[Paul[_13_]]

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

[John Williamson]

Paul wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....


Rich ones might use this:-

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Mic_Piano.html

I don't know how good they are, though.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson wrote:
Paul wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857

Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

Rich ones might use this:-

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Mic_Piano.html

I don't know how good they are, though.

They're okay, but you can build a similar mount yourself for a lot less
money if you're looking for that sort of sound, and put a better quality
omni into it.

Good clean cheap omnis are a lot easier to find than good clean cheap
cardioids.
--scott


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

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


In general, he recommends an omni-directional.

What do you think about PZM boundary microphones? I'm
sure there's a cheap one out there I can experiment with....

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to
eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a
useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


In general, he recommends an omni-directional.

This is a much, much better article than anything else you have mentioned
here. This is a good overview of basic methods and some discussion of why
they are done.

Here is a typical close-miked jazz sort of technique:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRbs4Bq3UX4

Notice again that you can hear very little of the room in the direct feed
and the piano is very wide. This is a good thing for some work, way too
close for classical. But what you're not hearing is all that hammer slam
that were heard in that video you cited where they shoved the mikes up
into the piano.

What do you think about PZM boundary microphones? I'm
sure there's a cheap one out there I can experiment with....

It is a useful device that was designed to deal with slap echo problems
from large surfaces. If you have a slap echo issue, and sometimes that can
happen in some rooms and some configurations especially if you are trying
to get in too close with the short stick in order to avoid bad room sounds,
the PZM is a useful salvage tool for getting you out of a bad situation.

In the 1970s a lot of people went crazy over the PZM and started putting it
on everything, in part because they were decent quality electret microphones
for cheap and many engineers had never encountered such a thing before. They
got heavily overused for a lot of things they should never have been used
for. Then in the eighties and nineties there was something of a backlash
against them. But they are a useful special purpose tool that can be useful
to have, although far from a general-purpose mike.

I am increasingly thinking you might want to try recording in a real studio
and get a sense of what is possible.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/8/2013 7:47 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


In general, he recommends an omni-directional.

This is a much, much better article than anything else you have mentioned
here. This is a good overview of basic methods and some discussion of why
they are done.

Here is a typical close-miked jazz sort of technique:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRbs4Bq3UX4

Notice again that you can hear very little of the room in the direct feed
and the piano is very wide. This is a good thing for some work, way too
close for classical. But what you're not hearing is all that hammer slam
that were heard in that video you cited where they shoved the mikes up
into the piano.


Well, I'm not quite sure I'm shooting for an ambient,
in-the-audience, "classical" sound then. In the audio samples of that
article, I liked the InsideCoincidentPair2, and InsideSpaced15cmPair1,
the later having beefier bass response, but would need some EQing for my
taste.

So I obviously prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.


What do you think about PZM boundary microphones? I'm
sure there's a cheap one out there I can experiment with....

It is a useful device that was designed to deal with slap echo problems
from large surfaces. If you have a slap echo issue, and sometimes that can
happen in some rooms and some configurations especially if you are trying
to get in too close with the short stick in order to avoid bad room sounds,
the PZM is a useful salvage tool for getting you out of a bad situation.

In the 1970s a lot of people went crazy over the PZM and started putting it
on everything, in part because they were decent quality electret microphones
for cheap and many engineers had never encountered such a thing before. They
got heavily overused for a lot of things they should never have been used
for. Then in the eighties and nineties there was something of a backlash
against them. But they are a useful special purpose tool that can be useful
to have, although far from a general-purpose mike.

I am increasingly thinking you might want to try recording in a real studio
and get a sense of what is possible.
--scott


As I've said before, I may just do that....but probably
not before I've tried it again (there was plenty of piano on
my first CD), just to see how much of a difference it will
make.

Plus, I really enjoy the recording process....why leave
all the fun to you guys?!

[hank alrich]

Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to
eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a
useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head outside
of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised to solve a
problem in context.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/8/2013 9:50 AM, hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to
eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a
useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head outside
of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised to solve a
problem in context.


The piano player's head is not too far from the insides,
and since I'm a piano player, that could be why I prefer
that sound.

[Steve King]

Paul wrote:
On 2/8/2013 7:47 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

BIG SNIP

I am increasingly thinking you might want to try recording in a real
studio and get a sense of what is possible.
--scott


As I've said before, I may just do that....but probably
not before I've tried it again (there was plenty of piano on
my first CD), just to see how much of a difference it will
make.

