Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra
sound? Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
In article uLBYj.4216$Uf1.604@trndny08, peter wrote:
What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? It's an instrument. All instruments are that way. You put a dozen horn players together and it sounds very different than just one horn. Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Probably. You can double-track too. Funny thing, though, double tracking doesn't make it sound like a coherent integral string section. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
peter wrote:
What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? Totally different thing. Think of a choir singing softly and a soloist singing loudly. Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Yup. It is an effect called chorus. It shifts the pitch and timing of the original sound, then drops it somewhere across a panned sound stage. You can multiple-chorus to many locations and end up with something that sounds almost entirely unlike a string section. d |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Tue, 20 May 2008 15:03:54 GMT, "peter" wrote:
What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Really great orchestras have the players with very good pitch and timing so the are really virbratoing and tuning very precisely, but every instrument has it's own voice and it's own placement in a large space that is needed to fit an orchestra. The closest I've come to faking it is to double track a string trio and and then backup their parts with a good sounding string pad played by someome who can really understand what the strings are doing. But you might find the trio is charming and all you really need. Here to you need a good space to record them in. Strings are difficult to record in a confined space. Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? if so why? why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance? Mark |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Mark wrote:
Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? Of course. if so why? why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance? Because all kinds of different sounds come out of the violin in different directions. They all strike the room and bounce around and mix to become a still different sound. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
"peter" wrote in message
news:uLBYj.4216$Uf1.604@trndny08 What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? You don't need so many of them unless you want the sound of so many of them. Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? That EFX is commonly called "chours". It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. That's all easy to do with fairly simple signal processing. |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Tue, 20 May 2008 11:36:59 -0700 (PDT), Mark
wrote: Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? if so why? The same reason close micing a voice gives more lipsmacks and breath noise. These sounds don't project and bounce off surfaces the same as the tones your really after, but they are right in your face when close miced and unlike a breath or lipsmack that may come between words the bow noise is continous and can't be separated. Some players also tap down with an audible noise on the fingerboard, which is also something to avoid. If your an electrc guitar player think of it as a noisey amp which also works fine from a distance but can be downright ugly with a mic stuck against it. There is no substitute for good instruments, technique, and space. You can find wonderful ambiance from a convolutions program, but you can't really move the mic in vitual space, it really has to happen when you record. |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with
room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? if so why? why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance? Perhaps the scraping sound is a point source which decreases at distance ^ 3 and the string is a line source (or area source because of the resonant chamber) which decreases at distance ^2 or slower. |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On May 20, 6:16*pm, "peter" wrote:
Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? if so why? why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance? Perhaps the scraping sound is a point source which decreases at distance ^ 3 and the string is a line source (or area source because of the resonant chamber) which decreases at distance ^2 or slower. I like it...that's a very good possibility.. The other comment about vocals i think is mostly due to the fact that people speak louder when the mic is far and softer when it is close so the mouth noises are more prominent when the mic is close and people speak soft... and Scotts commnet about the various angles of radiaion..OK that's probably true but then you could get the same reduction in scrape sound by placing the mic at the propoer angle away from the instrument rather than at a greater distance... I'll go for the 1/r^2 from a line source vs 1/r^3 from a point source theory...I like it...... thanks Mark |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Mark wrote:
