[Peter Gemmell]

Tomorrow I'm starting to record a harp quartet. A few months ago I
asked a question here about this project and received lots of great
suggestions. As promised here's the set up I'm going with. The group
will be set up in a semi(or 1/3) circle. I'm going to try a couple
stereo options. A/B omni about a foot apart, ORTF or similar. The mics
I have are 2 Octava mc-012's with all the attachments. These will go
to a Grace m201 preamp, then an RME Fireface 400 into a laptop. The
hall we'll be in is a church that is A shaped. It has a strange
sounding reverb. I'll want to minimize the room as much as possible,
so will likely get closer to the group than I otherwise would want to.
The group has only heard of one Harp Quartet recording, by the Venice
Harp Quartet. Do any of you know of other recordings?

Thanks Much,
Pete

[Scott Dorsey]

Peter Gemmell wrote:
Tomorrow I'm starting to record a harp quartet. A few months ago I
asked a question here about this project and received lots of great
suggestions. As promised here's the set up I'm going with. The group
will be set up in a semi(or 1/3) circle. I'm going to try a couple
stereo options. A/B omni about a foot apart, ORTF or similar.

Umm... ORTF is a coincident cardioid thing, not a thing you can do with
omnis. And A/B omni with one-foot spacing is also called "mono."

The mics
I have are 2 Octava mc-012's with all the attachments. These will go
to a Grace m201 preamp, then an RME Fireface 400 into a laptop. The
hall we'll be in is a church that is A shaped. It has a strange
sounding reverb. I'll want to minimize the room as much as possible,
so will likely get closer to the group than I otherwise would want to.
The group has only heard of one Harp Quartet recording, by the Venice
Harp Quartet. Do any of you know of other recordings?

If you're talking about concert harps and not smaller harps, the bad news
is that they really are very quiet, and on top of that the lowest string
on them is really pretty low, so you can't just filter off the low end
to reduce noise.

Do you have to use the main hall in the church? Is there a a fellowship
hall, or an area in the narthex where you can move them? My guess is that
you're going to have to get in way too close in order to avoid the room
problems and get good S/N, which is never a pleasant thing to do.
--scott

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

[Roy W. Rising[_2_]]

Peter Gemmell wrote:
Tomorrow I'm starting to record a harp quartet. A few months ago I
asked a question here about this project and received lots of great
suggestions. As promised here's the set up I'm going with. The group
will be set up in a semi(or 1/3) circle. I'm going to try a couple
stereo options. A/B omni about a foot apart, ORTF or similar. The mics
I have are 2 Octava mc-012's with all the attachments. These will go
to a Grace m201 preamp, then an RME Fireface 400 into a laptop. The
hall we'll be in is a church that is A shaped. It has a strange
sounding reverb. I'll want to minimize the room as much as possible,
so will likely get closer to the group than I otherwise would want to.
The group has only heard of one Harp Quartet recording, by the Venice
Harp Quartet. Do any of you know of other recordings?

Thanks Much,
Pete

I would use a crossed pair of EV RE15s (supercardioids) lying on the hard
stage floor, head-to-head, angled about 90 degrees apart. I would place
them about 2/3 as far away from group as the group is wide. If it's
necessary to minimize telegraphed sound from the floor, I'd use a 12" x 12"
piece of tile on a carpet scrap or thin foam. I have used this method with
great success for choral groups and string quartets.

Of course, your choice of mics can be different, but the technique works.
With crossed cardioids, the angle might increase to about 120 degrees.

Just remember, the reflection off of the floor is either your friend or
your hidden enemy. It's friendly only if the mics are as close to the
reflector as physically possible.

--
~ Roy
"If you notice the sound, it's wrong!"

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

Peter Gemmell wrote:
Tomorrow I'm starting to record a harp quartet. A few months ago I
asked a question here about this project and received lots of great
suggestions. As promised here's the set up I'm going with. The group
will be set up in a semi(or 1/3) circle. I'm going to try a couple
stereo options. A/B omni about a foot apart, ORTF or similar.

Umm... ORTF is a coincident cardioid thing, not a thing you can do with
omnis. And A/B omni with one-foot spacing is also called "mono."

Well, about four and two thirds inches more separation and you'll have something
close to 50cm A/B stereo, and that technique can produce a very accurate image of
what's on stage left to right, as well as giving quite a bit front to back. How much
depends on HF directivity of the mics, and how much splay you have.

The HF pattern with mics like that will be something of a wild card, to be sure. I
hope the 012s work for you. Do they have Scott's mods? If not, I'd be slightly
nervous. Not freaked out, but cautious.

As far as AB, you can also get pretty close to the group, get a good sound, and
still have some far field pickup to add some space and depth -- how much you want or
that's usable depends on just how bad the room might be.

