[[email protected]]

I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the singer(s).

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance. I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close. For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance. I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.
Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

[Daniel Fuchs]

wrote:


What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low?

IMHO the whole idea of spot mics is to add just a *small* touch of
presence, i.e. direct sound from the source, to the sound of the main
mic. Therefore (and because the spots are closer to the source) it is
only natural to attenuate them a good deal (20 dB or so sometimes).


Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?

That will give you less separation of your sources. However, 1-2 feet
may indeed be a bit close.
In the case of soloists, i.e. vocalists, I'd usually go about 3 feet or
so away. For group sources like woodwinds, I don't usually add
individual spots, instead I add point two or three spots in their
general direction... Same for a choir. And again, I just add a touch.
Just up to the point where there is a noticeable touch of extra
presence/direct sound.

There is another way to better integrate the spots with the main mic,
i.e. delaying the spots' signals according to their distance from the
main pair. Most DAW programs can do this. This will retain depth of
field.


Daniel

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message
ups.com...

I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the singer(s).

How does the coloration of the spot mics compare with that of the main pair.

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance.

You know of course that there is not just one sound of an actual
performance, right?

I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close.

I dunno about this too close thing. Like so many others I use individual
mics for vocalists, and they hold them a few inches away from their mouths.

For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance.

The means for avoiding breath sounds and popping of microphones are well
known.

I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.

That's what I do for spot mics that relate to a small group of sources or an
otherwise large source.

Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

Probably because there are vast differences in the timbre, and/or the reverb
in the spots and that which is picked up by the main pair.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low?

Do what sounds best to you.

Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?

There is a lot to be said for experimentation. When it comes to micing, one
setup does not fit all sitautions.

Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

(1) Pick spot mics that are as uncolored as possible to go with my uncolored
as possible main pair.
(2) Use coincident pairs as spot mics for larger sources, and mix them in as
a stereo source with different panning for each mic.
(3) Mix and mic so that for a given source, either the main pair or the
spot mics predominate

[Ray Thomas]

Spot miking is problematical, and as others have written its aimed at
getting just a small touch of additional focus on sources that would
otherwise sound too distant from the main pair...either due to low sound
output, competing with nearby louder sources, odd dispersion/propagation
patterns or simply distance. The ABC Classic FM radio network in Australia
uses spot mics on harps, woodwinds, tympani and percussion, piano, double
bass, solo violin or voice....brought into the mix at low level, and with
reverb added (shock ..horror !) from a good quality hardware box (eg TC
Electronic 3000 or 5000) to 'place the spot mic back in the room'. You can
use a large room reverb but again, in small amounts, and it really glues the
picture together. Also, rolling off some treble eq on the spot mic can
render it less 'present'...as can backing off to about 3 feet. And if its a
cadioid spot you don't want it so close that proximity boost starts to
become a factor either !

You could also try an omni spot instead of cardioid, if closer spot miking
is mandated, as this will pull a little more of the 'room sound' into your
mix. Little and sparing is the keyword with spot miking, and only to give
enough edge definition to the instrument concerned. Also take care to pan it
in the same sector of the left/right image as it's placed in by the main
pickup pair, otherwise you get weird 'smearing effects' which tip listeners
off to what you have been doing. Your job is to maintain the illusion ....
not become Phil Spector ! Remember, your main pair should be supplying 95%
or more of the total mix volume. Experiment a lot too !
Ray
wrote in message
ups.com...
I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the singer(s).

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance. I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close. For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance. I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.
Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

[Carey Carlan]

wrote in news:1158483737.327870.155370
@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com:

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

Spots should always be set low. If you can discern them, they are too
loud. But you can make them blend better.

First, do the spots "jump out" at you? If they are twenty feet or more
from the mains, you may need to delay them, rule of thumb is 1 ms per foot
of separation.

Second, if you're adding presence (not volume), you might consider cutting
some of the low frequencies. On many instruments, the "sparkle" is all you
need to bring the instrument out. Try cutting everything below 1K or 3K.

Finally, listen to the spot solo. Does it sound like what you're trying to
add? If not, can you make it sound right with different positioning or a
different microphone? Adding the "wrong" sound with a spot won't help.

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance. I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close. For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance. I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.

Yes, that would help. But now you're getting more leakage.

Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

Right, that's normal.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

Spot mikes are always a bad idea, but sometimes they are a necessary
evil.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

How far might be a good distance to stand off a spot on
a piano?

[Scott Dorsey]

In article . com,
wrote:
How far might be a good distance to stand off a spot on
a piano?

Far enough that you can't hear the hammers. The 421 parallel-to-the-floor
technique shown in this month's Live Sound works pretty well. Problem is
that if you pull back much more, you get everything else leaking into the
piano mikes; on the long stick, the piano is almost designed to funnel all
the sounds in the hall down inside it.

My feeling is that if you have to spot the piano in an orchestra, either
the piano itself isn't placed properly or set up properly, or you have
the main pair in a very wrong place. A piano is a very loud instrument
when played that way.
--scott

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

[Frank Stearns]

writes:

-snips-

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

All of the above, probably, but don't forget time-alignment (slipping the
spot tracks a little bit to account for propogation time through the air
vs. electrons through wire between close mic and main pair). There likely
will be some compromises here as well, but this will often help quite a
bit.

Once set up, I'll walk around the stage with a dog trainer "clicker",
announcing where I am at each click. This produces some fairly
easy-to-see alignment marker for use in post.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio
--

[Richard Crowley]

pandorapayne wrote ...
I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the singer(s).

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance.

You ran up and put your head a few feet from the soloist
(instrumental or vocal) *during the performance*? Else
how are you defining "natural and realistic"?

I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close. For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance. I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.
Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

I think you are not the first to discover this phenomenon.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?

"Zooming in" on instruments in classical music recording
has been a controversial technique since likely before you
were born. There were certain labels back in the days of
black vinyl who had a reputation for making "classical"
recordings vs. "pop-style" multi-track, spot-mic, post-
produced wonders. Perhaps the latter appeal to the pop/
rock music crowd, while the former are likely prefered by
people who actually attend live concerts of classical music.

[Frank Stearns]

"Richard Crowley" writes:

Snip

"Zooming in" on instruments in classical music recording
has been a controversial technique since likely before you
were born. There were certain labels back in the days of
black vinyl who had a reputation for making "classical"
recordings vs. "pop-style" multi-track, spot-mic, post-
produced wonders. Perhaps the latter appeal to the pop/
rock music crowd, while the former are likely prefered by
people who actually attend live concerts of classical music.

Hi Richard -

Problem is, we're already doing "unnatural" things by including mics,
electronics, and speakers in the transmission path between music and
listener. Sometimes the musically appropriate amount of spot added into a
mix can mitigate (hide?) inherent failings elsewhere in the process.

Plus, sometimes the hall and players need a little help as well.

In a perfect world, I'd agree with you 100%. (And as a live concert
attendee I also agree 100%.) Sometimes perfection in a recording does
happen with venue, performance and technology, but sadly not all that
often.

Whenever possible I *won't* use them very much if at all, but I like the
mix options offered by spots. YMMV.

Frank Stearns
Mobile Audio

--

[Richard Crowley]

"Frank Stearns" wrote ...
"Richard Crowley" writes:

Snip

"Zooming in" on instruments in classical music recording
has been a controversial technique since likely before you
were born. There were certain labels back in the days of
black vinyl who had a reputation for making "classical"
recordings vs. "pop-style" multi-track, spot-mic, post-
produced wonders. Perhaps the latter appeal to the pop/
rock music crowd, while the former are likely prefered by
people who actually attend live concerts of classical music.

Hi Richard -

Problem is, we're already doing "unnatural" things by including mics,
electronics, and speakers in the transmission path between music and
listener. Sometimes the musically appropriate amount of spot added
into a
mix can mitigate (hide?) inherent failings elsewhere in the process.

Plus, sometimes the hall and players need a little help as well.

In a perfect world, I'd agree with you 100%. (And as a live concert
attendee I also agree 100%.) Sometimes perfection in a recording does
happen with venue, performance and technology, but sadly not all that
often.

Whenever possible I *won't* use them very much if at all, but I like
the
mix options offered by spots. YMMV.

Indeed. Perhaps it is the difference between a well-
integrated spot-mic assistance, vs. surrealistic high-
lighting of the solo instrument, etc. That is an artistic
decision at least as much as a technical issue. I will
admit to a bit of "surrealism" myself when I know that
is what the customer (or the audience) prefers.

The labels with a reputation for making great classical
recordings typically selected optimal recording conditions,
something not all of us are priveleged to do.

[Roy W. Rising]

wrote:
How far might be a good distance to stand off a spot on
a piano?

A rule of thumb for micing is to keep the mic as far away as the major
dimension of the instrument.

Implied but not yet mentioned here is "atmospheric attenuation". Highs are
reduced more over distances. I've read that the typical slope is 3- 6 dB
per octave above 2 KHz. Use a little treble rolloff on the spots to help
them sound like the mains.

I've used serious rolloff on close-miced brass. You've never heard a
trumpet from as close as you might place the mic!

--
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"

[Scott Fraser]

The labels with a reputation for making great classical
recordings typically selected optimal recording conditions,
something not all of us are priveleged to do.

Which means a combination of state of the art venue, conductor,
performers & tonmeister. For the other 99% of the time we use whatever
tools we have to, including spot mics, to try to get close to the
ideal.

Scott Fraser

[Benjamin Maas]

My philosophy on spot mics is that in most situations, they are a necessary
evil. There is one hall that I work in where I can get away without them,
but even then, some ensembles benefit from the sound I get with multiple
spots.

