Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Mike Clayton
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

In article ,
(Kelly) wrote:

Hi all - I am going to purchase microphones to record my grand piano
(at my home), and I am considering a matched pair of Oktava stereo
mikes from the Sound Room (
www.oktava.com). Does anyone have any
suggestions or reference information to help me decide whether to buy
small or large diaphragm condenser mikes? Thanks!

Kelly


What type of music? Got a good sounding room and piano? Got good preamps?

(Gawd, I'm starting to sound like Dorsey...)

--
Mike Clayton
  #2   Report Post  
Ty Ford
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

In Article , "Ron Charles"
wrote:
The Oktavas from Sound Room are good, but for piano I would suggest (at the
same price point) either a pair of Beyer M260 ribbon mics, or perhaps a
couple of used Crown PZM mics, depending on the sound you want.
RON CHARLES



In the midst of a review of the nickel diaphragm Gefell M 294, 295, 296, I
got a chance to revisit the MC012 (mostly in cardioid, and from Sound Room).
I was reminded that they are boomy on the bottom and have a bit of skritch
on top. For the price, though, that's a pretty good deal.

Regards,

Ty Ford

For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

  #4   Report Post  
James Boyk
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home

One line of thought will suggest that you get a Steinway "D", condition your room for optimal acoustics, get the world's best mikes and CERTAINLY separate preamps --- and I'm often in this line of thought. But for the moment, why not just go ahead and record, and see how it comes out?


(Do try ribbons, though.)


James Boyk

  #5   Report Post  
David Satz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

Kelly wrote:

Hi all - I am going to purchase microphones to record my grand piano
(at my home) [ ... ] Does anyone have any suggestions or reference
information to help me decide whether to buy small or large diaphragm
condenser mikes? Thanks!


That normally isn't the first or the primary decision. First you have to
have a reasonably clear concept of what kind of sound you're hoping for,
and then you can make a plan for how to get it, if that's possible.

From everything I've read here, Oktava microphones from The Sound Room
might well be a good starting point for trying out some possibilities.
I don't use them myself, but I hear that they're not too expensive and
rather good sounding for the price. That's a good level to start out at.
Once you've used them in a bunch of ways and listened to the results, you
will (I hope) find that your perceptions and judgments about piano
recording will have progressed, such that you may find yourself thinking
about your whole conception of recorded piano sound somewhat differently.

That's experiential learning for you--a notoriously wayward process. But
if you're a musician, you already knew that ...

If your interest is in classical music or in other music that is normally
listened to in "real-world" acoustics rather than artificial/electronic,
you may find that it takes an "obscenely large" (to use Roy Allison's term)
living room with the right balance of materials to give you a satisfying
room sound. This can be quite frustrating since only rather wealthy people
can usually afford a living room that large and that specifically furnished.

There's a reason why the best studios for classical (or natural sounding
acoustic recording generally) are large, rare, and rather costly to rent.
Many good classical recordings are made in concert halls, churches and
other spaces that aren't, in themselves, recording studios for this reason.

But there's no guarantee whatsoever that you can get a beautiful piano
sound in a living room that's anything like most people's living rooms.
The laws of physics don't let you substitute anything else for the
required spatial proportions and volume of enclosed air, unfortunately.

If you want recordings that cleanly document what you're playing, you can
make relatively close, "dry" recordings that are well-balanced and accurate
within the context of documentary sound quality--and there's a fairly wide
variety of microphones which you can use for that purpose.


  #6   Report Post  
LeBaron & Alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

James Boyk wrote:

(Do try ribbons, though.)


Understand that with a Mackie 1202 preamping one will be restricted to
ribbons like the active Royers, because gain enough for others there is
not.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
  #7   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

Kelly wrote:
Hi all - I am going to purchase microphones to record my grand piano
(at my home), and I am considering a matched pair of Oktava stereo
mikes from the Sound Room (www.oktava.com). Does anyone have any
suggestions or reference information to help me decide whether to buy
small or large diaphragm condenser mikes? Thanks!


Get the mikes that you like the sound of, and don't worry if they are
large or small diaphragm condensers, ribbons, or what have you. People
worry too much. Use your ears.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #8   Report Post  
James Boyk
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home

LeBaron & Alrich wrote: Understand that with a Mackie 1202 preamping
one will be restricted to ribbons like the active Royers, because gain
enough for others there is not.


Goodness! If they can't handle say Coles 4038, they can't handle studio
dynamics---and THAT would surprise me. (On the other hand, I've been
surprised many times in my life.)


Part of my point in calling attention to ribbons is that everyone is so
used to hearing condenser recordings that many people in the biz have
"normalized" on that sound as being the sound of music, which it's very
much not. I've seen time after time that professional musicians have
been astonished the first time they're recorded with ribbons---from my
friend the clarinetest to my friend to soprano to the Chicago Symphony
Winds, whom I helped Sheffield record. "Finally," they say, "a sound I
can relate to!"


Taking this a bit further, it's my guess that typical recorded
sound---condenser mikes, s-s preamps, CD-std. digital; sound without
'core'; sound that's thin and rather harsh---has become so very much the
"norm" that even a manufacturer like Steinway is now somewhat shaping
the sound of its pianos to the sound people expect from their
experience, not with pianos, but with recordings of pianos.


James Boyk


  #9   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand pianoat home



Chris Hornbeck wrote:

Would anybody in the group be interested in a mic pre-preamp project?
Something that could run off phantom power and fit into an XLR
shell is easy to do; two JFETs and a few resistors.

I'm surprised that there aren't somesuch available commercially.
Or are there?

But I could easily describe how to do it, for anyone who can solder.


Does the bear **** in the woods? :-)

Go for it. Can you give it 20 dB of variable gain and about
-140 dBu EIN?


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #10   Report Post  
David Satz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

[ topic drift warning lights ON ... ]

Chris Hornbeck wrote:

Would anybody in the group be interested in a mic pre-preamp project?
Something that could run off phantom power and fit into an XLR
shell is easy to do; two JFETs and a few resistors.

I'm surprised that there aren't somesuch available commercially.
Or are there?


I haven't seen any so far, but Sanken recently announced a product of this
type, model HAD-48, which is to be available in a few weeks at a projected
price around $200 apiece. It's an in-line device about 4" long which runs
off of phantom power (3 mA per microphone) and offers switchable 20 or 40
dB gain. It can be attached directly to the XLR-3M plug of a ribbon or
other dynamic microphone and has its own XLR-3M output.

I recently got specifications from the U.S. distributor ("plus24", which
may sound like the name for a banking/ATM network but they're nice people)
and I've ordered a pair for testing.

Frankly the specifications were a bit disappointing; on paper it seems
like a product that will inspire someone else to make a version with
somewhat better performance, especially in the areas of input noise
(it's specified only as "noise," but since it's given as -121 dBA I
figure that it must be equivalent input noise) and frequency response
(it's down a dB or two on top and almost 3 dB on the bottom).

Plus the "expected receive side impedance" is specified as 10 kOhms which,
if true, would exclude most real-world mixers and preamps. But I was told
that "it will work with lower loads as well." So we'll see. I'll post a
message here when I've had a chance to measure them and/or try them out.


  #11   Report Post  
Chris Hornbeck
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 23:43:48 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:

Go for it. Can you give it 20 dB of variable gain and about
-140 dBu EIN?


Variable gain is "built in" to any simple design, by
changing the loading. FET's are high output impedance,
current-source devices, and don't mind us loading them
with a resistor to set gain.

That's a good thing because we have the phantom
resistors, 13.62 K ohms, and the mic preamp's input
impedance to drive anyway. We'll just add another
(resistive) load in parallel.

The noise requirement of 125nV is equivalent to about
50 ohms at room temperature. Might be too strict for
300 ohm sources, but it's do-able with common FET's.
Each will need to have a transconductance of 40mA/V
because they're in series as a noise source.

I'll try to sort a batch of 2SK369's today or tomorrow,
to see what kind of matching we'd get in a random batch
of 16 from MCM. And post back.

Thanks for your interest,


Chris Hornbeck

  #12   Report Post  
Chris Hornbeck
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 14:07:20 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:

Chris, FWIW my main interest and reason for specifying such
low noise would be as a "booster" pre-amp to bring low
sensitivity mics up to where they weren't colliding with the
less than stellar noise floor of the moderately priced front
end pre/AD boxes that are now appearing left and right. If
you have an XLR input with phantom on it you can pretty well
count on there already being a pre on the other side of it
that will give you a reasonably adjustable gain range but
you can't count on it being quiet enough for low sensitivity
mics in low SPL conditions.


Hi Bob,

That makes good sense to me, and is also the situation that's
got me thinking about this project. I'm hoping to save up for
a Royer SF12 someday, and will need suitable preamps.

To clarify/correct my previous post: An input noise level of
-140dBu (presumably unweighted) is 77.5nV, the noise made by
a resistor of less than 20 ohms. This can certainly be done,
but I don't know how using only phantom power and common
devices. No doubt somebody smarter than me could though.

But this low a noise spec may not matter enough to us to worry
about, because the noise of the microphone's own resistance
will swamp it. The Royer SF12 or Coles 4038, for example, is
300 ohms.

