Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Sidhu wrote:
But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar (both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each other, then it might work. Also what kind of sound difference can i expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred. The side effect of the rear lobe is that you now have very tight nulls around 120'. This means that if you can place one instrument so that the other is in the null of the first's microphone, you get much better rejection than with a cardioid. BUT, let me say that the hypercardioid Oktava is pretty wide, and does not have much of a rear lobe. The cardioid is wider than most cardioids too. Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD here. What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them to be less metallic than they really are? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
"Sidhu" wrote in message
om... But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar (both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each other, then it might work. Also what kind of sound difference can i expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred. Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD here. and with the 012's which capsule to order ? I'd go for the hypercardioids. You'd get better rejection at the sides, and on my mics at least, the hypercardioids are a little gentler on top, useful for instruments that tend toward the metallic. Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer ribbon such as an M260 or M160. Peace, Paul |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
(Sidhu)
But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar (both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each other, then it might work. Well even if the players are facing each other you can still place the *mics* at angles to each other. Sometimes as spot mics I have just stuck a 414 in figure 8 between two instrumentalists in a similar trio setting, with a cardiod on the third instrument which was the softest one (harp or zither or something). Also what kind of sound difference can i expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred. What you do is try to place the null of the mic facing whatever you wish to reject the most. You can always hang a packing blanket over a short mic stand with the boom crossways forming a "T", and place that to kill rear reflections if they are a problem. Usually they are low enough relative to the insturment that it is no problem. And one thing I like about omnis close up is that they capture the intrument in the context of the room, which is nice if you want a more open sound. Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD here. Sound like keys jangling or metal plates really test a microphone, many just get brittle and harsh when confronted with that kind of a sonic challenge. But omni microphones are easier to make sound good, and you can get close without tons of proximity effect (which increases as the pattern progressively narrows.) The down side of the ECM8000 is they are bit noisy, but if you can get close enough they have a decent output level so that might not be a problem for you. They definitely work for drums IMO. and with the 012's which capsule to order ? Thanks for the help. Well depends how much money you have. If I were on a budget and needed a lot of mics, I might consider buying a matched pair from Soundroom with all 3 capsules (about $640 USD) and then picking up a couple or more of them cheap for $100 a piece (cardiod only) at Guitar Center. Then you would have a well matched pair for stereo micing X/Y or AB, and whatever you weren't using for that you could mix and match for another usable couple of spot mics, or maybe for flank mics if the mic bodies on the single mics weren't too different in response from each other. Will Miho NY Music & TV Audio Guy Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News "The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Stamler wrote:
Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer ribbon such as an M260 or M160. Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things, but not for an M160. -- ha |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
(Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:znr1097846692k@trad...
In article writes: So i also have the option of now picking up the Shure PGDMK6 drum mic kit. It fits nicely in budget, but i doubt it would really be anything to write home about. You're probably correct, but if you don't already have a good drum mic setup, having really great mics alone won't assure that you get a good recorded drum sound. A kit is a good way to start, and you can supplemente it later as you grow experience. If it's convenient and will get your recording project started (the really important thing) I'd say go for it. Noted. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Sidhu wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ... The side effect of the rear lobe is that you now have very tight nulls around 120'. This means that if you can place one instrument so that the other is in the null of the first's microphone, you get much better rejection than with a cardioid. BUT, let me say that the hypercardioid Oktava is pretty wide, and does not have much of a rear lobe. The cardioid is wider than most cardioids too. OK. So what would you suggest to be a good choice of the two ? Personally, I would pick the hypercardioid by a long shot, but that is just me. I've got a review of the Josephson e22 microphone that ought to be out in Recording magazine soon, which has some discussion about this. The e22 was built to be as directional as possible without creating a rear lobe. I would have personally picked more directionality and the rear lobe, but the original guy who commissioned the microphone design didn't like rear lobes and wanted to be able to put a mike up anywhere in a drum kit without worrying about that. It's entirely a judgement call. Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD here. What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them to be less metallic than they really are? Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK) SDC, U87, Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar). The one thing to avoid is mikes with a presence peak, which will really bring that out. The SM57 or SM58 will really emphasize that. I once tried stereo micing the Sitar. Using two 451's (one was an EB). One on the bridge and another a little up the neck. The neck mic was a bad idea. I removed it during the mix. Also stereo miced a SWhankar Veena that time (New Indian Varient of the Six string Spanish guitar, played with a slide, single peice construction, hollow body, But no sound hole). Again one near the bridge an another near the 12th fret. Spaced AB. One of the most beautifull recordings ive done so far. I gave the mix to the client as is. No Eq, No compression. Nothing. My personal feeling is that sitar sounds much better if you just put it into a very live room and pull way back and mike the room rather than the instrument. This is a great sound for Indian classical music, but it is very different than the modern Bhollywood soundtrack sound and a lot of people don't like the more distant (and even hollow) approach. Never dealt with the Shankar Veena. I think there is a difference between sweet metallic and ear cringing metallic. It's the former that im after. My tendency is to urge you to pull back more and avoid anything with a 4KHz-6KHz peak to it. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"hank alrich" wrote in message .. . Paul Stamler wrote: Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer ribbon such as an M260 or M160. Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things, but not for an M160. True. Well, he's mostly looking for drum overheads, which will then do double-duty on other things. Pity about the mixer, since M160s actually can make nice drum overheads. But they're kind of out of the price range he mentioned anyway. Peace, Paul |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Stamler wrote:
"hank alrich" wrote... Paul Stamler wrote: Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer ribbon such as an M260 or M160. Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things, but not for an M160. True. Well, he's mostly looking for drum overheads, which will then do double-duty on other things. I like them as OH mics, too, and for lots of things. (I'm whispering so Ty won't hear me say this stuff.) But they do need some preamp ooompf. Pity about the mixer, since M160s actually can make nice drum overheads. But they're kind of out of the price range he mentioned anyway. Wonder if he'd be better off wth a fistful of 57's and a couple of RNP's? g -- ha |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
|
#52
|
|||
|
|||
|
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Sidhu wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ... What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them to be less metallic than they really are? Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK) SDC, U87, Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar). The one thing to avoid is mikes with a presence peak, which will really bring that out. The SM57 or SM58 will really emphasize that. I mentioned the mics above. Of these, could u kindly tell me ure pik for such recording, and well stick to spot micing for now. Also irrespective of the above mentioned mics, which would be your pik ? Also throw in a word for the 012 for uch applications. If I absolutely had to spot mike, I would probably use a good dynamic mike without a presence peak. Even the EV 635A, which in the US can often be found used for under fifty dollars. I don't think I would use most of the condensers because I would want somthing to tone the top end down a bit. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Ive been trying to get in touch with the sound room ppl. but there not
replying. I wanted to know how do they ship. (if it's a door to door service, so I wont need to go the customs office). And if they can make a cheaper invoice. There not getting back. Sidhu |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Just taken delivery of the Oktava MC012 stereo pair from the sound
room. Looking forward to using it. Thank you all for all the help. Regards, Sidhu |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Condenser mics | Pro Audio | |||
Condenser mics | Pro Audio | |||
FS-Two Oktava MC012 mics, price reduced | Pro Audio | |||
FS Two Oktava MC012 mics from Sound Room | Pro Audio | |||
Weather-proofing outdoor condenser mics | Pro Audio |