Plus, I really enjoy the recording process....why leave
all the fun to you guys?!

There is merit in learning by doing, making mistakes, trying something else,
making mistakes, etc. until you accumulate enought experience to quickly get
what you want in the room you have to work with and the music and musicians
you are recording. However, you don't know how much fun you might have
booking some time and arranging with the engineer ahead of time that you
want to learn from him, try a few different techniques, hear his
suggestions, listen to his experiences. The cost? Cheap, cheap, cheap for
what you might get out of it. Here's another idea. When I was in the
commercial studio business, we had engineers from out of town drop by and
offer to help with sessions, setting up the studio, putting everything away
after, making coffee, just to see what we were doing and how. If they
seemed like good people we accomodated. We had no secrets; after all,
thirty or forty session players were in and out of the studio every week and
our mic selections and placement among other things went out the door with
them.

Steve King

[Nate Najar]

On Thursday, February 7, 2013 10:48:05 AM UTC-5, John Williamson wrote:


Rich ones might use this:-



http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Mic_Piano.html



I don't know how good they are, though.


a good way to do this flavor of miking for as good or better result and much less cash is a pair of DPA 4061 omnis on the magnet mounts.

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/8/2013 10:30 AM, Steve King wrote:
Paul wrote:
On 2/8/2013 7:47 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

BIG SNIP

I am increasingly thinking you might want to try recording in a real
studio and get a sense of what is possible.
--scott


As I've said before, I may just do that....but probably
not before I've tried it again (there was plenty of piano on
my first CD), just to see how much of a difference it will
make.

Plus, I really enjoy the recording process....why leave
all the fun to you guys?!

There is merit in learning by doing, making mistakes, trying something else,
making mistakes, etc. until you accumulate enought experience to quickly get
what you want in the room you have to work with and the music and musicians
you are recording. However, you don't know how much fun you might have
booking some time and arranging with the engineer ahead of time that you
want to learn from him, try a few different techniques, hear his
suggestions, listen to his experiences. The cost? Cheap, cheap, cheap for
what you might get out of it. Here's another idea. When I was in the
commercial studio business, we had engineers from out of town drop by and
offer to help with sessions, setting up the studio, putting everything away
after, making coffee, just to see what we were doing and how. If they
seemed like good people we accomodated. We had no secrets; after all,
thirty or forty session players were in and out of the studio every week and
our mic selections and placement among other things went out the door with
them.


That sounds like a great idea actually. I could
offer to help in a local studio in exchange for seeing
their methods. If I'm really lucky, they'll press the
record button after a paying customer is gone, and
let me bang out a couple of quick sample tunes, just
so I can hear what their stuff sounds like....

Jesus, I'm such a cheapie!! It must be in
my DNA....... :/

[hank alrich]

Paul wrote:

On 2/8/2013 9:50 AM, hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the first half
he's talking about PA applications? This is something you do to
eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can hear the
slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good advice, and the
technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in with close mikes is a
useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the fifty-foot-wide
piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even for rock where you're
looking for that bright hammery sound to make it cut through a mix.
--scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head outside
of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised to solve a
problem in context.


The piano player's head is not too far from the insides,
and since I'm a piano player, that could be why I prefer
that sound.

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else play
the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano bench.

(1921 Chickering grand here.)

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.


Maybe, but that's not what a piano actually sounds like. When you go to
concert, they don't take you up on stage and put your head inside the piano
and close it, do they? It's a popular sound for a lot of rock stuff where
the piano needs to cut through a lot of electric guitars, but it's certainly
not natural.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich wrote:

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else play
the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano bench.

But... if you like how it sounds from the piano bench, put a Jecklin disc
up there above your head or a little behind it. You can then adjust the
tonality a lot by raising and lowering the lid a little bit. It's very,
very easy to get exaggerated separation there if you're not careful, though.
--scott


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

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/8/2013 11:08 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.


Maybe, but that's not what a piano actually sounds like. When you go to
concert, they don't take you up on stage and put your head inside the piano
and close it, do they? It's a popular sound for a lot of rock stuff where
the piano needs to cut through a lot of electric guitars, but it's certainly
not natural.
--scott


People also don't stick there ears right up to the
cones of a guitar cab to listen to it (they'd go deaf
real fast), but that's where most people mike them.

It still sounds like a piano to me. People also
mix in Fishman blender signals on acoustic guitar, both
the electric pickup, and the microphone inside the
guitar. It's not a natural sound by itself, but it
can compliment the far-field mics.

