Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Any recommendations for mics that may be an upgrade from Oktava
MK-012s for recording classical guitar. Let pre-empt some of your questions room - ok, treated so kind of 'dead' on purpose guitar - great! player - ok (well it's me, i can post some recordings if you want to gauge that) equipment - usbpre 2 and laptop...that's it! I will also do some guitar orchestra (boston guitar orchestra) recordings live, and spaces vary alot. thats Chris |
#2
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On 9/12/2011 3:38 PM, chris ruth wrote:
Any recommendations for mics that may be an upgrade from Oktava MK-012s for recording classical guitar. Let pre-empt some of your questions room - ok, treated so kind of 'dead' on purpose guitar - great! player - ok (well it's me, i can post some recordings if you want to gauge that) equipment - usbpre 2 and laptop...that's it! I will also do some guitar orchestra (boston guitar orchestra) recordings live, and spaces vary alot. thats Chris AKG C451 ? |
#3
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
schoeps cmc 641
trust me |
#4
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
"Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. |
#5
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
Any recommendations for mics that may be an upgrade from Oktava MK-012s for recording classical guitar. Let pre-empt some of your questions room - ok, treated so kind of 'dead' on purpose This is not good, because it - in my opinion - rules the best choice out, DPA 4006 or similar. guitar - great! This is good. player - ok (well it's me, i can post some recordings if you want to gauge that) For you to fix if not adequate. equipment - usbpre 2 and laptop...that's it! I will also do some guitar orchestra (boston guitar orchestra) recordings live, and spaces vary alot. Josephson C42, Shure KSM 141/137, AKG CK 451. All need suitable treble eq, whatever that is. Do NOT go too close, to record an entire instrument you need to be "instrument size" away from it. My best recordings of guitar in a room are made with mic higher than players head, ie. angled perhaps 45 degrees down. KSM 141 is the most useful one of those listed because of its dual personality, but ambience and perspective tends to be better on the other two when used for ensemble miking. Getting minimum phase EQ right helps a lot, but conceptually the Shure seems to be a spot microphone rather than an ensemble microphone - great for choir tho! Recording guitar for track use and guitar in a room are two very different recordings and thus come with different mic choices and placements. Based on Ty Ford's mic test a - preferably pair of - Neumann tlm 102's ARE on my "look for list". I do not have any personal experience with the tlm 102 so while it does appear to be excellent it is premature for me to comment on its usefulnes but I am thinking track use, comments are appreciated if available. And what the other guys said. With my existing setup my first choice would be C42 for you as well as for the guitar orchestra. You should also check the MKH 8040, to me it sounds as if Sennheiser have been in the Neumann design archive, ie. eerily like the KM84 as I _recall_ a pair I borrowed and stupidly did not buy in 1975 because they clipped my A77. Note: _not_ a valid AB comparison! Note: I instinctively dislike laptops for location recordings because they are independently usable objects that are sellable at a shady beerjoint, the Good Book says not to tempt ... Chris Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#6
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
I say the Schoepses if you have the money, or perhaps Sennheiser
MKH40s. I also second the recommendation of Neumann TLM102s -- I suspect they'd make a very good ORTF pair. Likewise Microtech Gefell M930s. Peace, Paul |
#7
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 22:33:05 -0800, "Charles Tomaras"
wrote: "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. If the room is dead there is no need for a cardioid. Much better to keep the smoother response of the omni. d |
#8
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
"Don Pearce" wrote in message ... On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 22:33:05 -0800, "Charles Tomaras" wrote: "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. If the room is dead there is no need for a cardioid. Much better to keep the smoother response of the omni. Not only that, but one of the justifications for high priced cardioids is their allegedly superior off-axis response. With omnis, off-axis response is strongly defined by the diaphragm's diameter. Question to the OP - have you tried the omni capsule for your MK-012? |
#9
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Don Pearce wrote:
If the room is dead there is no need for a cardioid. Much better to keep the smoother response of the omni. Ah, we get to disagree Don, depending of course on whether the room is dead but nice sounding or dead and boring. To reap the omni benefits requires a well sounding room. Also the off axis response doesn't really matter if there is no room sound that gets influenced by it. d Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#10