On May 20, 6:16 pm, "peter" wrote: Close micing gives a lot of bow scraping. distance only works with room for the sound to blossom. High ceilings are usually helpful. That's my 2 kilobits. interesting...is that really true? if so why? why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance? Perhaps the scraping sound is a point source which decreases at distance ^ 3 and the string is a line source (or area source because of the resonant chamber) which decreases at distance ^2 or slower. I like it...that's a very good possibility.. The other comment about vocals i think is mostly due to the fact that people speak louder when the mic is far and softer when it is close so the mouth noises are more prominent when the mic is close and people speak soft... and Scotts commnet about the various angles of radiaion..OK that's probably true but then you could get the same reduction in scrape sound by placing the mic at the propoer angle away from the instrument rather than at a greater distance... I'll go for the 1/r^2 from a line source vs 1/r^3 from a point source theory...I like it...... thanks Mark The radiation angles and dispersion change from note to note, thus there isn't any single "propoer angle away from the instrument." Later... Ron Capik -- |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Mark wrote:
The other comment about vocals i think is mostly due to the fact that people speak louder when the mic is far and softer when it is close so the mouth noises are more prominent when the mic is close and people speak soft... That's part of it... but if it's a basso or a baritone, a lot of the sound is coming from the chest and not from the mouth. But yes, the difference between singing and crooning is part of the issue with close-miking vocals. and Scotts commnet about the various angles of radiaion..OK that's probably true but then you could get the same reduction in scrape sound by placing the mic at the propoer angle away from the instrument rather than at a greater distance... Sure, but if you do that, you'll get a different unbalanced violin sound. You can mike in different places to get different parts of the sound, but you have to pull back to get the whole sound. And multiple fiddles playing in the same room are different than one fiddle overdubbed several times in the same room because of the room interactions as well as the interaction between performers. I'll go for the 1/r^2 from a line source vs 1/r^3 from a point source theory...I like it...... thanks A fiddle ain't even close to either a line or a point source. It is the weirdest source you ever saw. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Tue, 20 May 2008 23:28:37 GMT, Ron Capik
wrote: The radiation angles and dispersion change from note to note, thus there isn't any single "propoer angle away from the instrument." Agreed. I've tried micing from the side of the fiddle or over the fiddlers shoulder etc.. The results varied, but nothing sounds as good as having some space especially a nice space as I said before the sound seems to bloom. It spreads and fills the space. I happen to also play fiddle and know many fiddle players others of whom record and I hear the same complaint over and over about not being able to get the fiddle to sound as sweet as it sounds to them naturally. This is from someone whose ear is as close to the sound hole as a mic. The difference is they also hear the whole room and have another ear. Hmmm.. maybe that could be a trick to try, set up two mics one to get just room and another that is either omni or figure 8 to get a direct sound off the fiddle. Of course none of this solves your original question about an orchestral sound, but it was a nice diversion. |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On May 20, 8:13*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 20 May 2008 23:28:37 GMT, Ron Capik wrote: The radiation angles and dispersion change from note to note, thus there isn't any single "propoer angle away from the instrument." Agreed. I've tried micing from the side of the fiddle or over the fiddlers shoulder etc.. The results varied, but nothing sounds as good as having some space especially a nice space as I said before the sound seems to bloom. It spreads and fills the space. I happen to also play fiddle and know many fiddle players others of whom record and I hear the same complaint over and over about not being able to get the fiddle to sound as sweet as it sounds to them naturally. This is from someone whose ear is as close to the sound hole as a mic. The difference is they also hear the whole room and have another ear. Hmmm.. maybe that could be a trick to try, set up two mics one to get just room and another that is either omni or figure 8 to get a direct sound off the fiddle. Of course none of this solves your original question about an orchestral sound, but it was a nice diversion. I just want to add... Some of the other technical discussions we have here are BS and better off on an audiophool discussnion. But this kind of discussion about the ART of recording is the wonderfully good part of RAP. These kind of things can make a BIG difference in a recording and are not easily measured or quantified. These discussions are why I come here. thanks Mark |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:48:06 -0700 (PDT), Mark
wrote: But this kind of discussion about the ART of recording is the wonderfully good part of RAP. These kind of things can make a BIG difference in a recording and are not easily measured or quantified. These discussions are why I come here. My sentiments exactly. I'm so pleased if I could help. I almost gave up on this forum when we got invaded by the spammers. I've been here for years and have gotten great advise on gear purchases and technique some times at the last minute before a session. It is always greatly appreciated hats off to Mike and The Pope, Scott, David, Arnie and too many to name. |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
why would the ratio of scrape sound to string sound change as you change distance?