Seems many people use both mikes inside the piano, and
mics further away, and blend them......

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:

People also don't stick there ears right up to the
cones of a guitar cab to listen to it (they'd go deaf
real fast), but that's where most people mike them.

Sometimes. And sometimes they mike them from the back and sometimes they
mike them from a distance. In most cases where they mike them up close
they're trying to make them sound like a big PA system, which is where a
lot of the whole rock sound comes from. But that is very much a rock thing.

Listen to a lot of classic punk albums and you'll hear a lot of the guitar
is actually leakage into all the other mikes. The leakage is where that
sound comes from, not the guitar mikes.

It still sounds like a piano to me. People also
mix in Fishman blender signals on acoustic guitar, both
the electric pickup, and the microphone inside the
guitar. It's not a natural sound by itself, but it
can compliment the far-field mics.

That's also very much a rock thing. If you want to do the rock thing, that's
great, but that's a different thing. That's not reproducing a sound at all
but producing a new and different one.

Seems many people use both mikes inside the piano, and
mics further away, and blend them......

As I said earlier, this mostly started as an attempt to blur room reflections
and deal with room problems. It also gives you the ability to change the
piano sound at mixdown. It's not very natural, but that's okay because it's
not supposed to be.
--scott

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

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

hank alrich wrote:

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else play
the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano bench.

But... if you like how it sounds from the piano bench, put a Jecklin disc
up there above your head or a little behind it. You can then adjust the
tonality a lot by raising and lowering the lid a little bit. It's very,
very easy to get exaggerated separation there if you're not careful, though.
--scott

In some ways this thread already exhibits exaggerated separation. No
disc needed.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/8/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:

People also don't stick there ears right up to the
cones of a guitar cab to listen to it (they'd go deaf
real fast), but that's where most people mike them.

Sometimes. And sometimes they mike them from the back and sometimes they
mike them from a distance. In most cases where they mike them up close
they're trying to make them sound like a big PA system, which is where a
lot of the whole rock sound comes from. But that is very much a rock thing.

Listen to a lot of classic punk albums and you'll hear a lot of the guitar
is actually leakage into all the other mikes. The leakage is where that
sound comes from, not the guitar mikes.


We also don't listen to singers with our ears right up to
their lips, but that's the way many of them sing into a microphone
live, and it still sounds similar enough to their un-amplified
voices (assuming reasonably flat frequency response of the PA).

Ditto for close-miked drums. You certainly don't listen to
them live with your ear a few inches from the drum heads. Just using
ambient overheads gives you the overall kit sound, but it can be a weak
signal-to-noise ratio if used by itself.


It still sounds like a piano to me. People also
mix in Fishman blender signals on acoustic guitar, both
the electric pickup, and the microphone inside the
guitar. It's not a natural sound by itself, but it
can compliment the far-field mics.

That's also very much a rock thing. If you want to do the rock thing, that's
great, but that's a different thing. That's not reproducing a sound at all
but producing a new and different one.

Seems many people use both mikes inside the piano, and
mics further away, and blend them......

As I said earlier, this mostly started as an attempt to blur room reflections
and deal with room problems. It also gives you the ability to change the
piano sound at mixdown. It's not very natural, but that's okay because it's
not supposed to be.
--scott


One could argue any electronically recorded or amplified
sound is "unnatural", which is what some opera purists do.

I saw Lang Lang play at a local music hall that seats
2,300. Up in the balcony seats, way in the back, you could
barely hear him sometimes, even when he was playing solo. It
was just too big of a venue for a piano to fill, and some
amplification would have been great.

[Steve King]

hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/8/2013 9:50 AM, hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the
first half he's talking about PA applications? This is
something you do to eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can
hear the slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good
advice, and the technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in
with close mikes is a useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the
fifty-foot-wide piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even
for rock where you're looking for that bright hammery sound to
make it cut through a mix. --scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head
outside of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised
to solve a problem in context.


The piano player's head is not too far from the insides,
and since I'm a piano player, that could be why I prefer
that sound.

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else play
the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano bench.

(1921 Chickering grand here.)