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:20:02 +0100, "Peter Larsen"
wrote: Don Pearce wrote: If the room is dead there is no need for a cardioid. Much better to keep the smoother response of the omni. Ah, we get to disagree Don, depending of course on whether the room is dead but nice sounding or dead and boring. To reap the omni benefits requires a well sounding room. Also the off axis response doesn't really matter if there is no room sound that gets influenced by it. d Kind regards Peter Larsen Dead is dead. Considering whether it is nice sounding or not is a little like asking whether a light that is switched off is better with a blue bulb or a pink one. As for off axis not mattering in a dead room - that is exactly why I suggested using an omni instead. The on-axis response of an omni is generally much better than that of its cardioid equivalent. In a live room, of course, the situation is more complex (and much more fun). If the room sound is good, then moving an omni back a little might be good. This is not usually the best solution with a cardioid, because it inevitably has a much more coloured response off-axis that will not improve things. There are many combinations, not all of them euphonic. d |
#11
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Don Pearce wrote:
Dead is dead. Only in an an-echoic room, in real world rooms "dead" is a room with too little treble and too much bass. Considering whether it is nice sounding or not is a little like asking whether a light that is switched off is better with a blue bulb or a pink one. As for off axis not mattering in a dead room - that is exactly why I suggested using an omni instead. The on-axis response of an omni is generally much better than that of its cardioid equivalent. Just one example to counter this: the CK1 cardioid has a smoother, albeit gently rising, response on axis than the CK22 omni based on a measurement referencing a 4006 in a higly damped listening room, I probably still have the raw measurement data on some harddisk. In a live room, of course, the situation is more complex (and much more fun). If the room sound is good, then moving an omni back a little might be good. This is not usually the best solution with a cardioid, because it inevitably has a much more coloured response off-axis that will not improve things. There are many combinations, not all of them euphonic. Yes. But in a dead room I'll take a cardioid over an omni or a subcardiod because of the lack of treble from the room sound that is there. It is simpler than having to split the recording into M and S and boost the treble on the S. d Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#12
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:47:25 +0100, "Peter Larsen"
wrote: Don Pearce wrote: Dead is dead. Only in an an-echoic room, in real world rooms "dead" is a room with too little treble and too much bass. Considering whether it is nice sounding or not is a little like asking whether a light that is switched off is better with a blue bulb or a pink one. As for off axis not mattering in a dead room - that is exactly why I suggested using an omni instead. The on-axis response of an omni is generally much better than that of its cardioid equivalent. Just one example to counter this: the CK1 cardioid has a smoother, albeit gently rising, response on axis than the CK22 omni based on a measurement referencing a 4006 in a higly damped listening room, I probably still have the raw measurement data on some harddisk. You can always find an exception to a general rule. Doesn't make the rule wrong. In a live room, of course, the situation is more complex (and much more fun). If the room sound is good, then moving an omni back a little might be good. This is not usually the best solution with a cardioid, because it inevitably has a much more coloured response off-axis that will not improve things. There are many combinations, not all of them euphonic. Yes. But in a dead room I'll take a cardioid over an omni or a subcardiod because of the lack of treble from the room sound that is there. It is simpler than having to split the recording into M and S and boost the treble on the S. d Kind regards Peter Larsen OK, just a difference in definition of the word "dead". For me, dead equals anechoic. If there is any kind of reverb, the room is not dead. d .. |
#13
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Charles Tomaras wrote:
"Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. From my perspective, I will almost always take the MK41 over the MK4. If you want more ambience, just pull it farther away! --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#14
