these
posts seem to be centering on jacked-up stage settings with shout-to-
hear-your-neighbor volumes in the crowd area (what happened to
"sanctuary" anyway?).

So I'm trying to approach this from a reasonable volume, not hyped
situation.

The question part of this post is missing, so maybe only
general comments apply. Hard to tell your experience level
from the initial post, so forgive me if these comments are
too obvious (everything's obvious once you've done it!) :

Churches uniformly, without exception, seem to expect large
gains in choir sound volume by hanging a pair of microphones
and trusting to Faith. They are uniformly, without exception,
disappointed. Ain't happenin'. Never, ever, never.

Secondly, you need to begin to think about all the other
(potentially) open mic's in the sanctuary. Assuming (because
you didn't say) that you're talking about SR, the soup
that you're going to be cooking includes *all* potentially
open mic's.

But God dwells, with the Devil, in The Details (that new subdivision
further west), and without those details, nobody can offer you any
specific advice.



All the best fortune,
Chris Hornbeck

[Richard Crowley]

"Chris Hornbeck" wrote ...
The question part of this post is missing, so maybe only
general comments apply. Hard to tell your experience level
from the initial post, so forgive me if these comments are
too obvious (everything's obvious once you've done it!) :

Also missing from the original post was the critical information about
whether the OP was asking about reinforcement or recording.

Churches uniformly, without exception, seem to expect large
gains in choir sound volume by hanging a pair of microphones
and trusting to Faith. They are uniformly, without exception,
disappointed. Ain't happenin'. Never, ever, never.

There are most certainly exceptions. It depends on sort of
churches you sample. Most of the ones I sample are "acoustic".

Secondly, you need to begin to think about all the other
(potentially) open mic's in the sanctuary. Assuming (because
you didn't say) that you're talking about SR, the soup
that you're going to be cooking includes *all* potentially
open mic's.

Indeed we know absolutely nothing about any of these other
critical details.

[Chris Hornbeck]

On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 21:16:59 -0700, "Richard Crowley"
wrote:

Churches uniformly, without exception, seem to expect large
gains in choir sound volume by hanging a pair of microphones
and trusting to Faith. They are uniformly, without exception,
disappointed. Ain't happenin'. Never, ever, never.

There are most certainly exceptions. It depends on sort of
churches you sample. Most of the ones I sample are "acoustic".

I knew, reading my post in Usenet, that I'd been more
"general" than was politic, so thanks for the opportunity
to clarify my sweeping generalizations.

First: if a stranger posts into r.a.p asking about church
sound and offering next-to-nothing details, my bet is that
(s)he has been drafted into a gig way over their head, and
needs a place to get started (and this ain't it! - (s)he
needs a book).

Second: A church big enough to have significant gain from
a pair of flying choir mics has a dedicated sound person. If
not, they need to get their act together - I **** thee not.

Smaller churches fly mics hoping for results that simply
cannot happen. I'm not being mean here; it's just what I've
seen way too many times. Expectations exceed anything
possible - that's (sometimes) life. Best, IMO, to get it
out front.

Third: Churches seem to always ignore issues of on-stage
monitoring; issues of musicians hearing each other are
classic. Two keyboard players twenty feet apart seems
trivial to SR folks, but it's a surprise problem to most church
folks. Sound just ain't their main gig.


There's a lot to be said about church sound, and I think
good bits of it would be generally useful to all pro-sound
folks. Hopefully the thread will continue deeper. (But the
OP really needs a good book!)


Much thanks, as always,
Chris Hornbeck

[Paul Stamler]

wrote in message
...
If you were going to mic a chorus with very low stage volume (no
monitors, no band, etc.), it seems to me a pair of SM-81's in a
coincident pair about 6 feet up and away should be just fine.

What are you miking them for? Recording? Or reinforcement?

In either case the SM81s would probably be fine, but I'm curious.

Peace,
Paul

[LAB]

I have used SM94's in x-y. Cheaper than 81's, but very good.

Gianluca

[[email protected]]

It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.

[Paul Stamler]

wrote in message
...
It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.

Not to be cantankerous, but if there's sound reinforcement, it's not "purely
acoustic".

We still need to know a lot more. How many people singing? In what kinds of
spaces, for how big an audience? Accompanied by what instruments, if any?
Who will be operating the sound reinforcement system?

Peace,
Paul

[Richard Crowley]

wrote from Gooooooooooogle Groups...
It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.

It is not "acoustic" if you are doing sound reinforcement.

If you don't see that you are providing way too few
details to get any reasonable response, then you might
want to consider looking for local, live help rather than
trying to get assistance here.