My first recording studio job was helping Malcolm Chisholm build a studio on
the north side of Chicago. We were well along with the build, when he
announced that it was time to buy a piano, and an old friend was going to
help. The old friend turned out to be Oscar Peterson, who was playing a
week at a club called The London House. Malcolm had recorded a couple of
albums with Peterson at United Recorders in LA. We went to several piano
stores, where Oscar played and we listened. Oscar said he really liked a
Chickering, thought it would record really well. I think both Malcolm and I
were concerned that a Steinway might be a bigger draw for a new studio, but
we went with Mr. Peterson's advice. It was a great, great piano. Not only
did it sound really good, but it also stayed in tune much longer than we
expected under the hard use of a lot of R & B sessions, where it got banged
around pretty hard. Don't have any idea of the year, but it looked old when
we bought it in 1965.

Steve King

[geoff]

"Paul" wrote in message
...
On 2/8/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

I saw Lang Lang play at a local music hall that seats
2,300. Up in the balcony seats, way in the back, you could
barely hear him sometimes, even when he was playing solo. It
was just too big of a venue for a piano to fill, and some
amplification would have been great.

And a more appropriate venue would have been even better !

geoff

[Ron C[_2_]]

On 2/9/2013 6:50 PM, geoff wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message
...
On 2/8/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

I saw Lang Lang play at a local music hall that seats
2,300. Up in the balcony seats, way in the back, you could
barely hear him sometimes, even when he was playing solo. It
was just too big of a venue for a piano to fill, and some
amplification would have been great.

And a more appropriate venue would have been even better !

geoff


Totally agree. There's more to a venue than
the number of seats. I [we] know nothing of
that venue and this would be hard pressed
to support such a generalization. That room
may have been too big, but other 2300 seat
(or more) rooms may not have been.

==
Later...
Ron Capik
--

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/8/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

We also don't listen to singers with our ears right up to
their lips, but that's the way many of them sing into a microphone
live, and it still sounds similar enough to their un-amplified
voices (assuming reasonably flat frequency response of the PA).

Listen to some PA board tapes and you'll see how dramatically different
it sounds than their natural voice.

In fact, since the 1930s a whole singing style has grown up where the
close-up sound from the microphone is the whole point; it brings a sense
of closeness and intimacy that you don't hear in a real voice.

That's why you'll see people using U87s and the like for vocal recording;
they don't _want_ a natural vocal sound, they want a larger than life
sound.

For classical singers and for a lot of other traditional styles, it's
common to mike some distance away, in part because so much of the sound
is coming from the chest rather than the mouth. Sometimes this is even
done for PA applications (as in the Three Tenors rigs).

Ditto for close-miked drums. You certainly don't listen to
them live with your ear a few inches from the drum heads. Just using
ambient overheads gives you the overall kit sound, but it can be a weak
signal-to-noise ratio if used by itself.

The reason folks spot drums has nothing to do with SNR, and everything to
do with stylistic effect. For a really interesting take on it, listen to
what Stan Kenton had to say about drum spots.

One could argue any electronically recorded or amplified
sound is "unnatural", which is what some opera purists do.

Of course. PA has no place in performances like that. As far as recording
goes, it's a necessary evil because you can't have Maria Callas in your
living room live anymore, and the goal is to reproduce the performance as
accurately as possible in the recording.

I saw Lang Lang play at a local music hall that seats
2,300. Up in the balcony seats, way in the back, you could
barely hear him sometimes, even when he was playing solo. It
was just too big of a venue for a piano to fill, and some
amplification would have been great.

Sounds like you have some hall acoustics problems. Don't blame the
technique for a bad room.
--scott


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

[Scott Dorsey]

Jeff Henig wrote:

Oscar Peterson? Yeah, he was okay.

*deadpan stare at the camera*

Sounds like this guy had quite a "friend list."

Malcom was very good people. Everybody wanted to work with him, because
he was friendly and helpful, he wanted to get the job done, and he had an
amazing intuitive knowledge of what was going to work and what wasn't.

He used to post here occasionally back in the days when Usenet was a going
concern and a lot of active engineers hung out here, if you want to look up
some of the stuff he posted. I think his old website is archived too.
--scott

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

[hank alrich]

Jeff Henig wrote:

"Steve King" wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/8/2013 9:50 AM, hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the
first half he's talking about PA applications? This is
something you do to eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You can
hear the slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is good
advice, and the technique of using the ambient mikes mixed in
with close mikes is a useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the
fifty-foot-wide piano with my head stuck inside it, though, even
for rock where you're looking for that bright hammery sound to
make it cut through a mix. --scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head
outside of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised
to solve a problem in context.


The piano player's head is not too far from the insides,
and since I'm a piano player, that could be why I prefer
that sound.