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. From my perspective, I will almost always take the MK41 over the MK4. If you want more ambience, just pull it farther away! --scott I've not used mine for classical guitar, nor much music for that matter but I do have many hours of dialog and interview experience with my Schoeps stuff and almost always prefer the sound of the MK4 over the MK41 if the room sound and camera headroom will allow. |
#15
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Dec 9, 12:29*pm, "Charles Tomaras" wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend *the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. From my perspective, I will almost always take the MK41 over the MK4. *If you want more ambience, just pull it farther away! --scott I've not used mine for classical guitar, nor much music for that matter but I do have many hours of dialog and interview experience with my Schoeps stuff and almost always prefer the sound of the MK4 over the MK41 if the room sound and camera headroom will allow. WAIT. You guys are great but i think i should give some more info (as usual) Budget ~ $800. I'd like the mic to work in a variety of settings since i will be doing some live recordings, but mainly, for my personal use, it will be a small room with a lot of dampening material (ala ethan winer's recommendations). Maybe i should stick with the Octava MK-012s for the small room recording and just get another mic for live?? I have omni and cardiod capsules for the octavas. thanks |
#16
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
"chris ruth" wrote in message ... On Dec 9, 12:29 pm, "Charles Tomaras" wrote: "Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ... Charles Tomaras wrote: "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. From my perspective, I will almost always take the MK41 over the MK4. If you want more ambience, just pull it farther away! --scott I've not used mine for classical guitar, nor much music for that matter but I do have many hours of dialog and interview experience with my Schoeps stuff and almost always prefer the sound of the MK4 over the MK41 if the room sound and camera headroom will allow. WAIT. You guys are great but i think i should give some more info (as usual) Budget ~ $800. I'd like the mic to work in a variety of settings since i will be doing some live recordings, but mainly, for my personal use, it will be a small room with a lot of dampening material (ala ethan winer's recommendations). Maybe i should stick with the Octava MK-012s for the small room recording and just get another mic for live?? I have omni and cardiod capsules for the octavas. thanks Did your gain issues with the Octava's become more manageable with the USB Pre2? |
#17
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
[thread lost in schoepsung] WAIT. You guys are great but i think i should give some more info (as usual) Budget ~ $800. Allowed for in my suggestions, C42 as well as KSM 141 should be well within that for a matched pair. I'd like the mic Pair of mics - or 4 even, my best folly for many years was to buy 2 pairs of C42's that cam for sale simultanously - one here in Copenhagen and the other in the US of A. Perhaps you should devote some time to learn stereo recording since you keep saying mic rather than mics. Even if for a track in a multitrack you should in my opinion - track count permitting - record your guitar in stereo. With a guitar ensemble you DO need to learn how to set a stereo pair up, it is NOT gonna sound right in multi-mono. If it is just a spot mic used with a main pair, then using only one mic can be better than using a pair, a spot mic is there to focus the instrument image. I'm still only learning, and have been for 40 years, do not expect to get good at setting up a stereo pair already in take 3. Maybe i should stick with the Octava MK-012s for the small room recording and just get another mic for live?? I have omni and cardiod capsules for the octavas. Just what problem is it you need to solve then, they're perhaps not the pinnacle of reliability - no mic with detachable capsules is, but not at all bad mics. You should look into whether a Jecklin disk is a strategy for you, it is forgiving and very useful in case you can not - and in real life live recording you rarely can - get far enough away from an ensemble. A problem that btw. also often necessitates 45 to 60 degrees angle between an ""ORTF pair"" rather than the ""proper"" ORTF angle of 110 degrees. If there is a hole in the middle the size of the US budget hole, then the angle needs narrowing, if too much mono it needs widening, I try to reserve extreme left and right for ambience. Recorded rooms and stages usually ARE wider than the ensemble, remember! thanks Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#18
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
I've used the MK012s for ORTF live recordings, with more-than-decent
results. I suggest getting a pair of the hypercardioid capsules; they're actually closer to real cardioid than the "cardioid" ones. If you use the MK012s in omni, point them up at the ceiling; the off- axis response is reasonably flat, while the on-axis response is bright. Peace, Paul |