If we can relax the spec 4dB to 125nV and an equivalent
resistance of 50 ohms, we can use a selected pair of 2SK369's.
Today I rough-checked a random batch of BL group 2SK369's
and found four pairs of .5% matching I-sub-DSS, out of sixteen
transistors. All four pairs were within 9.75 thru 11.1 mA,
requiring a small source resistor.

Or, if we could relax the spec 7dB to 180nV and an equivalent
resistance of 100 ohms, we can use the 2SK389 GR duals.
Checked two today and found I-sub-DSS matching of 1-2% and
*ideal* absolute numbers of 5.7 and 6.1 mA.

Do you have any thoughts about a desirable input impedance?
We can have pretty much anything we want. What would be a
good load for the transformers in ribbon mic's, I wonder?


Chris Hornbeck

  #13   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home



Chris Hornbeck wrote:


To clarify/correct my previous post: An input noise level of
-140dBu (presumably unweighted)


Actually I was thinking weighted so that gives a bit more
room.

is 77.5nV, the noise made by
a resistor of less than 20 ohms. This can certainly be done,
but I don't know how using only phantom power and common
devices. No doubt somebody smarter than me could though.


Not me, for sure. What will the phantom resistors
contribute?


If we can relax the spec 4dB to 125nV and an equivalent
resistance of 50 ohms, we can use a selected pair of 2SK369's.
Today I rough-checked a random batch of BL group 2SK369's
and found four pairs of .5% matching I-sub-DSS, out of sixteen
transistors. All four pairs were within 9.75 thru 11.1 mA,
requiring a small source resistor.


That would be fine. The -140 dVu figure was off the top of
my head as about where the sublime would begin.


Or, if we could relax the spec 7dB to 180nV and an equivalent
resistance of 100 ohms, we can use the 2SK389 GR duals.
Checked two today and found I-sub-DSS matching of 1-2% and
*ideal* absolute numbers of 5.7 and 6.1 mA.


If the spectrum is fairly flat, the A-weighting would make
that about -135 dBu which is still a whole lot better than
many of the boxes it could front.


Do you have any thoughts about a desirable input impedance?
We can have pretty much anything we want. What would be a
good load for the transformers in ribbon mic's, I wonder?


Is Scott Dorsey around? He could address that a lot more
knowledgably than I could.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #14   Report Post  
Chris Hornbeck
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:10:39 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:

What will the phantom resistors contribute?


That's a very good point. Since the phantom resistors
will be passing about 6mA each, they'll need to be up
to snuff, and well matched.

The thermal noise contribution of the total parallel
load resistance (phantom r's in series, preamp input,
and any shunt gain-set resistor in our project, all
in parallel) increases with the square root of resistance.
But gain, and therefor signal, increases linearly. So
we should go for as high a gain as practical for
lowest noise.

Using the 40mA/V FET's, effectively in series for
transconductance here, means a gain of R-sub-Total Load
divided by 50 ohms. A typical(?) load of 1000 ohms
means a gain of 26dB. A little more would be nice, but
tough to get.

The 20mA/V duals would only be 20dB gain. Maybe
enough; I don't know how to guesstimate it.

Is Scott Dorsey around? He could address that a lot more
knowledgably than I could.


And a lot of other things. Hey! Scott! Help!


Chris Hornbeck

  #15   Report Post  
Scott Dorsey
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

Chris Hornbeck wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:10:39 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:

What will the phantom resistors contribute?


That's a very good point. Since the phantom resistors
will be passing about 6mA each, they'll need to be up
to snuff, and well matched.


Matching is a big deal, but if the front end isn't matched for good CMRR,
it's not worth matching the resistors any better. How good are those dual
FETs matched for anyway?

Noise contribution will be minimal, since the resistor value (plus the supply
impedance) is still far more than the input impedance of the source. So it
might be noisy without a mike plugged in, but once the mike is plugged in,
the source impedance will swamp it.

The thermal noise contribution of the total parallel
load resistance (phantom r's in series, preamp input,
and any shunt gain-set resistor in our project, all
in parallel) increases with the square root of resistance.
But gain, and therefor signal, increases linearly. So
we should go for as high a gain as practical for
lowest noise.


Maybe, but how much gain do you really want? That's sort of the question.
I'll take better linearity over more gain any time.

Using the 40mA/V FET's, effectively in series for
transconductance here, means a gain of R-sub-Total Load
divided by 50 ohms. A typical(?) load of 1000 ohms
means a gain of 26dB. A little more would be nice, but
tough to get.


How well are those FETs matched?

The 20mA/V duals would only be 20dB gain. Maybe
enough; I don't know how to guesstimate it.


Since you're running the thing into a preamp already, this thing would really
only be a pre-preamp anyway. 20 dB of gain should be plenty, right?