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else play
the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano bench.

(1921 Chickering grand here.)

My first recording studio job was helping Malcolm Chisholm build a studio on
the north side of Chicago. We were well along with the build, when he
announced that it was time to buy a piano, and an old friend was going to
help. The old friend turned out to be Oscar Peterson, who was playing a
week at a club called The London House. Malcolm had recorded a couple of
albums with Peterson at United Recorders in LA. We went to several piano
stores, where Oscar played and we listened. Oscar said he really liked a
Chickering, thought it would record really well. I think both Malcolm and I
were concerned that a Steinway might be a bigger draw for a new studio, but
we went with Mr. Peterson's advice. It was a great, great piano. Not only
did it sound really good, but it also stayed in tune much longer than we
expected under the hard use of a lot of R & B sessions, where it got banged
around pretty hard. Don't have any idea of the year, but it looked old when
we bought it in 1965.

Steve King

Oscar Peterson? Yeah, he was okay.

*deadpan stare at the camera*

Sounds like this guy had quite a "friend list."

Goodgle Malcolm Chisholm...

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey wrote:

Jeff Henig wrote:

Oscar Peterson? Yeah, he was okay.

*deadpan stare at the camera*

Sounds like this guy had quite a "friend list."

Malcom was very good people. Everybody wanted to work with him, because
he was friendly and helpful, he wanted to get the job done, and he had an
amazing intuitive knowledge of what was going to work and what wasn't.

He used to post here occasionally back in the days when Usenet was a going
concern and a lot of active engineers hung out here, if you want to look up
some of the stuff he posted. I think his old website is archived too.
--scott

His son curates a site:

http://www.malcolmchisholm.com/

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[axolotl]

My first recording studio job was helping Malcolm Chisholm build a studio on
the north side of Chicago. We were well along with the build, when he
announced that it was time to buy a piano, and an old friend was going to
help. The old friend turned out to be Oscar Peterson, who was playing a
week at a club called The London House. Malcolm had recorded a couple of
albums with Peterson at United Recorders in LA. We went to several piano
stores, where Oscar played and we listened. Oscar said he really liked a
Chickering, thought it would record really well. I think both Malcolm and I
were concerned that a Steinway might be a bigger draw for a new studio, but
we went with Mr. Peterson's advice. It was a great, great piano. Not only
did it sound really good, but it also stayed in tune much longer than we
expected under the hard use of a lot of R & B sessions, where it got banged
around pretty hard. Don't have any idea of the year, but it looked old when
we bought it in 1965.

Steve King



Wow. In your time with Mr Chisholm, did he ever speak of the recording
of Ahmed Jamal's Poinciana?

Kevin Gallimore

[Steve King]

Jeff Henig wrote:
"Steve King" wrote:
hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/8/2013 9:50 AM, hank alrich wrote:
Paul wrote:

On 2/7/2013 11:33 PM, Paul wrote:
On 2/7/2013 5:50 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul
wrote:

http://vimeo.com/42320857


Poor amateurs like me would replace the Audix
mics with their favorite cheap condenser....

This is a rock piano technique.... notice how throughout the
first half he's talking about PA applications? This is
something you do to eliminate
room sound and leakage.

Notice in the second half how terrible the room sounds? You
can hear the slap echo on the lav mike, even. His advice is
good advice, and the technique of using the ambient mikes
mixed in with close mikes is a useful
one when you're trying to blur the room sound.

There's a limit to how much I'm willing to tolerate the
fifty-foot-wide piano with my head stuck inside it, though,
even for rock where you're looking for that bright hammery
sound to make it cut through a mix. --scott


Here's another good article:


http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan0...rding_0108.htm


Great audio samples on this site.

So far, I like the InsideCoincidentPair2, and
InsideSpaced15cmPair1, the later having beefier bass
response, but would need some EQing for my taste.

I prefer the more intimate sound of mikes inside the
piano.

Which is a completely fake sound compared to having one's head
outside of the piano. That's all pop and rockery, a sound devised
to solve a problem in context.


The piano player's head is not too far from the insides,
and since I'm a piano player, that could be why I prefer
that sound.

Stick your head where those mics are placed and have someone else
play the piano. It sounds very little like it sounds from the piano
bench.

(1921 Chickering grand here.)