Because the violin is extremely efficient at projecting tone throughout a performance space, & very inefficient at projecting bow scrape beyond a few yards. Scott Fraser |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
peter wrote: What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Speaking to my violinist neighbour recently, he told me that in an orchestra (or even in a quartet) the violins do not play the same music, they play it in different keys etc. This results in harmony which a solo violin cannot achieve. Graham |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
In article ,
Eeyore wrote: peter wrote: What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Speaking to my violinist neighbour recently, he told me that in an orchestra (or even in a quartet) the violins do not play the same music, they play it in different keys etc. This results in harmony which a solo violin cannot achieve. Graham Well, in most orchestral music, there are two violin parts: First Violin and Second Violin. Sometimes those two parts, each played by multiple players, are written in unison, sometimes in harmony (only in very avant-garde literature would they be in different keys). |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Wed, 21 May 2008 07:06:03 +0100, Eeyore
wrote: Speaking to my violinist neighbour recently, he told me that in an orchestra (or even in a quartet) the violins do not play the same music, they play it in different keys etc. This results in harmony which a solo violin cannot achieve. Definately in a quartet, but in an orchestra there are whole sections playing the same part. Usually 1st Violins on a part, although occassionally each individual of a pair on a music stand will play different parts. to divide 1st. violins into two. 2nd violin section will have another part. Violas another and so on for celli and basses. It would be caos to have each player on a different part, but there are new music pieces that call for the players to adlib or play a note for 11 & 1/2 secs. or other wierd ****. |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
|
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Jenn wrote: Eeyore wrote: peter wrote: What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? Is there a sound processor that makes a solo violin sound like many? It just needs to create some slight pitch variations, some slight timing variation, and different rate of vibrato. Speaking to my violinist neighbour recently, he told me that in an orchestra (or even in a quartet) the violins do not play the same music, they play it in different keys etc. This results in harmony which a solo violin cannot achieve. Well, in most orchestral music, there are two violin parts: First Violin and Second Violin. Sometimes those two parts, each played by multiple players, are written in unison, sometimes in harmony (only in very avant-garde literature would they be in different keys). I defer to your superior knowledge in this regard. My main point was that all the violins are not playing identical sheet music. This was actually news to me. I hadn't known this previously. Graham |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro,rec.arts.movies.production.sound
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Wed, 21 May 2008 17:39:30 +1000, Soundhaspriority wrote:
You forgot me. Oh shame, how could we forget the buzzard? -- Anahata ==//== 01638 720444 http://www.treewind.co.uk ==//== http://www.myspace.com/maryanahata |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
peter wrote:
What is it about the violin, that you need many of them to get the orchestra sound? In German, a violin is a "Geige" and a violinist is a "Geiger". No wonder they invented the Geiger counter. And since so many Germans are named Müller, there's even a special version - the Geiger Müller counter. ;-) Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany private homepage: http://www.fotoralf.de manual cameras and photo galleries - updated Jan. 10, 2005 Contarex - Kiev 60 - Horizon 202 - P6 mount lenses |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Eeyore wrote:
Speaking to my violinist neighbour recently, he told me that in an orchestra (or even in a quartet) the violins do not play the same music, they play it in different keys etc. This results in harmony which a solo violin cannot achieve. In a string quartet, all four performers have different parts. In an orchestra, each violin section will have one part. First violins will all play one part, second violins will all play another. It is very rare that two first violin players will have different parts, unless it's an Alban Berg piece or one of the violins is specifically used for a solo. It does happen, though. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
|
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On May 21, 8:22 am, Laurence Payne wrote:
