Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be?
with cardioid I do my best to get them at 110 degrees and they end up around 6.5" apart. with the supercardioids, at 90 degrees, how far? thanks! |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
"Nate Najar" wrote in message news:24517183.675.1323786885166.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqlh5... hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? with cardioid I do my best to get them at 110 degrees and they end up around 6.5" apart. with the supercardioids, at 90 degrees, how far? What parts of the mics are 6.5 inches apart? I am generally able to get the diaphragms of small diameter mics within a fraction of an inch of touching at the edges. I've even done it with vocal mics by screwing off the balls. |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
Nate Najar wrote:
hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? If you are recording ORTF, you are using two mikes at 110 degrees with 20 cm spacing. If you are using anything else, you are not using ORTF. with cardioid I do my best to get them at 110 degrees and they end up around 6.5" apart. with the supercardioids, at 90 degrees, how far? If you want to try other non-ORTF near-coincident cardioid configurations, go ahead. The more you space them apart, the wider the stereo field at low frequencies will be. The greater the angle, the wider the stereo field at high frequencies will be UNTIL you get to a certain point at which the stereo field starts shrinking as you move them farther out. What configuration is optimal has more to do with the room than the mikes. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
On Dec 13, 10:20*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Nate Najar wrote: hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? If you are recording ORTF, you are using two mikes at 110 degrees with 20 cm spacing. *If you are using anything else, you are not using ORTF. Scott's right; to be Real ORTF, 110 degrees and 20cm. But Pseudo ORTF, with hypercardioids, 90 degrees and 20cm, works just fine. Peace, Paul |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
PStamler wrote:
On Dec 13, 10:20*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: Nate Najar wrote: hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? If you are recording ORTF, you are using two mikes at 110 degrees with 20 cm spacing. *If you are using anything else, you are not using ORTF. Scott's right; to be Real ORTF, 110 degrees and 20cm. But Pseudo ORTF, with hypercardioids, 90 degrees and 20cm, works just fine. Peace, Paul I hate to nitpick with Scott and Paul but the ORTF spacing is actually 17cm. Maybe something went astray in the double translation: cm inches cm :-) Nate, it really depends on how one defines "same as ORTF''. Is it the same SRA? (Stereophonic Recording Angle - ˙ou could think of that as the arc that the performers have to be fitted within to ensure a smooth recorded image spread, with no bunching of the outermost side flank players in the L and R speakers.). Or do you want close matching of other parameters such as the Angular Distortion of the images? etc. etc. You could may wish to check out the following stereo image visualization tool: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-EBS.htm This shows an ORTF array to have an SRA of +/- 48 deg - which would be approximated by a Hypercardioid array of 90 deg. / 13.5cm. Other angle-spacing combinations are of course possible. However, the polar response equation for the hypercardioid employed in this model was not stated (typcally " 0.25 + 0.75.cos(theta)". And there was no possibility to run the visualization with a Supercardioid such as your Mk41 (with its wider polar response of perhaps " 0.37 + 0.63.cos(theta)"). -- Tom McCreadie Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
On Dec 13, 8:15*pm, Tom McCreadie wrote:
Scott's right; to be Real ORTF, 110 degrees and 20cm. But Pseudo ORTF, with hypercardioids, 90 degrees and 20cm, works just fine. Peace, Paul I hate to nitpick with Scott and Paul but the ORTF spacing is actually 17cm. Maybe something went astray in the double translation: *cm inches cm * :-) Whoops -- right you are. And wrong we were. Is it NOS that's 20cm? Peace, Paul |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
PStamler wrote:
Is it NOS that's 20cm? Peace, Paul NOS is 30cm Pattern / spacing / angling of some stereo arrays:: NOS cardioid / 30cm / 90 deg. DIN cardioid / 20cm / 90 deg. DINa cardioid / 17cm / 90 deg. ORTF cardioid / 17cm / 110 deg Faulkner Fig-8./ 20cm / 0 deg. (i.e. parallel, forward) Some useful info on the dpa site http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Mic...echniques.aspx One can't expect to fully emulate an ORTF result using mics of other polar patterns...for even if one could juggle the angling and spacing to get the imaging to be pretty close, the direct to reverberant ratio of room sound would still differ from that of ORTF.. -- Tom McCreadie |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
On Dec 14, 3:15*am, Tom McCreadie wrote:
PStamler wrote: On Dec 13, 10:20*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote: You could may wish to check out the following stereo image visualization tool: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-EBS.htm This shows an ORTF array to have an SRA of +/- 48 deg *- which would be approximated by a Hypercardioid array of 90 deg. / 13.5cm. Other angle-spacing combinations are of course possible. However, the polar response equation for the hypercardioid employed in this model *was not stated (typcally *" 0.25 + 0.75.cos(theta)". *And there was no possibility to run the visualization with a Supercardioid such as your Mk41 (with its wider polar response of perhaps " 0.37 + 0.63.cos(theta)"). This stereo image visualization tool: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-EBS-E.htm Shows the microphone polar patterns: Omnidirectional, Subcardioid, Cardioid, Supercardioid, and Bidirectional. The Supercardioid has just the polar equation 0.37 + 0.63 x cos(theta) like your Schoeps Mk41. Cheers ebs |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