#19
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
Maybe i should stick with the Octava MK-012s for the small room recording and just get another mic for live?? What don't you like about the MK-012s? I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a pair of anything better in that price range. The Oktava is really a pretty good mike. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#20
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Dec 9, 3:53*pm, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
chris ruth wrote: Maybe i should stick with the Octava MK-012s for the small room recording and just get another mic for live?? What don't you like about the MK-012s? *I think you'll be hard-pressed to find a pair of anything better in that price range. *The Oktava is really a pretty good mike. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." First off, i usually them in ORTF, after lots of experimenting (i have not tried the omni's pointing at the ceiling though. That's why i post here!) . The issue is no matter what room i try (for solo recording), i find i have to be very close (like a few inches), otherwise it's starts to sound like crap (with either capsule). So I do a little EQ (sometimes) add some reverb and a get a 'decent' recording. However, the recording never sounds as good as my guitar sounds to my ears. It's a really beautiful intrument, made by a local luthier, Aaron Green (i'll give him a plug). And i can't seem to capture that beautiful sound in a recording. I even tried to record a really good player playing my guitar. I was blown away by the sound sitting in front of him but the recording, well just ok. For ensemble recording i tried ortf not far enough away, with the omni's and basically got a recording of the center guitars. It was my first time, i'm totally green. There was another time i recorded a koto ensemble, put the mics farther, but got too much room and sounded like crap. I have not tried the usbpre 2 yet but i'm not expected a huge improvement from that. All the above was done with a tascam. thanks |
#21
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
Any recommendations for mics that may be an upgrade from Oktava MK-012s for recording classical guitar. Let pre-empt some of your questions room - ok, treated so kind of 'dead' on purpose guitar - great! player - ok (well it's me, i can post some recordings if you want to gauge that) equipment - usbpre 2 and laptop...that's it! I will also do some guitar orchestra (boston guitar orchestra) recordings live, and spaces vary alot. thats Chris I think you've omitted one important parameter. How much are you willing to spend, what's your max outlay for this upgrade? If not so much, Arny's suggestion of omni caps for your Oktavas could be a fine next step. If more but not outrageously more, Ty's Josephson C42 MP's are a good ticket. Up from there the Schoeps are fine tools, regardless of your choice of caps, omni, card, or hyper. There are other options, like the Brauner VM1S, or Josephson C700S. Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. Feeding into that last item are your budget and the way different configurations work in your room. If you you listen now to the recordings you have made with your present setup, how do you personally rate the playing, and the mic config and placement? -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri .. |
#22
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
First off, i usually them in ORTF, after lots of experimenting (i have not tried the omni's pointing at the ceiling though. That's why i post here!) . The issue is no matter what room i try (for solo recording), i find i have to be very close (like a few inches) ,,, Follow up pending, looks like it will tke more time to type than I have this morning ... I have not tried the usbpre 2 yet but i'm not expected a huge improvement from that. All the above was done with a tascam. Well, recorder really doesn't matter all that much, mic matters and positioning thereof. Anybod who hasn't read it should search for the title "The stereophonic zoom" in the AES library, it is a 1983 or so item, and the author has written a new version, possibly including surround. thanks Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#23
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Dec 9, 4:42*pm, chris ruth wrote:
For ensemble recording i tried ortf not far enough away, with the omni's and basically got a recording of the center guitars. It was my first time, i'm totally green. There was another time i recorded a koto ensemble, put the mics farther, but got too much room and sounded like crap. By definition you can't do ORTF with omni mics. ORTF is defined as using cardioid mics, spaced 7" apart, angled outwards at 110 degrees. If you're using omni mics in that configuration all you have is spaced omnis, and with the Oktavas you have the added problem of pointing the capsules at the musicians, which will brighten up the direct sound while the room pickup is less bright. This disconnect between the on- and off-axis sound may be part of the reason you hear the recordings as sounding like crap. Do this: set the MK012s up as a real ORTF pair, with the cardioid capsules. Stick a finger in one of your ears and move around the room in front of the musician(s) until you find a spot where it sounds good -- good direct sound, good balance. Put the ORTF pair there and record. See how that sounds. Peace, Paul |
#24
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Thu, 8 Dec 2011 23:38:56 -0500, chris ruth wrote
(in article ): Any recommendations for mics that may be an upgrade from Oktava MK-012s for recording classical guitar. Let pre-empt some of your questions room - ok, treated so kind of 'dead' on purpose guitar - great! player - ok (well it's me, i can post some recordings if you want to gauge that) equipment - usbpre 2 and laptop...that's it! I will also do some guitar orchestra (boston guitar orchestra) recordings live, and spaces vary alot. thats Chris Schoeps CMC641 TLM 67 Most classical folks are pretty sensitive about the plasticky sound of the 1st and 2nd strings. Using a mic with a bright top end increases the plink. The mics I've mentioned above don't. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#25
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 01:33:05 -0500, Charles Tomaras wrote
(in article ): "Nate Najar" wrote in message news:29676328.378.1323411241479.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqj4... schoeps cmc 641 trust me Why would you recommend the Schoeps MK41 capsule for solo classical guitar in a dead room? Seems an MK4 cardiod would be a better choice. 1. He didn't say totally dead. 2. Pull it back a bit. I tried both here before going with the cmc641. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#26
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 03:29:55 -0500, Peter Larsen wrote
(in article ): Recording guitar for track use and guitar in a room are two very different recordings and thus come with different mic choices and placements. Based on Ty Ford's mic test a - preferably pair of - Neumann tlm 102's ARE on my "look for list". I do not have any personal experience with the tlm 102 so while it does appear to be excellent it is premature for me to comment on its usefulnes but I am thinking track use, comments are appreciated if available. You're right, Peter. The TLM 102 are contenders along with cmc641 and TLM 67. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#27
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:20:02 -0500, Peter Larsen wrote
(in article ): Ah, we get to disagree Don, depending of course on whether the room is dead but nice sounding or dead and boring +1! Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#28
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 12:29:58 -0500, Charles Tomaras wrote
(in article ): I've not used mine for classical guitar, nor much music for that matter but I do have many hours of dialog and interview experience with my Schoeps stuff and almost always prefer the sound of the MK4 over the MK41 if the room sound and camera headroom will allow. Tried the mk4 and mk41 and went the other way. Liked the mk41 better. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#29
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:33:29 -0500, Don Pearce wrote
(in article ): OK, just a difference in definition of the word "dead". For me, dead equals anechoic. If there is any kind of reverb, the room is not dead. d Please revisit the OP. "kind of 'dead' " The modifiers "kind" and "of" = "not" Do any of us have access to an anechoic room? Other than Don, of course. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#30
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. I was hoping someone would mention that... Mark |
#31
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Dec 10, 11:39*am, Mark wrote:
Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. I was hoping someone would mention that... Mark the playing is fine. The guitar sounds great to the ear. Again, the problem is, no matter what configuration i try, i need to pout the mics withing 6 inches of the guitar otherwise it sounds bad. So i think i'm missing some of the 'sound?' of the whole guitar, as it would sound if you sat a few feet in front of it. |
#32
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:48:32 -0500, Ty Ford
wrote: On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:33:29 -0500, Don Pearce wrote (in article ): OK, just a difference in definition of the word "dead". For me, dead equals anechoic. If there is any kind of reverb, the room is not dead. d Please revisit the OP. "kind of 'dead' " The modifiers "kind" and "of" = "not" Do any of us have access to an anechoic room? Other than Don, of course. I no longer take any notice of words like "kind of". They are meaningless in the modern argot. d |
#33
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Dec 10, 11:59*am, chris ruth wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:39*am, Mark wrote: Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. I was hoping someone would mention that... Mark the playing is fine. The guitar sounds great to the ear. Again, the problem is, no matter what configuration i try, i need to pout the mics withing 6 inches of the guitar otherwise it sounds bad. So i think i'm missing some of the 'sound?' of the whole guitar, as it would sound if you sat a few feet in front of it. i didn't mean to insult the playing... my point was that the playing and the mic LOCATION are much more important compared to the exact model of mic... except for the choice of omni vs non omni that is also major... if you have 2 tracks, record one of each and mix to taste. Mark |
#34
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Mark wrote:
Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. I was hoping someone would mention that... Mark Well, I play guitar and right there is where my own troubles begin. g -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri |
#35
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
On Dec 10, 11:39 am, Mark wrote: Your playing will turn out to make the biggest difference. After that mic configuration and placement will be the dominanat factors affecting recording quality. I was hoping someone would mention that... Mark the playing is fine. The guitar sounds great to the ear. Again, the problem is, no matter what configuration i try, i need to pout the mics withing 6 inches of the guitar otherwise it sounds bad. So i think i'm missing some of the 'sound?' of the whole guitar, as it would sound if you sat a few feet in front of it. When I record solo guitar I like to have the mic pair 3' - 5' away. -- shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/ http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri |
#36
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
chris ruth wrote:
First off, i usually them in ORTF, after lots of experimenting (i have not tried the omni's pointing at the ceiling though. That's why i post here!) . The issue is no matter what room i try (for solo recording), i find i have to be very close (like a few inches), otherwise it's starts to sound like crap (with either capsule). When you encounter this sort of thing, either the microphone is no good off-axis, or it's a room problem. The Oktavas are pretty good off-axis. How is your monitoring? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#37
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 12:26:42 -0500, Don Pearce wrote
(in article ): On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:48:32 -0500, Ty Ford wrote: On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:33:29 -0500, Don Pearce wrote (in article ): OK, just a difference in definition of the word "dead". For me, dead equals anechoic. If there is any kind of reverb, the room is not dead. d Please revisit the OP. "kind of 'dead' " The modifiers "kind" and "of" = "not" Do any of us have access to an anechoic room? Other than Don, of course. I no longer take any notice of words like "kind of". They are meaningless in the modern argot. d That explains so much! Henceforth I'll remember that you truncate instead of dither. Regards, Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
#38
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 10:16:56 -0500, Ty Ford
wrote: On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 12:26:42 -0500, Don Pearce wrote (in article ): On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 10:48:32 -0500, Ty Ford wrote: On Fri, 9 Dec 2011 10:33:29 -0500, Don Pearce wrote (in article ): OK, just a difference in definition of the word "dead". For me, dead equals anechoic. If there is any kind of reverb, the room is not dead. d Please revisit the OP. "kind of 'dead' " The modifiers "kind" and "of" = "not" Do any of us have access to an anechoic room? Other than Don, of course. I no longer take any notice of words like "kind of". They are meaningless in the modern argot. d That explains so much! Henceforth I'll remember that you truncate instead of dither. Oh yes. I've never been one to dither. d |
#39
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
Don Pearce wrote:
Oh yes. I've never been one to dither. Me neither. I think ..... geoff |
#40
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
mics for classical guitar
On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 18:38:09 -0500, geoff wrote
(in article ) : Don Pearce wrote: Oh yes. I've never been one to dither. Me neither. I think ..... geoff Ty Ford --Audio Equipment Reviews Audio Production Services Acting and Voiceover Demos http://www.tyford.com Guitar player?:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWaPRHMGhGA |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Classical Guitar Website | Pro Audio | |||
how do I record my classical guitar? | Pro Audio | |||
MK 41 on classical guitar? | Pro Audio | |||
advice on mics/recording classical guitar | Pro Audio | |||
Classical guitar mics? | Pro Audio |