My first recording studio job was helping Malcolm Chisholm build a
studio on the north side of Chicago. We were well along with the
build, when he announced that it was time to buy a piano, and an old
friend was going to help. The old friend turned out to be Oscar
Peterson, who was playing a week at a club called The London House.
Malcolm had recorded a couple of albums with Peterson at United
Recorders in LA. We went to several piano stores, where Oscar
played and we listened. Oscar said he really liked a Chickering,
thought it would record really well. I think both Malcolm and I
were concerned that a Steinway might be a bigger draw for a new
studio, but we went with Mr. Peterson's advice. It was a great,
great piano. Not only did it sound really good, but it also stayed
in tune much longer than we expected under the hard use of a lot of
R & B sessions, where it got banged around pretty hard. Don't have
any idea of the year, but it looked old when we bought it in 1965.

Steve King

Oscar Peterson? Yeah, he was okay.

*deadpan stare at the camera*

Sounds like this guy had quite a "friend list."

Check out this site for a list of his 'friends', the solo artists he
recorded as mixer from his time at Chess Records, Universal Recording
Chicago, United Recorders Hollywood, Chess again, Chicago Stereo Studios
(actually Chicago Sound Studios...the site gets that wrong), Paragon
Recording Chicago, and Sound Studios Chicago. As a measure of the respect
he had from the artists he recorded, his little black book had private phone
numbers of most of them. It was during his stint at Chess Records from
1958 - 1960 that he was at the center of the R & B scene and, some would
say, the birth of rock and roll. He was my mentor at Chicago Sound Studios
and my employee, when I was studio manager at Paragon Recording. Among the
names that jump out at you that he recorded are Frank Sinatra, Sarah Vaughn,
Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, Ella Fitzgerald, Muddy Waters, Willie Dixon,
and on and on. He got called for legitimate music, as he called it, too:
the Chicago Symphony and the Fine Arts Quartet among others. I was his
gofer for a recording of the Fine Arts Quartet on the stage of the
Auditoreum Theater in Chicago renowned for its accoustics and before its
renovation. With rubble all around we set up two Sony C-37s and a two-track
Ampex 300 with electronics that Malcolm had modified. We used a pair of JBL
(SM 7s ??) monitors to check playback of short test recordings, moved mics a
bit, tested again until Malcolm and the players were happy, then hit record.
The musicians played with their music stands lit by two stage work lights.
Malcolm's writing on studio design and building techniques is still useful
today. A lot is on this web site. He was an incredible guy to learn from.
Check out this site: http://malcolm.bignoisybug.com/

Steve King

[Steve King]

axolotl wrote:
My first recording studio job was helping Malcolm Chisholm build a
studio on the north side of Chicago. We were well along with the
build, when he announced that it was time to buy a piano, and an old
friend was going to help. The old friend turned out to be Oscar
Peterson, who was playing a week at a club called The London House.
Malcolm had recorded a couple of albums with Peterson at United
Recorders in LA. We went to several piano stores, where Oscar
played and we listened. Oscar said he really liked a Chickering,
thought it would record really well. I think both Malcolm and I
were concerned that a Steinway might be a bigger draw for a new
studio, but we went with Mr. Peterson's advice. It was a great,
great piano. Not only did it sound really good, but it also stayed
in tune much longer than we expected under the hard use of a lot of
R & B sessions, where it got banged around pretty hard. Don't have
any idea of the year, but it looked old when we bought it in 1965. Steve
King



Wow. In your time with Mr Chisholm, did he ever speak of the recording
of Ahmed Jamal's Poinciana?

Kevin Gallimore

Malcom didn't talk much about what he had done unless you really pressed
him. He talked about what he was doing and planned to do. In his teaching
he did use a lot of his recordings as teaching tools. If you check out the
web site I posted a bit ago there are a lot of stories about Malcolm as a
teacher at Columbia College in Chicago, where he was teaching, when he got
sick with lung cancer and died too young.

Steve King

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/10/2013 7:15 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
In article , Paul wrote:
On 2/8/2013 3:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

We also don't listen to singers with our ears right up to
their lips, but that's the way many of them sing into a microphone
live, and it still sounds similar enough to their un-amplified
voices (assuming reasonably flat frequency response of the PA).

Listen to some PA board tapes and you'll see how dramatically different
it sounds than their natural voice.

In fact, since the 1930s a whole singing style has grown up where the
close-up sound from the microphone is the whole point; it brings a sense
of closeness and intimacy that you don't hear in a real voice.

That's why you'll see people using U87s and the like for vocal recording;
they don't _want_ a natural vocal sound, they want a larger than life
sound.