Is Scott Dorsey around? He could address that a lot more
knowledgably than I could.


And a lot of other things. Hey! Scott! Help!


FET inputs will give you necessarily higher impedance than a bipolar array,
and therefore more noise since there is poorer power transfer. But it might
well be enough, and you really don't have the current to do it with bipolars
easily and still use phantom.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


  #16   Report Post  
James Boyk
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home

Bob Cain wrote:
Go for it. Can you give it 20 dB of variable gain and about
-140 dBu EIN?



Yes, that would be wonderful, but it just a teensy bit unlikely, as--under most
assumptions about b/width and impedance--it's way below the Johnson noise. Or is
this XLR-shell preamp in liquid nitrogen?


James Boyk

  #18   Report Post  
Chris Hornbeck
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

On 4 Sep 2003 08:08:24 -0700, (David Satz) wrote:

I'm surprised that there aren't somesuch available commercially.
Or are there?


I haven't seen any so far, but Sanken recently announced a product of this
type, model HAD-48, which is to be available in a few weeks at a projected
price around $200 apiece. It's an in-line device about 4" long which runs
off of phantom power (3 mA per microphone) and offers switchable 20 or 40
dB gain. It can be attached directly to the XLR-3M plug of a ribbon or
other dynamic microphone and has its own XLR-3M output.


Hi David,
That sounds like an excellent commercial packaging. I've seen those
sleeves around somewhere, probably Switchcraft, but don't see them
now. My current thought is just to build it into a cable or adaptor
that's already otherwise needed.

Frankly the specifications were a bit disappointing; on paper it seems
like a product that will inspire someone else to make a version with
somewhat better performance, especially in the areas of input noise
(it's specified only as "noise," but since it's given as -121 dBA I
figure that it must be equivalent input noise) and frequency response
(it's down a dB or two on top and almost 3 dB on the bottom).


I'm more surprised by the bandwidth limitations than by the noise
spec (they're not pulling much current). Low noise voltages mean
low impedances, and so wide bandwidths. Puzzling.

Plus the "expected receive side impedance" is specified as 10 kOhms which,
if true, would exclude most real-world mixers and preamps. But I was told
that "it will work with lower loads as well." So we'll see. I'll post a
message here when I've had a chance to measure them and/or try them out.


Maybe the 10 kOhm load is only needed to get 40dB gain. Phantom
resistors alone are 13.62 kOhms load, so.....

Would you like to try a beta prototype of the r.a.p. project?
Email me a USPS address.

Thanks,

Chris Hornbeck

  #21   Report Post  
Chris Hornbeck
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:10:39 -0700, Bob Cain
wrote:

clipped

Hi Bob,
Would you like to try a beta prototype of the project
and give comments? No blame will attach to you if this
thing fails miserably (but it's all your fault!).Arf.
If willing, email me a USPS address and I'll work on
it this weekend.

Thanks,

Chris Hornbeck

  #22   Report Post  
Bob Cain
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home



Scott Dorsey wrote:

Maybe, but how much gain do you really want? That's sort of the question.
I'll take better linearity over more gain any time.


Me too.


Since you're running the thing into a preamp already, this thing would really
only be a pre-preamp anyway. 20 dB of gain should be plenty, right?


Yes, AFAIAC.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
  #23   Report Post  
LeBaron & Alrich
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

James Boyk wrote:

LeBaron & Alrich wrote:


Don't know about the Mackie + Coles action, but with Beyer M260's and
M160's it's not a pretty thing.


If memory serves, the M260 sensitivity is about that of the B&O 200. The Coles
is perhaps 10 dB hotter.


That would make a significant difference, for the better.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"
  #24   Report Post  
David Satz
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand piano at home

Paul and Chris,

6 mA is pushing the limits of what's available from the phantom power
supplies of many preamps, unfortunately. Could I suggest exposing a
test point on the circuit board so that users can check the operating
voltage that you're getting, in case of doubt?

--best regards
  #25   Report Post  
Richard Kuschel
 
Posts: n/a
Default Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grand


Bob Cain wrote:
Go for it. Can you give it 20 dB of variable gain and about
-140 dBu EIN?



Yes, that would be wonderful, but it just a teensy bit unlikely, as--under
most
assumptions about b/width and impedance--it's way below the Johnson noise. Or
is
this XLR-shell preamp in liquid nitrogen?


James Boyk



Or the marketing Department at Earthworks

-140dBV@40dB Gain
http://www.earthwks.com/ns/preamps.html

Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Small vs. large diaphragm condenser mikes for recording grandpiano at home James Boyk Pro Audio 0 August 31st 03 04:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:48 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"