On 21 May 2008 08:58:32 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: In a string quartet, all four performers have different parts. In an orchestra, each violin section will have one part. First violins will all play one part, second violins will all play another. It is very rare that two first violin players will have different parts, unless it's an Alban Berg piece or one of the violins is specifically used for a solo. It does happen, though. There's a little more to it than that. In the symphony orchestra each violin section (First and Second) normally read from the same parts. But both solo and divisi passages are common. In light music it's common to see scoring for Violins A, B and C. String sections are smaller. There might not be any viola at all, maybe one 'cello. Violins often play LOTS of notes, frequently at great speed. Despite the skill of professional players, absolute accuracy of intonation is an impossible ideal. That's why one player to a part sounds good, if rather thin. Two to a part just sound out of tune. Three or more start sounding like a section. As a violin and viola player, I can attest to this. First off, let me say that the collective wisdom (mostly) of this thread has the right answers. The string sections of an orchestra are made up of violin 1, violin 2, viola, cello and bass. Within each of those sections, parts may be unison or divisi, and sometimes as many as four parts - even for fairly standard symphonic works such as by Beethoven or Brahms. Certainly for Sibelius, Dvorak, Mahler or Shostakovitch (just heard the New Mexico Symphony perform his 5th Symphony last Friday. Frightening, beautiful, powerful and sorrowful all at the same time). And I agree that differences of timing, intonation, vibrato and individual instrument voices all add to the whole of the "string sound". Then, the room (hall), the interaction between players, and how the conductor shapes the activities of the sections all play important roles. One thing that has not been brought up is that larger string sections are needed to balance with the winds and brass. If you follow the development of the orchestra over the centuries, you'll see that at first, there were maybe six or eight in each violin section, four or maybe six violas, same for celli, and then perhaps one or two bass. The winds were made up of oboe, flute, bassoon, a trumpet or two, and then only tympani for percussion. By Beethoven's time, the strings had grown by 50 percent to offset the addition of horns, trombones, more woodwinds, a greater role for the tympani, etc. By the end of the 19th century, the orchestra was double it's original size. Today, you commonly see 12 firsts, 12 seconds, 8 to 10 violas, 8 to 10 celli, 6 basses... to match wits with the tuba, three trombones, three trumpets, four horns, bass drum, cymbals & other percussion, three flutes, contrabassoon, etc. So to some extent, the number of strings we see in a symphony is for the simple reason of balance. I must admit that today, it is much more difficult for me to be sure that I'm hearing real strings. As recently as the early 1990s, I was almost always certain. But the advances in sampler technology, string libraries (which are originally real string sections), the skills of the composers/scoring guys and the variety of ways that string sounds (commercials, movies, games, TV scores, etc) can and are used has made it nearly impossible to tell anymore. But I will say this - despite these advances, I often hear VERY poor attempts at synthesizing real instruments from time to time. When I hear those examples, I always wonder "what they hell are they thinking" but it is probably a matter of time, budget, and the talent or lack thereof of the involved parties. -Karl |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Karl Winkler wrote:
I must admit that today, it is much more difficult for me to be sure that I'm hearing real strings. As recently as the early 1990s, I was almost always certain. But the advances in sampler technology, string libraries (which are originally real string sections), the skills of the composers/scoring guys and the variety of ways that string sounds (commercials, movies, games, TV scores, etc) can and are used has made it nearly impossible to tell anymore. But I will say this - despite these advances, I often hear VERY poor attempts at synthesizing real instruments from time to time. When I hear those examples, I always wonder "what they hell are they thinking" but it is probably a matter of time, budget, and the talent or lack thereof of the involved parties. At the same time, though, bad mike technique can turn real string sections into something that you'd swear was a cheap sampler. I have heard the Virginia Symphony Pops, aided by sound reinforcement, sound like something off a Barry Manilow record in a live concert. Very much unlike live strings. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro,rec.arts.movies.production.sound
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On May 21, 8:39*am, Soundhaspriority wrote:
In article , " wrote: On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:48:06 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote: But this kind of discussion about the ART of recording is the wonderfully good part of RAP. *These kind of things can make a BIG difference in a recording and are not easily measured or quantified. These discussions are why I come here. My sentiments exactly. I'm so pleased if I could help. I almost gave up on this forum when we got invaded by the spammers. I've been here for years and have gotten great advise on gear purchases and technique some times at the last minute before a session. It is always greatly appreciated hats off to Mike and The Pope, Scott, David, Arnie and too many to name. You forgot me. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 Because it sounds better! ) (Or at least you can't hear the ones out of tune.) |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On May 21, 9:11 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Karl Winkler wrote: I must admit that today, it is much more difficult for me to be sure that I'm hearing real strings. As recently as the early 1990s, I was almost always certain. But the advances in sampler technology, string libraries (which are originally real string sections), the skills of the composers/scoring guys and the variety of ways that string sounds (commercials, movies, games, TV scores, etc) can and are used has made it nearly impossible to tell anymore. But I will say this - despite these advances, I often hear VERY poor attempts at synthesizing real instruments from time to time. When I hear those examples, I always wonder "what they hell are they thinking" but it is probably a matter of time, budget, and the talent or lack thereof of the involved parties. At the same time, though, bad mike technique can turn real string sections into something that you'd swear was a cheap sampler. I have heard the Virginia Symphony Pops, aided by sound reinforcement, sound like something off a Barry Manilow record in a live concert. Very much unlike live strings. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Absolutely. Often times this is because of the use of contact mics. As has been pointed out (probably by you) earlier in this thread, mic position makes a big difference. And so does mixing. Adding sound reinforcement to an orchestra is no trivial matter, especially if you want it to sound good. -Karl |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro,rec.arts.movies.production.sound
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Jason wrote:
On May 21, 8:39 am, Soundhaspriority wrote: In article , " wrote: On Tue, 20 May 2008 17:48:06 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote: But this kind of discussion about the ART of recording is the wonderfully good part of RAP. These kind of things can make a BIG difference in a recording and are not easily measured or quantified. These discussions are why I come here. My sentiments exactly. I'm so pleased if I could help. I almost gave up on this forum when we got invaded by the spammers. I've been here for years and have gotten great advise on gear purchases and technique some times at the last minute before a session. It is always greatly appreciated hats off to Mike and The Pope, Scott, David, Arnie and too many to name. You forgot me. Bob Morein (310) 237-6511 Because it sounds better! ) (Or at least you can't hear the ones out of tune.) Speak for yourself. Most conductors I've spoken to can. ;-) -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Wed, 21 May 2008 23:57:18 +0100, John Williamson
wrote: Speak for yourself. Most conductors I've spoken to can. ;-) Same here, it's scary when they point the finger and announce second violins 4th desk that is a g flat in the 144th bar not a g natural. With all that's going on to hear a single 1/8 note from one player and identify who seems like a feat of magic. |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
|
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Karl Winkler writes:
On May 21, 9:11 am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: Karl Winkler wrote: snips At the same time, though, bad mike technique can turn real string sections into something that you'd swear was a cheap sampler. I have heard the Virginia Symphony Pops, aided by sound reinforcement, sound like something off a Barry Manilow record in a live concert. Very much unlike live strings. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." Absolutely. Often times this is because of the use of contact mics. As has been pointed out (probably by you) earlier in this thread, mic position makes a big difference. And so does mixing. Adding sound reinforcement to an orchestra is no trivial matter, especially if you want it to sound good. With all respect to our PA brethren, many of them just don't get it when it comes to R E I N F O R C E M E N T vs. PA. The sonic balance of the PA system matters not one bit; it seems squeezing out that last 1/4 dB of gain before feedback that matters most to them. But there's a better way... Step 1. Turn it the F**K down -- this alone cures many, many ills throughout the system. And for acoustic group reinforcment, 90-95 dB average SPL should be fine (that's still pretty loud) - you really don't need 105+. That 10 dB can turn sack cloth into silk. Step 2. Take some time to balance the system sonically. In the old days about 10% of my work was PA mixing; 90% studio -- while some techniques were different I aimed for the same kind of sound. People asked why the sound was so good. Step 1 was paramount, but also taking the time to make the underlying system sound like good monitors in a good control room was also a trick. Couldn't always get there based on the gear supplied/time limits but that was the goal. And when that could be done it was great, even with modest PA gear. These days I generally cringe when I see a PA system, and reach for my earplugs. Sigh. Can't think of the last time I heard a good PA (heard some good mixes at a Bluegrass festival but it was 100-105+); worked with some guys this past weekend who I think did a good reinforcement job but I was off to the side recording and doing a live tv mix; couldn't really pay attention to the house sound. No one complained, so that's something, given that the audience was mainly used to purely acoustic settings. Frank Stearns Mobile Audio -- |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
In article ,
jakdedert wrote: wrote: On Wed, 21 May 2008 23:57:18 +0100, John Williamson wrote: Speak for yourself. Most conductors I've spoken to can. ;-) Same here, it's scary when they point the finger and announce second violins 4th desk that is a g flat in the 144th bar not a g natural. With all that's going on to hear a single 1/8 note from one player and identify who seems like a feat of magic. It's why they make the big bucks.... jak Well, a few do. Then there's me... ;-) (moderate bucks. I'm lucky) |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro,rec.arts.movies.production.sound
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
Speak for yourself. Most conductors I've spoken to can. ;-)
:-) (I trust you know that was meant to be a joke....) Best, Jason |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
To: Frank Stearns
Frank Stearns wrote: position makes a big difference. And so does mixing. Adding sound reinforcement to an orchestra is no trivial matter, especially if you want it to sound good. And there are some that practice the art whether well. A fellow iirc in Colorado discussed his techniques for this in alt.audio.pro.live-sound last summer. OUTdoor amphitheater. NOT having heard his work, from the descriptions he gave I think that you scott or I would like to listen to the results. FS With all respect to our PA brethren, many of them just don't get it FS when it comes to R E I N F O R C E M E N T vs. PA. The sonic FS balance of the PA system matters not one bit; it seems squeezing out FS that last 1/4 dB of gain before feedback FS that matters most to them. WOuld have to agree, and they're saddled with two problems, and hence their mindset as noted by you above. FIrst, many of these guys have never listened to music that didn't require amplification. All of their musical experience is with electric guitars basses and drum kits. this brings us to rpoblem number two: People who don't understand the physics at all, don't understand how their microphone works and won't learn to handle it properly. Hence, poor or nonexistent mic technique coupled with expecting the repeal of the laws of physics. FS But there's a better way... FS Step 1. Turn it the F**K down -- this alone cures many, many ills FS throughout the system. And for acoustic group reinforcment, 90-95 dB FS average SPL should be fine (that's still pretty loud) - you really FS don't need 105+. That 10 dB can turn sack cloth into silk. Goes back to problem no. 1 I mention above. THey're not used to thinking of reinforcement as what it actually is. FS Step 2. Take some time to balance the system sonically. To do that, you have to know what to listen for. YOu also have to take the *time* and not just paint by the numbers. Regards, Richard USE elspider at bellsouth dot net to email ... .... GOOGLE AIDS AND ABETS SPAMMERS! --- timEd 1.10.y2k+ * Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS (1:116/901) --- Synchronet 3.15a-Win32 NewsLink 1.85 * Derby City Online - Louisville, KY - telnet://derbycitybbs.com |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
With all respect to our PA brethren, many of them just don't get it when it comes to *R E I N F O R C E M E N T *vs. PA. *The sonic balance of the PA system matters not one bit; it seems squeezing out that last 1/4 dB of gain before feedback that matters most to them.