I appreciate your input.

From that perspective, I definitely prefer the larger than
life, more intimate sound of the piano miked from the inside,
so that's what I'll shoot for. I'll still probably mix in a far-field
mic.

[hank alrich]

Steve King wrote:

Check out this site for a list of his 'friends', the solo artists he
recorded as mixer from his time at Chess Records, Universal Recording
Chicago, United Recorders Hollywood, Chess again, Chicago Stereo Studios
(actually Chicago Sound Studios...the site gets that wrong), Paragon
Recording Chicago, and Sound Studios Chicago. As a measure of the respect
he had from the artists he recorded, his little black book had private phone
numbers of most of them. It was during his stint at Chess Records from
1958 - 1960 that he was at the center of the R & B scene and, some would
say, the birth of rock and roll. He was my mentor at Chicago Sound Studios
and my employee, when I was studio manager at Paragon Recording. Among the
names that jump out at you that he recorded are Frank Sinatra, Sarah Vaughn,
Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, Ella Fitzgerald, Muddy Waters, Willie Dixon,
and on and on. He got called for legitimate music, as he called it, too:
the Chicago Symphony and the Fine Arts Quartet among others. I was his
gofer for a recording of the Fine Arts Quartet on the stage of the
Auditoreum Theater in Chicago renowned for its accoustics and before its
renovation. With rubble all around we set up two Sony C-37s and a two-track
Ampex 300 with electronics that Malcolm had modified. We used a pair of JBL
(SM 7s ??) monitors to check playback of short test recordings, moved mics a
bit, tested again until Malcolm and the players were happy, then hit record.
The musicians played with their music stands lit by two stage work lights.
Malcolm's writing on studio design and building techniques is still useful
today. A lot is on this web site. He was an incredible guy to learn from.
Check out this site: http://malcolm.bignoisybug.com/

Steve King

Thanks, Steve.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Nate Najar]

His son curates a site:



http://www.malcolmchisholm.com/




holy hell what a great resource. I especially like the article on microphone selection....

[jason]

On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:47:38 -0700 "Paul" wrote in
article



That sounds like a great idea actually. I could
offer to help in a local studio in exchange for seeing
their methods. If I'm really lucky, they'll press the
record button after a paying customer is gone, and
let me bang out a couple of quick sample tunes, just
so I can hear what their stuff sounds like....

Jesus, I'm such a cheapie!! It must be in
my DNA....... :/


Good luck finding any. I live near Woodstock, NY. Until a decade ago or
so, there were studios everywhere around here, often tucked into the
woods halfway up some mountain or other.

Now, they're almost all gone. The last really snazzy one to vanish was
Allaire I believe. It sprung from the ashes of Bearsville Studio but I
think it was only running for a few years. The sumptuous accomodations
and amenities cost too much apparently. But I also wonder if the
studios' fate followed the pop music industry down.

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/10/2013 5:25 PM, Jason wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:47:38 -0700 "Paul" wrote in
article



That sounds like a great idea actually. I could
offer to help in a local studio in exchange for seeing
their methods. If I'm really lucky, they'll press the
record button after a paying customer is gone, and
let me bang out a couple of quick sample tunes, just
so I can hear what their stuff sounds like....

Jesus, I'm such a cheapie!! It must be in
my DNA....... :/


Good luck finding any. I live near Woodstock, NY. Until a decade ago or
so, there were studios everywhere around here, often tucked into the
woods halfway up some mountain or other.

Now, they're almost all gone. The last really snazzy one to vanish was
Allaire I believe. It sprung from the ashes of Bearsville Studio but I
think it was only running for a few years. The sumptuous accomodations
and amenities cost too much apparently. But I also wonder if the
studios' fate followed the pop music industry down.


Surely the popularity of home studios has led to less
work for them.

[Luxey]

Some time ago, I've recorded series of 12 concerts (1 per month) for solo "prepared" piano (prepared with various noise making junk), for good part of it piano was not prepared. There were 4 mics.

1. Coincident pair, couple of meters from piano towards the edge of the stage, as if someone from the audience would put jump on stage and listen from there.
2. Spaced pair inside, trying to have even response.

Then,...
1. I used for the meat of the sound, 2. I added to get that tingling feeling of stereo in my ears.

[Paul[_13_]]

On 2/11/2013 4:23 AM, Luxey wrote:
Some time ago, I've recorded series of 12 concerts (1 per month) for solo "prepared" piano (prepared with various noise making junk), for good part of it piano was not prepared. There were 4 mics.