My spot list will usually include woodwinds (2 mics in a spaced pair),
piano, harp, and celeste. Also the solo instrument will usually get a spot
mic. To integrate them in the recording, I'll usually delay the mics so
that they are time aligned with the main pair or main array. In addition,
I'll use a bit of reverb on those mics to correlate the ambience as needed.

Now, the positioning doesn't necessarily follow rules as to how close or how
far from their source they are. Generally, woodwind mics are about 5-6 feet
up and a couple feet in front of the section on individual stands. Harp,
piano and celeste are usually mic'd relatively close because a distant
micing results in bleed that negates the usefulness of those mics. Soloists
get a more distant treatment and a micing the very my depends on the
instrument (ie pianos usually get a stereo pair, but the kind and the mic
depends on the instrument. Vocalists/violinists, etc.. usually get single
point spots).

The integration of these mics into the final sound is very much dependent on
careful mixing. As I said, I'll usually delay them which helps, but in the
end it can rest on a dB of gain as to whether a spot mic is providing the
natural detail on the sound or is unnecessarily highlighting an instrument
that needs to be in the ensemble. When using reverb, I am careful with the
level which it sends out- an instrument with a long decay (like a piano or
harp) will usually get less than a celeste which has a shorter decay time.

In the end, let your ears be the guide and don't be afraid to do anything
that may be "against" what the book (or internet) says is right.

--Ben

--
Benjamin Maas
Fifth Circle Audio
Los Angeles, CA

please delete the obvious spam blocking to reply

[Scott Dorsey]

Richard Crowley wrote:

Indeed. Perhaps it is the difference between a well-
integrated spot-mic assistance, vs. surrealistic high-
lighting of the solo instrument, etc. That is an artistic
decision at least as much as a technical issue. I will
admit to a bit of "surrealism" myself when I know that
is what the customer (or the audience) prefers.

I'll do this too, but I won't go as far as Vanguard went with Mischa Elman,
for instance.

The labels with a reputation for making great classical
recordings typically selected optimal recording conditions,
something not all of us are priveleged to do.

Some of those labels, like DG for instance, actually make pretty shockingly
unrealistic recordings, because that's what their audience wants.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Daniel Fuchs]

Richard Crowley wrote:


You ran up and put your head a few feet from the soloist
(instrumental or vocal) *during the performance*? Else
how are you defining "natural and realistic"?

Ears hear differently... One-point stereo setups from a "natural"
listening position don't sound like what a listener in the same position
perceived. A certain extra focus from spot mics can help.

[Richard Crowley]

"Daniel Fuchs" wrote ...
Ears hear differently... One-point stereo setups from a "natural"
listening position don't sound like what a listener in the same
position
perceived. A certain extra focus from spot mics can help.

Exactly. I was trying to point out that the OP was using
TOO MUCH spot mic to retain any semblence of
"natural" effect.

[Daniel Fuchs]

Scott Dorsey wrote:


My feeling is that if you have to spot the piano in an orchestra, either
the piano itself isn't placed properly or set up properly, or you have
the main pair in a very wrong place. A piano is a very loud instrument
when played that way.

Esp. in live situations, you can't always place the main pair in a place
where it will pick up the piano, esp. if it's a solo piano which is
positioned behind the conductor at times. And with the lid half open, it
may simply not project in the direction of the main pair enough. A bit
of "piano spotting" will do no harm.

Daniel

[hank alrich]

pandorapayne wrote:

I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the singer(s).

The trouble I'm having is, when I bring up the spots into the main
pair, it doesn't sound natural and realistic, the way it sounds
during the actual performance. I'm thinking maybe I'm putting the
spots too close. For example, I'm getting breath sounds off
the singer, which you wouldn't really hear during a live
performance. I'm thinking maybe I would get a spot recording
that would be easier to integrate (i.e. sound natural) if
I backed the spots off to 3-5 feet.
Right now, it seems like I have to keep the spots down
real low otherwise it sounds pretty obvious that the mic's
were set right up on the source.

What I'm wondering is do I just need to keep the spots
set low? Or would it be best to back them off some
so that the source doesn't sound so "close mic'd"?
Have others run into this problem and can relate
with what I'm talking about?


You have to back them off, turn them down (maybe both) or get them into
close time alignment with the main pair after rolling off some upper
mids and highs on the spot mic feeds. If this is multitracked you can
tweak most of these variables in post.

--
ha

[Ray Thomas]

all good advice .... and a major determinant is whether you are recording a
live mix to stereo, where immediate decisions are required, or maintaining
multitrack separation...in which case why not go to town with all the spots
you might need and mix at your leisure in post ?
Ray

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
pandorapayne wrote:

I have been mic'ing pretty close with the spots, say 1-2 feet off
off individual instuments. Same for the spots on the
singer(s)................