The real issue is that only a tiny fraction of all PA mixers have even the slightest familiarity with acoustic instruments, much less classical music & the culture it exists within. Beyond that, though, a good engineer should be able to work successfully with unfamiliar music. The sad reality is that most PA engineers simply aren't very good, regardless of the genre they work within. Scott Fraser |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
"Frank Stearns" wrote in
message acquisition With all respect to our PA brethren, many of them just don't get it when it comes to R E I N F O R C E M E N T vs. PA. The sonic balance of the PA system matters not one bit; it seems squeezing out that last 1/4 dB of gain before feedback that matters most to them. It's often not either sonic balance/or gain before feedback. Gain before feedback helps put the console op in charge of sonic balance. Here's why. Most people end up mixing a collection of electronic and acoustical instruments. The electronic instruments are easy, they are very resistant feedback. The acoustical instruments vary all over the map, including the vocalists. You often end up with some acoustical sources that won't be heard even in the first row unless amplfied, while others can be heard pretty well in the back row without any amplification at all. Then you have the effects of the room. Often rooms have tremendously non-flat response. Often that non-flat response varies throughout the room. A well designed sound system may have far better sonic balance throughout the room than the room itself. Given that most voices and instruments cover limited frequency ranges, simply adjusting their relative levels can have beneficial effects on sonic balance in the room. However, to effectively adjust the level of a source, your sound system has to have significant amounts of stable gain in that frequency range. Then of course you have the obvious boundary condition of maximum gain before feedback. You can't turn the gain up more than that. Furthermore system response starts going to blazes a fair number of dB before the system starts singing on its own. Getting back to feedback theory - positive feedback increases, not decreases variations in system response. But there's a better way... Step 1. Turn it the F**K down -- this alone cures many, many ills throughout the system. Agreed with the caveat that if you can't turn anything up, you're not in control. And for acoustic group reinforcment, 90-95 dB average SPL should be fine (that's still pretty loud) - you really don't need 105+. That 10 dB can turn sack cloth into silk. Again agreed, but. What do you do if you have to get balanced sound in a small room with loud instruments in the ensemble, such as those drums over there? Rule of thumb - you the sound guy aren't in control until the sum of live sound and amplified sound is so many dB *more* than the loudest acoustical instrument. I routinely work with a medium-sized pipe organ - almost 10,000 pipes, lowest rank 16', and powered by a 10 horsepower electric motor. I think it can do 100+ dB at the back of the room without trying. How loud does the piano have to be to be heard when they are playing together? What is the sum of the two when they are balanced? Step 2. Take some time to balance the system sonically. In the old days about 10% of my work was PA mixing; 90% studio -- while some techniques were different I aimed for the same kind of sound. Right now I'm doing 70%+ live sound. The really nasty thing about live sound is that you only get one shot. There's no undo or redo command. Rehearsals are nice but I can hardly remember the last one because it was months and months ago. I've mixed over 400 live sound gigs and had about 3 real rehearsals. Furthermore, performers never sing at the same levels when there is an audience, and never the same for two performances in a row. People asked why the sound was so good. Step 1 was paramount, but also taking the time to make the underlying system sound like good monitors in a good control room was also a trick. Agreed. Thing is, monitors only need to sound good where you sit. A live sound system needs to sound good all over the room. |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Why so many violins in an orchestra?
On Thu, 22 May 2008 12:16:04 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote: What do you do if you have to get balanced sound in a small room with loud instruments in the ensemble, such as those drums over there? Rule of thumb - you the sound guy aren't in control until the sum of live sound and amplified sound is so many dB *more* than the loudest acoustical instrument. You've got a problem. But you can't solve it. Only the musicians can solve it by choosing instruments, playing technique, musical styles appropriate to the size of the room and the audience. I believe you often work in a church situation. It sounds like you're doubly ****ed by the managerial decision to use inexpert performers and inappropriate musical styles in the name of inclusion. I routinely work with a medium-sized pipe organ - almost 10,000 pipes, lowest rank 16', and powered by a 10 horsepower electric motor. I think it can do 100+ dB at the back of the room without trying. How loud does the piano have to be to be heard when they are playing together? What is the sum of the two when they are balanced? A well-designed church organ is capable of 100dB but it's also capable of accompaning a single boy treble. And it's often played by a competent musician. You shouldn't need to mic the piano. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|