I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it. I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?
What microphones have been found to be good for this? I have a KSM44 on my
short wish list, which would give me a figure-8 pattern, but buying two of
them would mean sacrificing some other goodies....

Life is full of hard choices, but the ones about which microphones to buy
seem harder than normal.

Cheers,
Walt

WJ wrote:
I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it. I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?
What microphones have been found to be good for this? I have a KSM44 on my
short wish list, which would give me a figure-8 pattern, but buying two of
them would mean sacrificing some other goodies....

If the mikes are mismatched, the response will change as you move to the
edge of the soundfield. That's not always a bad thing. Using a condenser
mike as the center and a ribbon figure-8 can give you reduced hall ambience
at high frequencies and still an okay image up front.

Try it.

Life is full of hard choices, but the ones about which microphones to buy
seem harder than normal.

Spend all your money on two good small diaphragm multipattern mikes and
stop worrying so much.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 5 Sep 2005 13:22:51 -0400, in rec.audio.pro (Scott
Dorsey) wrote:

WJ wrote:
I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it. I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?
What microphones have been found to be good for this? I have a KSM44 on my
short wish list, which would give me a figure-8 pattern, but buying two of
them would mean sacrificing some other goodies....

If the mikes are mismatched, the response will change as you move to the
edge of the soundfield. That's not always a bad thing. Using a condenser
mike as the center and a ribbon figure-8 can give you reduced hall ambience
at high frequencies and still an okay image up front.

Try it.

Life is full of hard choices, but the ones about which microphones to buy
seem harder than normal.

Spend all your money on two good small diaphragm multipattern mikes and
stop worrying so much.
--scott
I'm waiting until the Oktava MK-012 has a fig 8 capsule. Hope it's not
too long from now


martin

martin griffith wrote:
I'm waiting until the Oktava MK-012 has a fig 8 capsule. Hope it's not
too long from now

I doubt it'll happen. It is very, very difficult to make a good small
diaphragm figure-8. Schoeps is the only company that I know of that has
actually succeeded in it. (Sennheiser made one in their MKH series, but
with even more goofy tricks than usual).

Now that McKay is selling these Chinese-made Oktava clones under the
Oktava name, the Tula factory guys are probably tearing their hair out
just trying to deal with that, let alone actually make any new products.

And there is _no_ chance that anything like that is going to come from
McKay's clone folks.
--scott

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

On 9/5/05 12:33 PM, in article
, "WJ"
wrote:

I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it.

And in this scenario, It's All New and you can;t lose!

I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?
What microphones have been found to be good for this? I have a KSM44 on my
short wish list, which would give me a figure-8 pattern, but buying two of
them would mean sacrificing some other goodies....

Life is full of hard choices, but the ones about which microphones to buy
seem harder than normal.

This one;s easy.. Buy the 44 (a no-lose proposition any way you look at it)
And get a decent cardioid and a decent omni. (AKG 535 and a SHURE SM11?)
You won;t be able to do Blumlien but that's ok for now...

I've done MS with everything from a Neumann Sm69 (two multipattern Neumann
mics on one head), to an AT 4050 with a 451-omni strapped to it, down to a
Reslo and a 57. You can get picky later as you learn to hear the details And
play with it: They all WORK, and when you;re trying it out new it's just
friggin amazing to hear it work at ALL.

Go
Buy
Enjoy...

On 9/5/05 1:22 PM, in article , "Scott Dorsey"
wrote:

WJ wrote:
I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it. I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?
What microphones have been found to be good for this? I have a KSM44 on my
short wish list, which would give me a figure-8 pattern, but buying two of
them would mean sacrificing some other goodies....

If the mikes are mismatched, the response will change as you move to the
edge of the soundfield. That's not always a bad thing. Using a condenser
mike as the center and a ribbon figure-8 can give you reduced hall ambience
at high frequencies and still an okay image up front.

Try it.

Life is full of hard choices, but the ones about which microphones to buy
seem harder than normal.

Spend all your money on two good small diaphragm multipattern mikes and
stop worrying so much.

Whatever happened to the SD AKG stereo mics?

A small-diaphragm AKG stereo model C 34 was sold during the 1980s,
alongside the large-diaphragm C 422. I don't remember seeing anything
more recent than that, though.

On 9/5/05 4:47 PM, in article
, "David Satz"
wrote:

A small-diaphragm AKG stereo model C 34 was sold during the 1980s,
alongside the large-diaphragm C 422. I don't remember seeing anything
more recent than that, though.

There were two flavors of the SD.. One was a twist-top dual multipattern
capsule model.
The other was essentially two CK1 capsules in a twist-top mount for
adjustable XY.

Martin is right about the quality of Schoeps - but if you have less
money, there is a figure of 8 in the AKG Blueline range.

Al

and the KM120 from Neumann is a Schoeps alternative. It is a single
diaphram capsule, also, like the Schoeps.

wrote:
Martin is right about the quality of Schoeps - but if you have less
money, there is a figure of 8 in the AKG Blueline range.

It's awful, though. It gets really bizarre off-axis, and with M-S
miking, almost everything is off-axis. That's one of the mikes I
was thinking of when I said nobody else made a good one.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

David Spearritt wrote:
and the KM120 from Neumann is a Schoeps alternative. It is a single
diaphram capsule, also, like the Schoeps.

Again, compare the off-axis response of the KM140 with the KM120, and
it's shocking. The KM120 doesn't even really have that solid a null.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Thanks for the information and encouragement, everyone. If I accidently
invent any revolutionalry new techniques while I'm messing around, I'll let
you know g.

Cheers,
Walt

WJ wrote:
I've never tried M-S micing, and would like to experiment with it. I'm
wondering about the mics used for this. Is it standard practice to use a
matched set of multi-pattern mics, or are mis-matched mics sometimes used?

They are, but I wouldn't recommend it if you have the
multi's available. The reason is that MS mismatch results
in a frequency dependant logical angle between the LR from
the matrix. A broadband sound, anything percussive for
example, from off axis can get seriously spatially smeared
because of this. I've definitely heard this with drums to
the side. Localization can be terrible.

This will be true to some extent even if using a multi but
it would seem to be less so. Perhaps not because matching
may well disappear with different patterns.

For this reason, I think matched XY is the best coincident
approach.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

WJ wrote:
Thanks for the information and encouragement, everyone. If I accidently
invent any revolutionalry new techniques while I'm messing around, I'll let
you know g.

If you have three channels available, three pencil cardiods
that are matched can give the best MS results. Face one
forward, face one to the left above it and one to the right
below it, all three diaphragms on the same vertical
centerline. Use the forward as M and the difference between
the two sides as S.

Then

L = M + (LS - RS)

R = M - (LS - RS)

On the horizontal plane you will have TOA coherence and no
comb filtering. The matching will give reasonably frequency
independant localization enhanced by the close symmetery of
LS and RS. Not exactly, but about the best you can do.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein

Not sure what response curves you are looking at Scott, but the KM120
has fantastic constant frequency independent uniform directivity all
the way through 8K, and 16K still has an absolute null. It is much more
consistent and independent of frequency than the KM140.
http://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics...?ProdID=km100#

David Spearritt wrote:
Not sure what response curves you are looking at Scott, but the KM120
has fantastic constant frequency independent uniform directivity all
the way through 8K, and 16K still has an absolute null. It is much more
consistent and independent of frequency than the KM140.
http://www.neumann.com/infopool/mics...?ProdID=km100#

Listen to it. Record someone in the near field talking into the side
of the mike and into the front. Then try the same thing with a U87.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Done this many times. I have 2 KM120's used in Blumlein often. The
directivity, uniformity, and nulls beats a U87 hands down, which I also
have. The KM120 FR curve specs for null necking are superior to the MK8
at 16kHz as well. You must have heard a crook one.

David Spearritt wrote:
Done this many times. I have 2 KM120's used in Blumlein often. The
directivity, uniformity, and nulls beats a U87 hands down, which I also
have. The KM120 FR curve specs for null necking are superior to the MK8
at 16kHz as well. You must have heard a crook one.

I'll give it a try again, then. I was not at all impressed with the thing
when I used it, but admittedly that was quite a few years ago. My experience
with it was that the null changed position with frequency a lot.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."