But as you get close with any technique, be *very careful* about balance. Make sure
all the harps are being heard as they should be, since it doesn't sound like you're
running spot mics (which might save your bacon in this situation). And, the closer
you are, the less chance there is for an acoustical blend to emerge. But then, that
pesky room rears its head again...

Still, given that many (but not all) mics are "better" in omni, I might be tempted
to start with AB, given the subtleties, richness, and "internal note space" of the
harp. By that I mean the harp is one of those instruments with a sound that you can
almost "walk through", somewhat like walking through mist. It'd be good to preserve
that. Bad mics are not your friend. Glad to see you're using the Grace, though. It's
lack of various forms of coloring distortion should help with this, unless it
reveals too much about the mic quality or room. But, hopefully you'll be okay.


If the room is quirky, consider taking several moving pads or heavy blankets, along
with extra mic stands with booms. If you're hearing odd echos or slaps, you can
carefully place a "panel" or two of material on a boom stand set up as a "T" behind
or to the sides of the group. Go as high as the stands will go, don't worry if
there's a foot or so on the bottom that's open.

Careful you don't overdo it, but such tricks can help in a pinch if you've got some
directed echo issues.

Finally, be sure you monitor either in another room, or listen to playback very
carefully while the group is not playing. Any "live" spill from the acoustic sound
of the harps blended with your headphone signal might really throw you, and this is
one situation that calls for pretty good monitoring.

Good luck with it,

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns wrote:
Umm... ORTF is a coincident cardioid thing, not a thing you can do with
omnis. And A/B omni with one-foot spacing is also called "mono."

Well, about four and two thirds inches more separation and you'll have something
close to 50cm A/B stereo, and that technique can produce a very accurate image of
what's on stage left to right, as well as giving quite a bit front to back. How much
depends on HF directivity of the mics, and how much splay you have.

Yes, that actually works pretty well with 414s, because it relies on the
omnis not really being very omni. It can be an interesting choice if you
have to get up close to a source for political or mechanical reasons, or
to deal with room noise.

The HF pattern with mics like that will be something of a wild card, to be sure. I
hope the 012s work for you. Do they have Scott's mods? If not, I'd be slightly
nervous. Not freaked out, but cautious.

The new 012s have pretty much incorporated everything that I did, and if you
buy a brand new one right now you can be assured that it has a quiet Toshiba
front end FET. On the other hand, if you get an old one that GC sold a few
years back, you can find all kinds of screwy stuff in there.

As far as AB, you can also get pretty close to the group, get a good sound, and
still have some far field pickup to add some space and depth -- how much you want or
that's usable depends on just how bad the room might be.

But as you get close with any technique, be *very careful* about balance. Make sure
all the harps are being heard as they should be, since it doesn't sound like you're
running spot mics (which might save your bacon in this situation). And, the closer
you are, the less chance there is for an acoustical blend to emerge. But then, that
pesky room rears its head again...

This is the best advice you will ever get.

I am not a fan of A-B miking at all, but sometimes it is your only choice
when you are forced to get in very close. And sometimes a center mike is
needed when you do that.

Still, given that many (but not all) mics are "better" in omni, I might be tempted
to start with AB, given the subtleties, richness, and "internal note space" of the
harp. By that I mean the harp is one of those instruments with a sound that you can
almost "walk through", somewhat like walking through mist. It'd be good to preserve
that. Bad mics are not your friend. Glad to see you're using the Grace, though. It's
lack of various forms of coloring distortion should help with this, unless it
reveals too much about the mic quality or room. But, hopefully you'll be okay.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Roy W. Rising wrote:

Just remember, the reflection off of the floor is either your friend
or your hidden enemy. It's friendly only if the mics are as close to
the reflector as physically possible.

I have begun placing whatever pillowy stuff I can find on the floor around
the mic stand if a non-audience recording, seems to clean up the
perspective. And always get the mic stand off of any symmetry axis of
anything that can focus sound, even if only by a few inches.

trade secret

_Never_ allow a vocalist to sing on a buildings mid line, also ask ensembles
to set up with their center one foot off axis if at all possible.

/trade secret

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Frank Stearns]

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

I am not a fan of A-B miking at all, but sometimes it is your only choice
when you are forced to get in very close. And sometimes a center mike is
needed when you do that.

You've got me curious, Scott. What aspect of AB doesn't seem to work in your
experience?

There are many configurations of AB, of course; the one I use is at 50 cm, KM183s
with diffraction spheres (home brew; $200 each for Neumann's seems silly), 100
degree splay, 10-25 degree up angle, typically 12-15 feet up in the air, fairly
close to the group (exactly where depends on the group size and room).

With this setup, the imaging is deadly accurate and can be startling in its realism,
left/right & front/back. The low end extension on the 183s is really good to have. I
enjoy getting the best of both worlds (immediacy because of the proximity to the
group plus "depth and size" from the room). Love those omnis (even if the spheres
have made them slightly less so)!

Part of the secret is use of the spheres; without them the stereo field is indeed a
little murky and less "outlined" in a way.

In the same rooms with the same groups I've used ORTF (17 cm, 120 degrees),
mid-side, and NOS (30 cm, 90 degrees). Also with some number of spots, depending on
the performers, room, and program.

The AB always seems to win out, though I will often use an ORTF pair 1-3 feet down
the stick to supplement it if I'm not sure just how immediate the sound should be
until post. The ORTF lets me "reach in" to the group. Combined with the AB signal in
the right amount, that can be very useful.

Did one of my best ever orchestral recordings last night (classical, baroque, and
"weird modern" configutations); solo spots and rear LCR mics (because sometimes that
stage can get dead upstage). Except for the solos, looks like I hit the sweet spot
with the ABs, for much of the program that will be all I use other than the solos
(and not all that much of them).

Anyway. Just curious what you've run into. Maybe I've not hit the right set of
gotchas yet; getting a forewarning is good!

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Frank Stearns]

"Peter Larsen" writes:

Roy W. Rising wrote:

Just remember, the reflection off of the floor is either your friend
or your hidden enemy. It's friendly only if the mics are as close to
the reflector as physically possible.

I have begun placing whatever pillowy stuff I can find on the floor around
the mic stand if a non-audience recording, seems to clean up the
perspective. And always get the mic stand off of any symmetry axis of
anything that can focus sound, even if only by a few inches.

trade secret

_Never_ allow a vocalist to sing on a buildings mid line, also ask ensembles
to set up with their center one foot off axis if at all possible.

/trade secret


This is interesting... What size rooms are we talking about? How far, approximately,
to the ceiling? Side walls? Back wall? Room shapes?

Thanks,
Frank
Mobile Audio









--

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Frank Stearns wrote:


This is interesting... What size rooms are we talking about? How far,
approximately, to the ceiling? Side walls? Back wall? Room shapes?

I'm at work, so I have to be terse: Applies for Holmens Church and for New
Carlsberg Glyptotek large hall as well as for anything with a vaulted or
otherwise focusing building structure and parallel opposing structures. Ie.
any building, especially with a focusing ceiling. Put a soprano in the
acoustic focal point of reflections and get a combfilting disaster that
sounds like clipping an input channel. There is a clue however: it will also
sound like that in the room, but the ears handle it better than mics do.

Thanks,
Frank
Mobile Audio

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Scott Dorsey]

Frank Stearns wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) writes:

I am not a fan of A-B miking at all, but sometimes it is your only choice
when you are forced to get in very close. And sometimes a center mike is
needed when you do that.

You've got me curious, Scott. What aspect of AB doesn't seem to work in your
experience?

The usual A-B miking, either with a wide triad or even with relatively narrow
spacing, gives a sense of depth that is very impressive but I just don't hear
in the original hall.

I have some customers who really like it, and I appreciate the sound of the
old Mercury Living Presence recordings, but the sense of space behind the
performers just sounds really exaggerated to me.

There are many configurations of AB, of course; the one I use is at 50 cm, KM183s
with diffraction spheres (home brew; $200 each for Neumann's seems silly), 100
degree splay, 10-25 degree up angle, typically 12-15 feet up in the air, fairly
close to the group (exactly where depends on the group size and room).

I'm not sure I would call that standard AB because you're clearly using the
directionality of the omnis to your advantage in this case.

Part of the secret is use of the spheres; without them the stereo field is indeed a
little murky and less "outlined" in a way.

Without them you wouldn't get any intensity imaging at all except at the highest
frequencies.

In the same rooms with the same groups I've used ORTF (17 cm, 120 degrees),
mid-side, and NOS (30 cm, 90 degrees). Also with some number of spots, depending on
the performers, room, and program.

Have you considered Jecklin Disc? I really like the system, because it gives
you good intensity imaging even down into the low midrange and it still lets
you use omnis. It seems more touchy about placement than widely spaced omnis
or ORTF though, but I think it may be somthing of a variation on the sort of
method you're using, except using the baffle instead of the balls to get your
directionality.

There are some other baffled methods like the Schoeps Sphere but in the long
run comparing them they all more or less seem to work about the same.

Anyway. Just curious what you've run into. Maybe I've not hit the right set of
gotchas yet; getting a forewarning is good!

I think what you're doing isn't really traditional A-B at all.... with
traditional widely spaced omnis there is intensity imaging because some
instruments are closer to one mike than the other, but the phase imaging
is totally absent because the phase differences between channels are so
wide that the brain can't do anything with them. With narrowly spaced
A-B, there is only phase imaging because the intensity at the microphones
are about the same, it's only arrival time differences between the two
that make the right and left channels different. What you're doing is
actually using omnis and making them directional at higher frequencies
to get both phase and amplitude differences, which is how it's supposed
to work.
--scott


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

[Peter Gemmell]

On May 9, 8:48*am, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Frank Stearns wrote:

(Scott Dorsey) writes:

I am not a fan of A-B miking at all, but sometimes it is your only choice
when you are forced to get in very close. *And sometimes a center mike is
needed when you do that.

You've got me curious, Scott. What aspect of AB doesn't seem to work in your
experience?

The usual A-B miking, either with a wide triad or even with relatively narrow
spacing, gives a sense of depth that is very impressive but I just don't hear
in the original hall.

I have some customers who really like it, and I appreciate the sound of the
old Mercury Living Presence recordings, but the sense of space behind the
performers just sounds really exaggerated to me.

There are many configurations of AB, of course; the one I use is at 50 cm, KM183s
with diffraction spheres (home brew; $200 each for Neumann's seems silly), 100
degree splay, 10-25 degree up angle, typically 12-15 feet up in the air, fairly
close to the group (exactly where depends on the group size and room).

I'm not sure I would call that standard AB because you're clearly using the
directionality of the omnis to your advantage in this case.

Part of the secret is use of the spheres; without them the stereo field is indeed a
little murky and less "outlined" in a way.

Without them you wouldn't get any intensity imaging at all except at the highest
frequencies.

In the same rooms with the same groups I've used ORTF (17 cm, 120 degrees),
mid-side, and NOS (30 cm, 90 degrees). Also with some number of spots, depending on
the performers, room, and program.

Have you considered Jecklin Disc? *I really like the system, because it gives
you good intensity imaging even down into the low midrange and it still lets
you use omnis. *It seems more touchy about placement than widely spaced omnis
or ORTF though, but I think it may be somthing of a variation on the sort of
method you're using, except using the baffle instead of the balls to get your
directionality.

There are some other baffled methods like the Schoeps Sphere but in the long
run comparing them they all more or less seem to work about the same.

Anyway. Just curious what you've run into. Maybe I've not hit the right set of
gotchas yet; getting a forewarning is good!

I think what you're doing isn't really traditional A-B at all.... with
traditional widely spaced omnis there is intensity imaging because some
instruments are closer to one mike than the other, but the phase imaging
is totally absent because the phase differences between channels are so
wide that the brain can't do anything with them. *With narrowly spaced
A-B, there is only phase imaging because the intensity at the microphones
are about the same, it's only arrival time differences between the two
that make the right and left channels different. *What you're doing is
actually using omnis and making them directional at higher frequencies
to get both phase and amplitude differences, which is how it's supposed
to work.
--scott

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

We tried a few techniques. XY, with hyper cardiods, very close. They
liked the immediacy but there wasn't enough bass. Next, I tried ORTF a
couple feet further away, but we lost definition. Third, AB omni's
very close, less than two feet, they were very happy with the sound.
There was plenty of bass and they really liked the immediacy of the
attack. All recordings I've heard, of harps, have the attack drowned
out by reverb. The group was in a 1/3 circle. Mics about halfway up
the harp.
Pete

[Frank Stearns]

Peter Gemmell writes:

snips

We tried a few techniques. XY, with hyper cardiods, very close. They
liked the immediacy but there wasn't enough bass. Next, I tried ORTF a
couple feet further away, but we lost definition. Third, AB omni's
very close, less than two feet, they were very happy with the sound.
There was plenty of bass and they really liked the immediacy of the
attack. All recordings I've heard, of harps, have the attack drowned
out by reverb. The group was in a 1/3 circle. Mics about halfway up
the harp.
Pete

Glad it worked out for you.

A few questions...

- IIRC you mentioned that the room might be a problem. I take it you were close
enough so that any room problems were way down, while perhaps there was "enough
there" to give you a sense of space? (Even at 2 ft, there was probably still a wee
bit of room in the mix...)

- So which mics did you use for the AB? How much distance between the mics?

Frank
Mobile Audio
--

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

Frank Stearns wrote:

- IIRC you mentioned that the room might be a problem. I take it you
were close enough so that any room problems were way down, while
perhaps there was "enough there" to give you a sense of space? (Even
at 2 ft, there was probably still a wee bit of room in the mix...)

That must have been the distance between the mics, there is no way a mic
pair can be two feet from a hard quartet.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

- So which mics did you use for the AB? How much distance between the
mics?

Frank
Mobile Audio

[Frank Stearns]

"Peter Larsen" writes:

Frank Stearns wrote:

- IIRC you mentioned that the room might be a problem. I take it you
were close enough so that any room problems were way down, while
perhaps there was "enough there" to give you a sense of space? (Even
at 2 ft, there was probably still a wee bit of room in the mix...)

That must have been the distance between the mics, there is no way a mic
pair can be two feet from a hard quartet.

Good point! That would be a wee bit cozy.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--