Mike bar for Decca tree

[normanstrong]

Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
means of balancing the load.

Thanks,

Norm

[Eric K. Weber]

Look here....

http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html

Rgds:
Eric

"normanstrong" > wrote in message
news:fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51...
> Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
> tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> means of balancing the load.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norm
>
>

[Eric K. Weber]

Look here....

http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html

Rgds:
Eric

"normanstrong" > wrote in message
news:fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51...
> Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
> tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> means of balancing the load.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norm
>
>

[Don Pearce]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:08:40 -0500, "Eric K. Weber"
> wrote:

>Look here....
>
>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>
>Rgds:
>Eric

But the prices are some kind of joke, no?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[Don Pearce]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:08:40 -0500, "Eric K. Weber"
> wrote:

>Look here....
>
>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>
>Rgds:
>Eric

But the prices are some kind of joke, no?

d
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

[William Sommerwerck]

When an ordinary stereo mic bar is screwed onto a stand, some of the thread
protrudes through the hole. You might be able to attach a third adapter --
though be sure it's screwed down tightly.

[William Sommerwerck]

When an ordinary stereo mic bar is screwed onto a stand, some of the thread
protrudes through the hole. You might be able to attach a third adapter --
though be sure it's screwed down tightly.

[Jim Kollens]

<< Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
tree to a single mike stand? >>

Wes Dooley of AEA electronics.

[Jim Kollens]

<< Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
tree to a single mike stand? >>

Wes Dooley of AEA electronics.

[Richard Kuschel]

>Date: Sat, Sep 18, 2004 11:18 AM
>Message-id: >
>
>On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:08:40 -0500, "Eric K. Weber"
> wrote:
>
>>Look here....
>>
>>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>>
>>Rgds:
>>Eric
>
>But the prices are some kind of joke, no?
>
>d
>Pearce Consulting
>http://www.pearce.uk.com
>
>
>
>
>

If you had actually looked at one of these stands, you might still think it
somewhat expensive, but since it is designed to hold about $20,000 worth of
Neumann m-50 microphones above an orchestra, It isn't so bad.

Decca Tree array specifies these microphones, though others may be substituted
with varying results.

Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

[Richard Kuschel]

>Date: Sat, Sep 18, 2004 11:18 AM
>Message-id: >
>
>On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 12:08:40 -0500, "Eric K. Weber"
> wrote:
>
>>Look here....
>>
>>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>>
>>Rgds:
>>Eric
>
>But the prices are some kind of joke, no?
>
>d
>Pearce Consulting
>http://www.pearce.uk.com
>
>
>
>
>

If you had actually looked at one of these stands, you might still think it
somewhat expensive, but since it is designed to hold about $20,000 worth of
Neumann m-50 microphones above an orchestra, It isn't so bad.

Decca Tree array specifies these microphones, though others may be substituted
with varying results.

Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty

[Wayne]

>>
>>>Look here....
>>>
>>>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>>>
>>>Rgds:
>>>Eric
>>
>>But the prices are some kind of joke, no?
>>
>>d
>>Pearce Consulting
>>http://www.pearce.uk.com
>>
>>

Dig up a money can in the back yard. The mics you normally put on that tree
can run up some dollars from a safety standpoint.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

[Wayne]

>>
>>>Look here....
>>>
>>>http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>>>
>>>Rgds:
>>>Eric
>>
>>But the prices are some kind of joke, no?
>>
>>d
>>Pearce Consulting
>>http://www.pearce.uk.com
>>
>>

Dig up a money can in the back yard. The mics you normally put on that tree
can run up some dollars from a safety standpoint.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

[Scott Dorsey]

Jim Kollens > wrote:
><< Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
>tree to a single mike stand? >>
>
>Wes Dooley of AEA electronics.

As far as I know, the AEA one is the only commercial one out there. Most of
the folks I know doing Decca tree work have homebrews, mostly made from
one-inch iron pipe. It's not too difficult to make your own, and since the
spacing is constant and only the angle varies, it's really just a matter of
drilling and tapping.

Starbird also used to make one. I bet Manley still has the old tooling and can
turn one out, but it might be a good bit more expensive than the AEA.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Jim Kollens > wrote:
><< Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
>tree to a single mike stand? >>
>
>Wes Dooley of AEA electronics.

As far as I know, the AEA one is the only commercial one out there. Most of
the folks I know doing Decca tree work have homebrews, mostly made from
one-inch iron pipe. It's not too difficult to make your own, and since the
spacing is constant and only the angle varies, it's really just a matter of
drilling and tapping.

Starbird also used to make one. I bet Manley still has the old tooling and can
turn one out, but it might be a good bit more expensive than the AEA.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter B.]

"normanstrong" > wrote in message news:<fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51>...
> Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
> tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> means of balancing the load.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norm



I think it could be build using the Bogen triple mic t-bar as a start.
You would have to find some place that would sell you 25mm diameter
tubing to get the proper width you want. The rest of the parts could
probably be ordered from Bogen. It's sort of like playing with tinker
toys.

I'd have to search Bogen's expansive website to see if it could be
done. If it can, the stand would be solid as a rock, highly adjustable
and most likely under $200.

Peter

[Peter B.]

"normanstrong" > wrote in message news:<fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51>...
> Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a Decca
> tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> means of balancing the load.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Norm



I think it could be build using the Bogen triple mic t-bar as a start.
You would have to find some place that would sell you 25mm diameter
tubing to get the proper width you want. The rest of the parts could
probably be ordered from Bogen. It's sort of like playing with tinker
toys.

I'd have to search Bogen's expansive website to see if it could be
done. If it can, the stand would be solid as a rock, highly adjustable
and most likely under $200.

Peter

[Phil Brown]

>Starbird also used to make one.

Boy, there's a name from the past. Wen I worked at CBS we had a forest of those
things. What great stands.
Phil Brown

[Phil Brown]

>Starbird also used to make one.

Boy, there's a name from the past. Wen I worked at CBS we had a forest of those
things. What great stands.
Phil Brown

[Peter B.]

There is enough hardware here to put together a decca tree (not
including extra tubing):

http://www.micsupply.com/standaccessories.htm

Plus you will end up with a lot of parts that can be configured to do
just about any type of mic setup. All the tubing is aluminum. The mic
mounts are cast aluminum, machined where it needs to be. Good stuff.


It's not exactly low profile... but neither is a decca tree.


Peter

[Peter B.]

There is enough hardware here to put together a decca tree (not
including extra tubing):

http://www.micsupply.com/standaccessories.htm

Plus you will end up with a lot of parts that can be configured to do
just about any type of mic setup. All the tubing is aluminum. The mic
mounts are cast aluminum, machined where it needs to be. Good stuff.


It's not exactly low profile... but neither is a decca tree.


Peter

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I think it could be build using the Bogen triple mic t-bar as a start.
> You would have to find some place that would sell you 25mm diameter
> tubing to get the proper width you want. The rest of the parts could
> probably be ordered from Bogen. It's sort of like playing with tinker
> toys.

A Decca Tree is pretty big, a few feet between the microphones. I
don't think I'd want to put that on any normal sort of stand. Maybe
the Latch Lake Music one. But that's getting you well beyond the $200
range.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article > writes:

> I think it could be build using the Bogen triple mic t-bar as a start.
> You would have to find some place that would sell you 25mm diameter
> tubing to get the proper width you want. The rest of the parts could
> probably be ordered from Bogen. It's sort of like playing with tinker
> toys.

A Decca Tree is pretty big, a few feet between the microphones. I
don't think I'd want to put that on any normal sort of stand. Maybe
the Latch Lake Music one. But that's getting you well beyond the $200
range.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Phil Brown > wrote:
>>Starbird also used to make one.
>
>Boy, there's a name from the past. Wen I worked at CBS we had a forest of those
>things. What great stands.

Manley has the original Starbird pattern and they are still making the stands.
They are just just as solid as ever, but you don't even want to know what they
cost these days.

The Atlas stands used to come a near second, but the current Atlas stuff is
just flimsy junk.
--scott

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

[Scott Dorsey]

In article >,
Phil Brown > wrote:
>>Starbird also used to make one.
>
>Boy, there's a name from the past. Wen I worked at CBS we had a forest of those
>things. What great stands.

Manley has the original Starbird pattern and they are still making the stands.
They are just just as solid as ever, but you don't even want to know what they
cost these days.

The Atlas stands used to come a near second, but the current Atlas stuff is
just flimsy junk.
--scott

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

[normanstrong]

Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Thanks a bunch,

Norm Strong


"Eric K. Weber" > wrote in message
...
> Look here....
>
> http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>
> Rgds:
> Eric
>
> "normanstrong" > wrote in message
> news:fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51...
> > Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a
Decca
> > tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> > means of balancing the load.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Norm
> >
> >
>
>

[normanstrong]

Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Thanks a bunch,

Norm Strong


"Eric K. Weber" > wrote in message
...
> Look here....
>
> http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
>
> Rgds:
> Eric
>
> "normanstrong" > wrote in message
> news:fCZ2d.69195$D%.53693@attbi_s51...
> > Does anyone make an adapter to connect 3 mikes in the form of a
Decca
> > tree to a single mike stand? I imagine it would have to have some
> > means of balancing the load.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Norm
> >
> >
>
>

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
>Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
>mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
>will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Ummmm.... this sort of defeats the whole principle, doesn't it?
--scott


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

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
>Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
>mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
>will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Ummmm.... this sort of defeats the whole principle, doesn't it?
--scott


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

[hank alrich]

normanstrong wrote:

> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Why? A PZM is not a pressure zone mic without the plate. Why not use
some little omni instead? Why rip the plates off of a PZM just to make a
small omni?

--
ha

[hank alrich]

normanstrong wrote:

> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.

Why? A PZM is not a pressure zone mic without the plate. Why not use
some little omni instead? Why rip the plates off of a PZM just to make a
small omni?

--
ha

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich > wrote:
>normanstrong wrote:
>
>> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
>> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
>> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.
>
>Why? A PZM is not a pressure zone mic without the plate. Why not use
>some little omni instead? Why rip the plates off of a PZM just to make a
>small omni?

In fact, if it's a real Crown PZM, the top end response of the capsule is
specifically rolled off to compensate for the high end rise when it's mounted
on the plate, so it will make a pretty poor small omni by itself anyway.

BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree anyway, it
is sort of academic.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich > wrote:
>normanstrong wrote:
>
>> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
>> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The mikes
>> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.
>
>Why? A PZM is not a pressure zone mic without the plate. Why not use
>some little omni instead? Why rip the plates off of a PZM just to make a
>small omni?

In fact, if it's a real Crown PZM, the top end response of the capsule is
specifically rolled off to compensate for the high end rise when it's mounted
on the plate, so it will make a pretty poor small omni by itself anyway.

BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree anyway, it
is sort of academic.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[normanstrong]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> hank alrich > wrote:
> >normanstrong wrote:
> >
> >> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
> >> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The
mikes
> >> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.
>
> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
anyway, it
> is sort of academic.

Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

Norm Strong

[normanstrong]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> hank alrich > wrote:
> >normanstrong wrote:
> >
> >> Excellent! Since I'll be using very light weight small diaphragm
> >> mikes I should be able to get away with stand mounting. The
mikes
> >> will actually be PZMs with the metal plates removed.
>
> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
anyway, it
> is sort of academic.

Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

Norm Strong

[Bob Smith]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote:

> Manley has the original Starbird pattern and they are still making the
stands.
> They are just just as solid as ever, but you don't even want to know what
they
> cost these days.
>
> The Atlas stands used to come a near second, but the current Atlas stuff
is
> just flimsy junk.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Most mic stands in general seem to be junk. There are a few exceptions. I
started using Avenger lighting stands and booms. Much better though a lot
heavier. Big mics stay in position.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
http://www.bsstudios.com
we organize chaos

[Bob Smith]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote:

> Manley has the original Starbird pattern and they are still making the
stands.
> They are just just as solid as ever, but you don't even want to know what
they
> cost these days.
>
> The Atlas stands used to come a near second, but the current Atlas stuff
is
> just flimsy junk.
> --scott
>
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Most mic stands in general seem to be junk. There are a few exceptions. I
started using Avenger lighting stands and booms. Much better though a lot
heavier. Big mics stay in position.

bobs

Bob Smith
BS Studios
http://www.bsstudios.com
we organize chaos

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
Scott Dorsey writes:
>>
>> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
>anyway, it
>> is sort of academic.
>
>Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
>tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

Because you won't get any amplitude differences between channels, just
exaggerated phase differences. What makes a Decca tree work the way it
does is the directionality at high frequencies that you get from the M-50.

The original idea of the Decca tree was to use the beaminess of the M-50
to your advantage, and it does so very well. But it does not work very
well with mikes that have significantly different characteristics.
--scott


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

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
Scott Dorsey writes:
>>
>> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
>anyway, it
>> is sort of academic.
>
>Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
>tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

Because you won't get any amplitude differences between channels, just
exaggerated phase differences. What makes a Decca tree work the way it
does is the directionality at high frequencies that you get from the M-50.

The original idea of the Decca tree was to use the beaminess of the M-50
to your advantage, and it does so very well. But it does not work very
well with mikes that have significantly different characteristics.
--scott


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

[Mike Rivers]

In article <jBh4d.90618$D%.43447@attbi_s51> writes:

> Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

The Decca Tree mic arrangement doesn't follow any particular rules but
just happens to work because of the pattern characteristics of the
Neumann M50 that makes three mics a few feet apart in a triangle a
"Decca Tree." Anything else is just three mics a few feet apart with
the associated phase problems. Nothing special.

You may be able to rig something with partially absorbent baffles to
approximiate the high frequency directivity of the M50. If it works
for you, name it the Norm Tree. (or something)

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Mike Rivers]

In article <jBh4d.90618$D%.43447@attbi_s51> writes:

> Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> tree? I really need to know. Thanks,

The Decca Tree mic arrangement doesn't follow any particular rules but
just happens to work because of the pattern characteristics of the
Neumann M50 that makes three mics a few feet apart in a triangle a
"Decca Tree." Anything else is just three mics a few feet apart with
the associated phase problems. Nothing special.

You may be able to rig something with partially absorbent baffles to
approximiate the high frequency directivity of the M50. If it works
for you, name it the Norm Tree. (or something)

--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

[Kurt Albershardt]

normanstrong wrote:
>
> Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> tree? I really need to know.

Because small omnis have truly omni polar patterns, even at high frequencies. The Decca Tree works by taking advantage of the HF beaminess of the sphere-mounted moni in an M50.

Josephson and Schoeps both sell add-on spheres for use with small (but not fractured PZM small) omnis. Think 20-22mm diameter bodies.

[Kurt Albershardt]

normanstrong wrote:
>
> Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> tree? I really need to know.

Because small omnis have truly omni polar patterns, even at high frequencies. The Decca Tree works by taking advantage of the HF beaminess of the sphere-mounted moni in an M50.

Josephson and Schoeps both sell add-on spheres for use with small (but not fractured PZM small) omnis. Think 20-22mm diameter bodies.

[normanstrong]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> normanstrong > wrote:
> Scott Dorsey writes:
> >>
> >> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
> >anyway, it
> >> is sort of academic.
> >
> >Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> >tree? I really need to know. Thanks,
>
> Because you won't get any amplitude differences between channels,
just
> exaggerated phase differences. What makes a Decca tree work the way
it
> does is the directionality at high frequencies that you get from the
M-50.
>
> The original idea of the Decca tree was to use the beaminess of the
M-50
> to your advantage, and it does so very well. But it does not work
very
> well with mikes that have significantly different characteristics.

Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.
It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
of arrival cues.

Norm

[normanstrong]

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote in message
...
> normanstrong > wrote:
> Scott Dorsey writes:
> >>
> >> BUT, since a small omni won't work worth a damn in a Decca tree
> >anyway, it
> >> is sort of academic.
> >
> >Now you have my attention. Why won't small omnis work in a Decca
> >tree? I really need to know. Thanks,
>
> Because you won't get any amplitude differences between channels,
just
> exaggerated phase differences. What makes a Decca tree work the way
it
> does is the directionality at high frequencies that you get from the
M-50.
>
> The original idea of the Decca tree was to use the beaminess of the
M-50
> to your advantage, and it does so very well. But it does not work
very
> well with mikes that have significantly different characteristics.

Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.
It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
of arrival cues.

Norm

[Benjamin Maas]

"normanstrong" > wrote in message ...
>
> Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
> so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
> facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.
> It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
> of arrival cues.
>
> Norm

When I set up a decca tree, I face the side mics slightly forward, but
mostly outward. The front mic is positioned straight ahead. With standard
omnis that lack the beaminess, you don't end up with the exaggerated timing
differences between microphones. Low frequencies on the M50 are quite
omni-directional, but as you go higher in frequency, you get more
directionality.

The higher frequency information is what will often give us the directional
information in a stereo configuration. With a lack of directionality on a
good set of omnis, all frequencies are going to all microphones and
therefore you loose some of your imaging. If you are effectively cutting
off certain parts of the sound from certain microphones, you'll end up with
a much better image.

I can't afford a set of M50's (or even M150's) so I've had good luck with
the Schoeps MK21 capsule for decca tree work. I find that while it is an
approximation of the pattern in an M50, they are one of the closer mics out
there to the pattern I'd want.

--Ben

--
Benjamin Maas
Fifth Circle Audio
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.fifthcircle.com

Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies

[Benjamin Maas]

"normanstrong" > wrote in message ...
>
> Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
> so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
> facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.
> It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
> of arrival cues.
>
> Norm

When I set up a decca tree, I face the side mics slightly forward, but
mostly outward. The front mic is positioned straight ahead. With standard
omnis that lack the beaminess, you don't end up with the exaggerated timing
differences between microphones. Low frequencies on the M50 are quite
omni-directional, but as you go higher in frequency, you get more
directionality.

The higher frequency information is what will often give us the directional
information in a stereo configuration. With a lack of directionality on a
good set of omnis, all frequencies are going to all microphones and
therefore you loose some of your imaging. If you are effectively cutting
off certain parts of the sound from certain microphones, you'll end up with
a much better image.

I can't afford a set of M50's (or even M150's) so I've had good luck with
the Schoeps MK21 capsule for decca tree work. I find that while it is an
approximation of the pattern in an M50, they are one of the closer mics out
there to the pattern I'd want.

--Ben

--
Benjamin Maas
Fifth Circle Audio
Los Angeles, CA
http://www.fifthcircle.com

Please remove "Nospam" from address for replies

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
>
>
>Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
>so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
>facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.

They are toed-out, a varying amount depending on the room.

>It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
>of arrival cues.

If you depend only on time of arrival cues, you get great imaging below
around 1KC or so, and no imaging above that range. Your brain can't sort
out phase differences at high frequencies, so you need to preserve intensity
differences as well as phase differences in order to get a complete soundstage.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

normanstrong > wrote:
>
>
>Interesting. Is it true that the M-50's were all facing forward? If
>so, I fail to see how the beaminess will work. Or are the mikes
>facing outwards? Perhaps I should read up a bit more on the subject.

They are toed-out, a varying amount depending on the room.

>It was my understanding that the Decca tree depended strictly on time
>of arrival cues.

If you depend only on time of arrival cues, you get great imaging below
around 1KC or so, and no imaging above that range. Your brain can't sort
out phase differences at high frequencies, so you need to preserve intensity
differences as well as phase differences in order to get a complete soundstage.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Benjamin Maas > wrote:
>
>I can't afford a set of M50's (or even M150's) so I've had good luck with
>the Schoeps MK21 capsule for decca tree work. I find that while it is an
>approximation of the pattern in an M50, they are one of the closer mics out
>there to the pattern I'd want.

I actually was surprised at how well the 1" B&K measurement mikes work. With
a ball around them, they are beamy enough to be surprisingly effective. Have
you ever tried any of the Gefell stuff? I have heard some of their large
diaphragm omnis used in a Decca tree and it sounded very close to the classic
Decca sound.
--scott

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

[Scott Dorsey]

Benjamin Maas > wrote:
>
>I can't afford a set of M50's (or even M150's) so I've had good luck with
>the Schoeps MK21 capsule for decca tree work. I find that while it is an
>approximation of the pattern in an M50, they are one of the closer mics out
>there to the pattern I'd want.

I actually was surprised at how well the 1" B&K measurement mikes work. With
a ball around them, they are beamy enough to be surprisingly effective. Have
you ever tried any of the Gefell stuff? I have heard some of their large
diaphragm omnis used in a Decca tree and it sounded very close to the classic
Decca sound.
--scott

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