ebs wrote:
This stereo image visualization tool: http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-EBS-E.htm Shows the microphone polar patterns: Omnidirectional, Subcardioid, Cardioid, Supercardioid, and Bidirectional. The Supercardioid has just the polar equation 0.37 + 0.63 x cos(theta) like your Schoeps Mk41. Yes, thanks for correcting my sloppiness. While writing, I'd made a detour to the Schoeps site to remind myself on whether the Mk41 was listed as a super- or a hyper...and then apparently returrned from that late-night trip with my supers and hypers in a twist :-).. So the tool now becomes a bit more relevant for Nate with his Mk41's. -- Tom McCreadie Live at The London Palindrome - ABBA |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
Tom McCreadie wrote:
I hate to nitpick with Scott and Paul but the ORTF spacing is actually 17cm. Tom, thanks for nitpicking. I'd wager both Scott and Paul can appreciate it. -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
hank alrich wrote:
Tom McCreadie wrote: I hate to nitpick with Scott and Paul but the ORTF spacing is actually 17cm. Tom, thanks for nitpicking. I'd wager both Scott and Paul can appreciate it. Agreed. I think in inches, sadly. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:17:21 -0500, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ) : screwing off the balls. heh, heh. Bevis & Butthead --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
On 12/13/2011 9:34 AM, Nate Najar wrote:
hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? No need to speak hypothetically. There's an official definition of the angle and capsule spacing for ORTF by the French organization that set the standard. I don't remember what it is, but you can use Google as well as I can. with cardioid I do my best to get them at 110 degrees and they end up around 6.5" apart. They can be displaced vertically by an inch or so without ruining the concept. If what's defining the capsule spacing at the angle you're using is that the back end of the mics with the connector and cable are trying to occupy the same physical space, you can put cobble up something on your stereo bar to raise one mic so they can overlap at the back end. Or maybe using right-angle XLR plugs on the mic end of the cable will give you enough working room. I used the right angle XLRs with with a pair of Shure SM-81s to get the official ORTF angle and spacing. And if that's the spacing and angle that sounds right to you, who cares what it SHOULD be? You've been doing this long enough to know what you want it to sound like. -- "Today's production equipment is IT based and cannot be operated without a passing knowledge of computing, although it seems that it can be operated without a passing knowledge of audio." - John Watkinson http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com - useful and interesting audio stuff |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
ortf question
Nate Najar wrote:
hypothetically speaking of course, if you were to do ortf with a pair of mk41's, about how far apart should the capsules be? with cardioid I do my best to get them at 110 degrees and they end up around 6.5" apart. with the supercardioids, at 90 degrees, how far? ORTF is traditionally cardiods at 110 degrees and a certain spacing, I think it is 17.5 centimeters. Over here we say X-Y whenever we have microphones at a short distance, from 0 to 25 centimeters between capsules. In the US of A it is only X-Y if the capsule distance is 0 centimeters. Consequently the wording ORTF gets used a lot of times when it shouldn't be and the wording "intensity+time de-correlated" should. It is all about de-correlation: intensity decorrelation: coincident stereo, in USA called X-Y, capsule distance zero. intensity+time decorrelation: ORTF and similar, in Europe called X-Y, capsule distance zero (remember zero == coincident) to 30 centimeters. time decorrelation: A-B, capsule distance typically 30 centimeters to 2 meters, if you are very far from the source the distance can be increased/needs to be increased. thanks! So the answer to your question is that it depends on how far from the sound source you are. I mostly use an angle between 45 and 80 degrees when using a standard K&M crossbar. For the ORTF angle of 110 degrees to work well you have to remove the chais in the middle of row 4,5 and 6 so that you can place the mic stand there and to me it would sound too distant due to too much reflected sound anyway and audience noise might be a problem because not behind the mic pair. In the real world of live recording you determine which 5 square feet of real estate you can place the mic stand on and adjusts mic angle and height to get a good panorama with good tonal balance also for the rearmost guys. Usually that implies aiming the mics vertically at the rearmost sound sources. Doing that comes with an image advantage: mic PAIR off-axis behaviour pulls extreme left and right of front row musicians toward the center, thus at best changes the usual trapezoid orchestral image to a rectangular. Find and read that "Stereophonic Zoom" paper! Kind regards Peter Larsen |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ortf delay to ortf. do they need to be same configuration?? | Pro Audio | |||
Quick question ORTF mic angles | Pro Audio | |||
ORTF vs AB | Pro Audio | |||
ORTF and panning L/R | Pro Audio | |||
ORTF + Mid? | Pro Audio |