Making people play "20-questions" isn't likely to win
you many folk willing to help you, either.

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
If you were going to mic a chorus with very low stage volume (no
monitors, no band, etc.), it seems to me a pair of SM-81's in a
coincident pair about 6 feet up and away should be just fine.

You could do worse. The SM-81s aren't the best things around and will
tend to be a little brittle sounding, but they are perfectly okay in a
good room with a tight budget.

I see people talking about choir mics in church settings. But these
posts seem to be centering on jacked-up stage settings with shout-to-
hear-your-neighbor volumes in the crowd area (what happened to
"sanctuary" anyway?).

This is a very bad situation, yes.

So I'm trying to approach this from a reasonable volume, not hyped
situation.

Well, I can tell you that a pair of B&K 4006s with a Jecklin Disc will
sound a lot cleaner in a good room than an ORTF pair of SM-81s, but
it will cost a lot more too. And a Jecklin disc will make a real hash
of a bad room. On the other hand if you are in a long skinny church
with an extended narthex and very shallow galleries, a Blumlein pair of
figure-8s can help get you a good sound and can help you avoid slap problems
from the walls.

This sort of job becomes a question of what mike technique and configuration
fits the room.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

In article ,
wrote:
It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.

In that case, a mike with a tighter pattern will do better than an SM-81.
And a parametric set up to notch the first couple feedback modes would help
too.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[genericaudioperson]

Thanks, Scott.

Are you talking about a hypercardioid, or do you mean something like
an sm-58 that only picks up sounds close to the source?

I saw a Josephson C42 which sells for about $420 each. That's a good
brand, but I'm not sure what the pickup pattern is like compared to
the SM-81, or the off-axis response or the rf-rejection, etc.

Is there some mic in the $350 range that does what you are talking
about?

[genericaudioperson]

I saw an AKG CK 98 for $400:

http://www.akg.com/site/products/pow... ew,specs.html

[Scott Dorsey]

genericaudioperson wrote:
Thanks, Scott.

Are you talking about a hypercardioid, or do you mean something like
an sm-58 that only picks up sounds close to the source?

Probably a hypercardioid. Your goal is to use microphones that you can
pull as far away from the source as possible.

I saw a Josephson C42 which sells for about $420 each. That's a good
brand, but I'm not sure what the pickup pattern is like compared to
the SM-81, or the off-axis response or the rf-rejection, etc.

The pattern is a little tighter than the SM-81. The top end is a whole
hell of a lot cleaner and the top end response is much flatter, and
consequently has better gain before feedback. But it's not super tight.

Is there some mic in the $350 range that does what you are talking
about?

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Ty Ford]

On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 23:07:22 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote
(in article ):

genericaudioperson wrote:
Thanks, Scott.

Are you talking about a hypercardioid, or do you mean something like
an sm-58 that only picks up sounds close to the source?

Probably a hypercardioid. Your goal is to use microphones that you can
pull as far away from the source as possible.

I saw a Josephson C42 which sells for about $420 each. That's a good
brand, but I'm not sure what the pickup pattern is like compared to
the SM-81, or the off-axis response or the rf-rejection, etc.

The pattern is a little tighter than the SM-81. The top end is a whole
hell of a lot cleaner and the top end response is much flatter, and
consequently has better gain before feedback. But it's not super tight.

Is there some mic in the $350 range that does what you are talking
about?

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?
--scott



yes.

Ty Ford

--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 7/10/08 5:07, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

(...)

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?

No.

--
Joe Kotroczo

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 7/10/08 17:57, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

(...)

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?
--scott



yes.

Ty Ford

You're sure about that? The Audio-Technica website says it's discontinued.


--
Joe Kotroczo

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 03:47:38 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

On 7/10/08 5:07, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

(...)

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?

No.



http://tinyurl.com/3tqwxb


Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 03:47:38 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

On 7/10/08 5:07, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

(...)

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?

No.



Ah, well ....at4053b now.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 8/10/08 17:42, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 03:47:38 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

On 7/10/08 5:07, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

(...)

Is the Audio-Technica AT4053 still being made?

No.



Ah, well ....at4053b now.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Huh? It just tried it again: type in 4053 into the search thingy on the A-T
website, and all you get is this:
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...2b1/index.html
Type in 4053b and the search yields nothing, no hits. Hmpf.

--
Joe Kotroczo

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:46:12 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Um, step away from the coffee machine and scroll down a bit, Joe. it's at the
bottom of the window.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Regards,

Ty Ford



--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 8/10/08 18:01, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:46:12 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Um, step away from the coffee machine and scroll down a bit, Joe. it's at the
bottom of the window.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html


Hmm?

