Shoeps CMC641 suboptimal? It happens.

[Carey Carlan]

My "go to" microphone pair to record large groups is Schoeps CMC6 with
the 41 supercardioid capsule. Good directivity, superb off-axis
response, and mostly flat with only a tiny HF rise. It minimizes the
problems of many halls (slapback, HVAC and lighting noise, ugly sound
reinforcement, etc.)

Today I put that pair away and pulled out another "perfect" pair, the
DPA 4006 omnis. No jecklin or other aid, just pointed toward the wings
(180°) with the capsules about 18 inches apart.

The program was a huge (200+) member chorus with organ, a string
quintet, 2 trumpets, and timpani. The hall is an octagonal church with
serious acoustic treatment (reflectors, diffusers, etc). Still absorbs
all the transients.

The Schoeps accurately captured the sound of the group, keeping a good
balance of chorus and "orchestra" with proper mic placement. In other
words it correct, but in a clinical sort of way.

When I substituted the omnis, the sound opened up and mixed better. I'm
not referring to post-processing mixing in the studio. I refer to the
blend of left and right in the two microphones. While it was less
defined that the supercardioid sound, it added atmosphere that I can't
add with synthetic reverb and it had a stereo definition I couldn't get
with ambient mics in that room.

I'll use the 41's to capture the ambient tone from the rear of the hall
(not allowed to place mics in the seating area during the program).
Their "reach" will still be useful, even from that distance.

[Scott Dorsey]

Carey Carlan > wrote:
>
>When I substituted the omnis, the sound opened up and mixed better. I'm
>not referring to post-processing mixing in the studio. I refer to the
>blend of left and right in the two microphones. While it was less
>defined that the supercardioid sound, it added atmosphere that I can't
>add with synthetic reverb and it had a stereo definition I couldn't get
>with ambient mics in that room.

Try the Jecklin Disc. You know you want to.
--scott

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

[Carey Carlan]

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in news:iohd39$prp$1
@panix2.panix.com:

> Carey Carlan > wrote:
>>
>>When I substituted the omnis, the sound opened up and mixed better. I'm
>>not referring to post-processing mixing in the studio. I refer to the
>>blend of left and right in the two microphones. While it was less
>>defined that the supercardioid sound, it added atmosphere that I can't
>>add with synthetic reverb and it had a stereo definition I couldn't get
>>with ambient mics in that room.
>
> Try the Jecklin Disc. You know you want to.
> --scott

In a heartbeat at a recording session. But this was a concert with a mic
stand front and center. That big fuzzy pizza on a stick would have
attracted too much attention.

With the capsules at extreme angles and 18" apart I get a surprising amount
of stereo field. For that matter, as close as I was to such a big group,
that's probably as much spread as I could want.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Carey Carlan > wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in news:iohd39$prp$1
:
>
>> Carey Carlan > wrote:
>>>
>>>When I substituted the omnis, the sound opened up and mixed better. I'm
>>>not referring to post-processing mixing in the studio. I refer to the
>>>blend of left and right in the two microphones. While it was less
>>>defined that the supercardioid sound, it added atmosphere that I can't
>>>add with synthetic reverb and it had a stereo definition I couldn't get
>>>with ambient mics in that room.
>>
>> Try the Jecklin Disc. You know you want to.
>
>In a heartbeat at a recording session. But this was a concert with a mic
>stand front and center. That big fuzzy pizza on a stick would have
>attracted too much attention.
>
>With the capsules at extreme angles and 18" apart I get a surprising amount
>of stereo field. For that matter, as close as I was to such a big group,
>that's probably as much spread as I could want.

I think the more omni the omnis are, the worse this works. You can get
nice results with more beamy omnis (like M-50s or something).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Carey Carlan wrote:

> With the capsules at extreme angles and 18" apart I get a surprising

distance makes sense, but I always keep omni's parallel so as to get the
same image of the rearmost center in both, otherwise the room sound to me
tends to split into a Y.

> amount of stereo field. For that matter, as close as I was to such a
> big group, that's probably as much spread as I could want.

Omni's vs. subcardioid vs. cardioid is very much about how much audience
and/or room noise is acceptable but also about depth clarity, some of the
time omni pairs work better for large ensembles than for small ensembles.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen