small opera production (about 25 instruments and piano all on the
stage), plus three vocalists out front who generally do not move
around on the stage. there is no sound reinforcement, just a live
performance. no vocal mics are to be placed on the stage. how can i
best capture something like this and give some presence to the vocal
parts? i've got dpa 4011s, akg c481s, some dpa omnis, and 8 channels
of HV3 pres. thanks.

In article ,
jnorman wrote:
small opera production (about 25 instruments and piano all on the
stage), plus three vocalists out front who generally do not move
around on the stage. there is no sound reinforcement, just a live
performance. no vocal mics are to be placed on the stage. how can i
best capture something like this and give some presence to the vocal
parts? i've got dpa 4011s, akg c481s, some dpa omnis, and 8 channels
of HV3 pres. thanks.

Put a mike pair where you get a good balance of vocal and orchestra.

If they truly don't move much (as in a recital situation) and you want
more vocal presence, a Jecklin disc might be a good choice. But it will
exaggerate the soundfield on stage compared with an ORTF pair pulled back.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

jnorman wrote:
small opera production (about 25 instruments and piano all on the
stage), plus three vocalists out front who generally do not move
around on the stage. there is no sound reinforcement, just a live
performance. no vocal mics are to be placed on the stage. how can i
best capture something like this and give some presence to the vocal
parts? i've got dpa 4011s, akg c481s, some dpa omnis, and 8 channels
of HV3 pres. thanks.

If you are recording a small opera production you should not be looking to
'give presence' above what is there naturally. I would suggest the purist
way would be a single stereo pair, or M/S.

geoff

You know, when I saw the subject line I thought this was going to be
something like the banjo-jokes thread.

Peace,
Paul

In article ,
Geoff Wood -nospam wrote:
jnorman wrote:
small opera production (about 25 instruments and piano all on the
stage), plus three vocalists out front who generally do not move
around on the stage. there is no sound reinforcement, just a live
performance. no vocal mics are to be placed on the stage. how can i
best capture something like this and give some presence to the vocal
parts? i've got dpa 4011s, akg c481s, some dpa omnis, and 8 channels
of HV3 pres. thanks.

If you are recording a small opera production you should not be looking to
'give presence' above what is there naturally. I would suggest the purist
way would be a single stereo pair, or M/S.

I can give lots of presence with a single stereo pair. I can take it
away too. Damn, I love working 2-track.
--scott

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

the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence. he is concerned that i address
that specific issue. i was thinking of just an ORTF pair, but as
close to the stage front as i can get without undue visual intrusion.
this will still result in the vocals being interpreted as "part of the
ensemble" as opposed to "out front" like you might hear them in a TV
broadcast where they use vocal mics. would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

On 20 Jul 2004 10:50:26 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

In article ,
Geoff Wood -nospam wrote:
jnorman wrote:
small opera production (about 25 instruments and piano all on the
stage), plus three vocalists out front who generally do not move
around on the stage. there is no sound reinforcement, just a live
performance. no vocal mics are to be placed on the stage. how can i
best capture something like this and give some presence to the vocal
parts? i've got dpa 4011s, akg c481s, some dpa omnis, and 8 channels
of HV3 pres. thanks.

If you are recording a small opera production you should not be looking to
'give presence' above what is there naturally. I would suggest the purist
way would be a single stereo pair, or M/S.

I can give lots of presence with a single stereo pair. I can take it
away too. Damn, I love working 2-track.
--scott

-- In such a configuration, I would prefer a matched pair of
microphones, at some convenient opening angles, ORTF or so. Small
capsule ones, a kind of a Schoeps rail. How good is the Rode NT-4 (I'd
like it to use with the new Hi-MD, linear PCM mode, when it _finally_
will be available and if Sony wouldn't mess something up as usual)?

Edo Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

jnorman wrote:
the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence.

Well, the vocals probably didn't have much presence in the room, then.

I'm not a fan of the outrigger configurations, but I don't think you
will get any different balance between the orchestra and vocalists
with an ORTF pair than you will with the outrigger system.

he is concerned that i address
that specific issue. i was thinking of just an ORTF pair, but as
close to the stage front as i can get without undue visual intrusion.
this will still result in the vocals being interpreted as "part of the
ensemble" as opposed to "out front" like you might hear them in a TV
broadcast where they use vocal mics.

If you go with a Jecklin disc, you can get closer to the ensemble than
you can with an ORTF pair. Bring the ORTF pair in too close and everything
falls off onto the sides and your ambience goes away, but you can get the
Jecklin up really close without a problem.

You will _definitely_ have to spend some time fiddling around at a rehearsal,
though.

would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

Maybe. The problem is that if you do this, you will have very wildly
exaggerated imaging on stage because you're so close in with the tight
mikes. If a singer moves back and forth even a little bit, they will
sway around a lot in the stereo image. So you will have to collapse the
image on these in a little bit by panning them in. Also, of course, you
want to keep the orchestra out of them as much as possible.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

jnorman wrote:
the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence. he is concerned that i address
that specific issue. i was thinking of just an ORTF pair, but as
close to the stage front as i can get without undue visual intrusion.
this will still result in the vocals being interpreted as "part of the
ensemble" as opposed to "out front" like you might hear them in a TV
broadcast where they use vocal mics. would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

If he wants it to sound other than like a natural opera you may as well
give everybody a mic and mu,titrack it.

Or was he meaning 'presence' in an extremely subtle way, in which case it
comes down more to mic selection, method, and positioning.

Sorry, I can't help you with suggestions for that, but there are others here
who can.


geoff

In article writes:

-- In such a configuration, I would prefer a matched pair of
microphones, at some convenient opening angles, ORTF or so.

I supposed in an ideal world, we would all prefer matched pairs, but I
think that term is thrown around too frequently (both by those who
want them and those who claim to sell them). Unless they were
seriously mismatched in frequency response or polar pattern, I don't
think I could tell that they weren't "matched." Since they're pointed
in different directions and are somewhat directional, I'd expect the
two mics configured as a stereo pair to sound different anyway.

If they were mismatched in level, that's what the gain pots on the
preamp are for. It's no sin to have the knobs pointing at different
numbers if the recording sounds good.




--
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 he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence

How large is the performance space? Is the stage a proscenium type? At
30 feet its hardly surprising that there was little presence in the
vocals. With Opera, the trick is get the vocal/orchestral balance to
be 'satisfactory'.....however the singers will have one opinion about
this and the conductor another.

If the distance of the singers to the mic position is approx twice the
the distance of the orchestra to the mic position -you say the
orchestra is behind the singers- you'll achieve your goal of vocal
presence. To get more orchestra and less vocal raise the mics to a
higher position at the same distance.

would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

This could be a catasrophe of comb-filtering caused by reflections off
the stage. However, its used by many Opera Houses for archival
recordings.

Are you intending to hang the main mic pair? Its more work but you'll
get less complaints from the 'visual' people in the audience.

Good luck, it sounds like a fun project.

On 20 Jul 2004 18:49:15 -0400, (Mike Rivers)
wrote:


In article writes:

-- In such a configuration, I would prefer a matched pair of
microphones, at some convenient opening angles, ORTF or so.

I supposed in an ideal world, we would all prefer matched pairs, but I
think that term is thrown around too frequently (both by those who
want them and those who claim to sell them). Unless they were
seriously mismatched in frequency response or polar pattern, I don't
think I could tell that they weren't "matched." Since they're pointed
in different directions and are somewhat directional, I'd expect the
two mics configured as a stereo pair to sound different anyway.

If they were mismatched in level, that's what the gain pots on the
preamp are for. It's no sin to have the knobs pointing at different
numbers if the recording sounds good.


Hmm, sounds logically... I just noticed that I have first sugessted a
matched pair and then an ORTF placement. I expect from any serious
manufacturers that all their microphones of a certain type would have
tolerances tight enough to be "matched" so for spaced mics, this what
you Mike say would certainly apply.

Rode NT-4 is sold as a matched pair in a XY configuratin and thus it
should act as a coincident mic type. Here, "matching" could be of
advantage. The different story is, if one tries to record an opera
with such a pair only... XY requires a semicircle placed performers
at a not so great distance...

Recently, I purchased a CD of Heinz Franz Ignaz von Biber, "Missa
Salisburgensis", a giant Baroque work for 97 performers, singers
divided in 7 ensembles/choirs, organ etc., all recorded in a
cathedral. They used 48 mics, 6 mic preamp systems, recorder with 6
digital multitrack recorders and mixed down at a Yamaha digital mixer.

Listening to it, I have an impression that they are still lacking on
some mics extra; some choirs are edited/panned so they "appear"
suddently in the sound picture etc. Otherwise an impressive recording,
I just wanted to point out that recording such events in churches,
halls, etc. which everybody considers at being of an "excellent
acoustics", can be a real pain in the neck for anybody wanting to
record it properly and here, I would definitely stay at minimalistic
2-microphone technique.

Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

what's a Jecklin disk?

In article ,
xy wrote:
what's a Jecklin disk?

It's one of several baffled omni systems. The Schneider baffle and the
Schoeps sphere basically do the same thing: provide amplitude separation
between channels with an omni pair.

The original article discussing it is somewhere on http://www.josephson.com,
as is a good tutorial on general stereophony.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

(jnorman) wrote in message om...
the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence. he is concerned that i address
that specific issue. i was thinking of just an ORTF pair, but as
close to the stage front as i can get without undue visual intrusion.
this will still result in the vocals being interpreted as "part of the
ensemble" as opposed to "out front" like you might hear them in a TV
broadcast where they use vocal mics. would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

I'd suggest that the composer has heard other opera recordings that
have the "presence" he's looking for. It could be helpful to find out
what recordings/broadcasts he likes, and to the degree that that
micing translates to your environment, mimic that.

If, for example, he likes the New York Met broadcasts, check out how
they mic them and see if that will work for you. If my memory serves
me right, I believe many of the Met broadcasts were recorded with 5
Schoeps omnis (the collete versions) dropped from above at the lip of
the stage, with some ambience micing to capture the room.

Regarding your suggestion of placing some hyper/super cardioids at the
edge of the stage, I'd do it if I had the tracks. You can always NOT
use them if you have the option to mix in post.

I think my approach, without looking at a room diagram or stage plot,
would be to drop 3 omnis over and just in front of the vocals in a
sort of Decca Tree arrangement, plus a Jaecklin disc hung at an
appropriate location in front and above, plus 2 ambience mics, and a
"presence mic" on the lip of the stage (assuming the vocalists are
grouped close enough to fit in the pattern); my first choice being a
Neumann shotgun mic, and then a Sennheiser 415 shotgun, or an AKG
C-747, followed by a large element condenser with a hypercardioid
pattern (AKG 414 etc.), then followed with whatever you've got. Send
each mic to a separate channel of the recording format of your choice.

That gives you 2 entire setups, that you can select between for
"presence," and it will all fit on 8 tracks.

The Jaecklin pair is first choice. You can mix in the ambience mics if
you wish, and if you aren't getting enough "vocal presence," mix in
the vocal spot mic. If you are mixing in a DAW, you can "time align"
the vocal spot mic with the Jaecklin pair by measuring the distance
from the vocals to the main pair, and measuring the distance from the
vocals to the mic, and the mic to the pair. You want to "match" the
distance of the vocals to the stereo pair by delaying the presence mic
1 ms per foot. Listen first before futzing; if it sounds OK, it is OK.

The dropped omnis system is the second choice. Again, it's basically a
Decca Tree. Add ambience mics and presence mic to taste.

It might be overkill for your budget to pull this off and hang these
mics with their long cable runs. But, you'll look like a hero and
won't be leaving anything to chance.

Bob Singleton
Singleton Productions, Inc.

Bob Singleton wrote:

If, for example, he likes the New York Met broadcasts, check out how
they mic them and see if that will work for you. If my memory serves
me right, I believe many of the Met broadcasts were recorded with 5
Schoeps omnis (the collete versions) dropped from above at the lip of
the stage, with some ambience micing to capture the room.

Actually, I think those are cardioid AKGs on extension tubes, not Schoeps.
They are combined with shotguns in the proscenium and spotmikes all over
the orchestra. The overall effect is very artificial to my ears but
it comes across well on a table radio, which is the point.
--scott

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

On 21 Jul 2004 11:50:18 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

-------------8------------------------
Actually, I think those are cardioid AKGs on extension tubes, not Schoeps.
They are combined with shotguns
--- Interference mics? --Ow. How they're mixing in with the others?
in the proscenium and spotmikes all over
the orchestra. The overall effect is very artificial to my ears but
it comes across well on a table radio, which is the point.
--scott
Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia

The overall effect [of the Met miking} is very artificial to my ears,
but it comes across well on a table radio, which is the point.

Artificial in the sense of sounding "close-up" and lacking hall ambience, with
the balance thrown toward the singers? I'd agree. But at least it doesn't sound
highly colored, the way most commercial recordings do.

Edi Zubovic edi.zubovic[rem wrote:
On 21 Jul 2004 11:50:18 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

-------------8------------------------
Actually, I think those are cardioid AKGs on extension tubes, not Schoeps.
They are combined with shotguns

--- Interference mics? --Ow. How they're mixing in with the others?

With a Studer broadcast production console. The shotguns are basically
pointed at a couple spots downstage which aren't easily reached with the
footlight microphones. There isn't enough overlap for comb filtering to
be an issue, and they are constantly riding faders so they don't have a lot
of mikes open unless there is someone directly in front of them.

The vocal tone does change as someone moves upstage and is faded from the
shotguns to the footlight mikes, but the tone changes as they move upstage
anyway.

The system gives excellent voice intelligibility on a small table radio.
--scott


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

On 20 Jul 2004 08:13:17 -0700, (jnorman) wrote:

the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence. he is concerned that i address
that specific issue.

Ask the composer to play you an opera recording he likes. Maybe it
wasn't a live performance recording. If he wants lots of vocal
presence, suggest he sets up a session where you can record the show
the way he wants, with each singer (fairly) close-miced.

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

"jnorman" wrote in message
m

the last engineer who recorded for this composer used an M/S pair of
414s flanked by a pair of earthworks omnis, set up about 30 feet from
the stage, and the composer was not satisfied with the recording, as
he felt the vocals had no presence.

No surprise at all. Good mics, but minimalist-miced large productions are
virtually guaranteed to not have a strong vocal presence.

he is concerned that i address that specific issue.

The obvious way to increase presence is with vocal mics. In opera that
probably means wireless which has plenty of potential grief, not to mention
expense, of its own. Time for a rental?

i was thinking of just an ORTF pair,

Does ORTF have that much longer *reach* than M/S or X/Y? FWIW, I don't
think so.

but as
close to the stage front as i can get without undue visual intrusion.
this will still result in the vocals being interpreted as "part of the
ensemble" as opposed to "out front" like you might hear them in a TV
broadcast where they use vocal mics.

Right.

would a pair of hypers at stage
front, just peeking over the edge of the stage and aimed at the
vocalists, be a workable approach in case i need to enhance the vocals
a bit?

Consider this illustration:

http://www.crownaudio.com/mic_htm/tips/mictip2.htm

"Cardioid: "Heart-shaped" pattern that offers maximum rejection (null) at
the rear of the microphone."

The rear null is a good thing because it helps reject sound from the hall,
But, it does little for rejecting reverberation from the stage area itself.

"Hypercardioid: Has a narrower pickup pattern than supercardioid, but also
has more rear pickup than supercardioid. Note that there are two nulls."

The nice rear null is gone so reflections from the hall are up, and the
pickup pattern is only a little narrower. Not the sort of night-and-day
difference I think you are looking for.

It appears to me that the big payoff with hypercardioids is that they do a
better job of ignoring sources like stage monitors, which isn't your
problem.