I've seen your link, thanks, I was complaining about the fact that their
"Product Search" doesn't get me there.


--
Joe Kotroczo

[Ty Ford]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 12:18:45 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

On 8/10/08 18:01, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:46:12 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Um, step away from the coffee machine and scroll down a bit, Joe. it's at
the
bottom of the window.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html


Hmm?

I've seen your link, thanks, I was complaining about the fact that their
"Product Search" doesn't get me there.




Joe,

My own experiences with product search were annoying until I realized that
the results were small and way at the bottom of the window. You had to find
them and click on them.

Regards,

Ty Ford


--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 9/10/08 16:02, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 12:18:45 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

On 8/10/08 18:01, in article ,
"Ty Ford" wrote:

On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 11:46:12 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html

Um, step away from the coffee machine and scroll down a bit, Joe. it's at
the
bottom of the window.

http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wi...1f0/index.html


Hmm?

I've seen your link, thanks, I was complaining about the fact that their
"Product Search" doesn't get me there.

Joe,

My own experiences with product search were annoying until I realized that
the results were small and way at the bottom of the window. You had to find
them and click on them.

I tried it again: it does indeed work when I go to the Audio-Technica US
website. If I try the same search ("4053b") on for example the UK website, I
get an "Not available in your world area and/or language."

Hmm...

I hate websites where they make you click on a worldmap before letting you
in.

--
Joe Kotroczo

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:50:14 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

I tried it again: it does indeed work when I go to the Audio-Technica US
website. If I try the same search ("4053b") on for example the UK website, I
get an "Not available in your world area and/or language."

Hmm...

I hate websites where they make you click on a worldmap before letting you
in.

It's a small world after all.

Ty Ford




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[jakdedert]

Ty Ford wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:50:14 -0400, Joe Kotroczo wrote
(in article ):

I tried it again: it does indeed work when I go to the Audio-Technica US
website. If I try the same search ("4053b") on for example the UK website, I
get an "Not available in your world area and/or language."

Hmm...

I hate websites where they make you click on a worldmap before letting you
in.

It's a small world after all.

Ty Ford

Depends on the size of your screen....

jak




--Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services
Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com
Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA

[Tim Perry]

wrote in message
...
It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.


OK the question is micing choir using SM81's for SR.

Answer: getting gain before feedback (GBF) when micing from a distance is
always a problem requiring consideration of mic placement.

While the Sm81 does as well as many other cardioid condensers for this it is
still a cardioid. For optimum results with the dictates of mic placement
something with a hypercard pattern is usually slightly better. you aim the
null toward the speakers to optimize GBF.

I find the Samson C01
http://www.samsontech.com/products/relatedDocs/C01U.pdf to be a good choice
when a LDC can be used.

[Tim Perry]

"Tim Perry" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
It's not for a church. It's for sound reinforcement. Visuals are
inconsequential. No monitors, purely acoustic.


OK the question is micing choir using SM81's for SR.

Answer: getting gain before feedback (GBF) when micing from a distance is
always a problem requiring consideration of mic placement.

While the Sm81 does as well as many other cardioid condensers for this it
is
still a cardioid. For optimum results with the dictates of mic placement
something with a hypercard pattern is usually slightly better. you aim the
null toward the speakers to optimize GBF.

I find the Samson C01
http://www.samsontech.com/products/relatedDocs/C01U.pdf to be a good
choice
when a LDC can be used.




The more observant will notice the link is to the USB version. rest assured
the polar pattern is identical to the one that comes with a new C01

[Scott Dorsey]

Tim Perry wrote:

I find the Samson C01
http://www.samsontech.com/products/relatedDocs/C01U.pdf to be a good
choice
when a LDC can be used.

The more observant will notice the link is to the USB version. rest assured
the polar pattern is identical to the one that comes with a new C01

Sadly, the polar pattern on the data sheet has little to do with the polar
pattern of the actual device, as you will sadly discover if you attempt to
use it as a PA mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Tim Perry]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message
...
Tim Perry wrote:

I find the Samson C01
http://www.samsontech.com/products/relatedDocs/C01U.pdf to be a good
choice
when a LDC can be used.

The more observant will notice the link is to the USB version. rest
assured
the polar pattern is identical to the one that comes with a new C01

Sadly, the polar pattern on the data sheet has little to do with the polar
pattern of the actual device, as you will sadly discover if you attempt to
use it as a PA mike.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I will not insist the printed pattern is accurate, however I own 4 of these
and from first hand experience find they do work well for live PA choir.