1. Coincident pair, couple of meters from piano towards the edge of the stage, as if someone from the audience would put jump on stage and listen from there.
2. Spaced pair inside, trying to have even response.

Then,...
1. I used for the meat of the sound, 2. I added to get that tingling feeling of stereo in my ears.


Yeah, I definitely prefer the sound of miking closer
to the strings, inside the piano. It doesn't sound un-natural
to me. It just sounds stronger, fuller, and better overall.

I'll still probably mix in a mic further away. As the
fella in the video said, there are millions of ways to do it.

[hank alrich]

Paul wrote:

On 2/10/2013 5:25 PM, Jason wrote:
On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:47:38 -0700 "Paul" wrote in
article



That sounds like a great idea actually. I could
offer to help in a local studio in exchange for seeing
their methods. If I'm really lucky, they'll press the
record button after a paying customer is gone, and
let me bang out a couple of quick sample tunes, just
so I can hear what their stuff sounds like....

Jesus, I'm such a cheapie!! It must be in
my DNA....... :/


Good luck finding any. I live near Woodstock, NY. Until a decade ago or
so, there were studios everywhere around here, often tucked into the
woods halfway up some mountain or other.

Now, they're almost all gone. The last really snazzy one to vanish was
Allaire I believe. It sprung from the ashes of Bearsville Studio but I
think it was only running for a few years. The sumptuous accomodations
and amenities cost too much apparently. But I also wonder if the
studios' fate followed the pop music industry down.


Surely the popularity of home studios has led to less
work for them.

The failure of many to pay for music they apparently can't live without
is the primary point of deprivation for the music industry at levels
below the very top. Up there the action is so deep a few million lost
here or there makes little difference to the limo driver. Everywhere
else it's the end of an era, and many careers.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic

[Nate Najar]

On Monday, February 11, 2013 9:32:26 AM UTC-5, hank alrich wrote:




The failure of many to pay for music they apparently can't live without

is the primary point of deprivation for the music industry at levels

below the very top. Up there the action is so deep a few million lost

here or there makes little difference to the limo driver. Everywhere

else it's the end of an era, and many careers.



Not to go totally OT (but I will anyway), Hank you are exactly right, except that stealing is no longer the issue. The "industry" has created an environment where the consumer pays for access (through their broadband provider, etc...) and can get content for free or nearly free (through pandora, spotify, and especially youtube! etc...). Now the consumer expects that and the majority of consumers are pleased with this model. I can't tell you how many "lay people" I know who think pandora and spotify are the greatest things ever. They are not people who are "stealing" music. They are using products made available to them by the "industry". They don't know, think, or care that we're not being compensated properly- they just assume we are.. And that money that traditionally they would have spent each month on a new record or two is being spent on their broadband access....

I like iTunes as the model actually does work and generate revenue IF people are buying whole records, but youtube, pandora and spotify have negated many folks' use of itunes even! Thank god I can still get paid to play a concert.

[hank alrich]

Nate Najar wrote:

On Monday, February 11, 2013 9:32:26 AM UTC-5, hank alrich wrote:




The failure of many to pay for music they apparently can't live without

is the primary point of deprivation for the music industry at levels

below the very top. Up there the action is so deep a few million lost

here or there makes little difference to the limo driver. Everywhere

else it's the end of an era, and many careers.



Not to go totally OT (but I will anyway), Hank you are exactly right,
except that stealing is no longer the issue. The "industry" has
created an environment where the consumer pays for access (through
their broadband provider, etc...) and can get content for free or
nearly free (through pandora, spotify, and especially youtube! etc...).
Now the consumer expects that and the majority of consumers are pleased
with this model. I can't tell you how many "lay people" I know who
think pandora and spotify are the greatest things ever. They are not
people who are "stealing" music. They are using products made
available to them by the "industry". They don't know, think, or care
that we're not being compensated properly- they just assume we are.
And that money that traditionally they would have spent each month on a
new record or two is being spent on their broadband access....

I like iTunes as the model actually does work and generate revenue IF
people are buying whole records, but youtube, pandora and spotify have
negated many folks' use of itunes even!


Google leads straight to pirate sites. After a million takedown notices.
The DCMA was designed to be dysfunctional right from the start.

http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/perm...30208lumineers

Thank god I can still get paid to play a concert.

And there it is, the value of live music! Amen.

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://hankandshaidrimusic.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic