Recording classical music

In article <v71hr77vvf @corp.supernews.com>,

These are true, BUT you have a lot of stuff coming in from the rear lobe,
and your front angle of acceptance is very narrow.  In a long skinny room,
Blumlein is wonderful, but I don't see it any more tolerant to poor setup
than any other coincident or near-coincident system.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

If you don't have the option of placing the mics "exactly" where you want them,
the safest compromise is Blumlein miking -- figure-8s crossed at 90 degrees.

Two reasons -- First, you can adjust the balance and imaging (slightly) by
twisting one or both mics away from the nominal 90-degree angle. Second, the
side nulls suppress room reverb in the region in which it is most obnoxious,
reducing the chance of an overly reverberant recording.

In some rooms, I'll use 3 omnis across the group for a concert band.  I find
that that can work out pretty well as I usually want a big, blended ensemble
sound.  That said, it doesn't always work and I'll always bring a stereo
pair of some sort for the middle.

I use Omnis on choir, too, but that is a different story... :-)

--Ben

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

Because it's true.  Widely spaced omnis get you bizarre imaging, with
a sense of depth that is very artificial.  If you don't want the hole
in the middle, you need to go with a spaced triad and that just exaggerates
the effect.

Listen to some of the Mercury Living Presence recordings for an example
of this.  Great tone, really weird imaging.

I honestly don't know too many people using widely spaced omnis for
orchestral work any more, although some people like that false sense
of depth.
--scott

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

hey hey scott - i personally always use an ORTF pair of cards as the
main stereo pair, but there isnt much doubt that spaced omnis are the
most common setup for larger orchestras.  i know you are more
experienced than i am, so i am interested in why you would comment
this way...

It's true, about 17 years ago I got to listen, 1st hand, to Ron Streicher's
presentation and demonstration on basic stereo micing techniques.

As far as creating the main stereo image:
Coincident (X-Y, M/S, Blumlein) and near-coincident (ORTF, NOS) were far
more accurate as far as stereo image was concerned. Spaced techniques
created two orchestras clumped at each speaker location. Adding a center
fill mic simply, created a center clump with the side clumps.

The coincident techniques spread the image so evenly that the addition of
spot mics started to tug at the image noticably.
Ron's subsequent solution was stereo spot micing -- then panning the stereo
image of the spot section into the image of the main pair.

With care, the section was nicely highlighted, while preserving the image
integrity of the main stero pair.

Small diaphragms for all this, since off axis response is quite important
for the image simulation.

I've seen set-ups with large dia mics in spaced techniques -- well, since
they don't have much of a stereo image, to begin with, they won't notice the
off axis response affecting the image.

Check out the details at:
Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 1985
Vol.33, No.7/8 (July/August)
p. 548-555

-- Dave K

"Willie K.Yee, M.D." <w @bestweb.netttttttttttttttt> wrote in message

http://www.bigbluebigband.org

So just sample him and play it back as MIDI.

This is a *real* classical guitarist? Geez. I thought
those guys were purists.

--
Les Cargill

<< At which point you can dispense with the performer.  The editor is now
creating the music. >>

Yeah, but somehow when the CD comes out it always says "Joe Blow, Classical
Guitarist Extraordinaire" never "Scott Fraser, Superb Editor".

Scott Fraser

mriv @d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in

On a recent assignment, the performer played to a nice cadence, stopped and
started the next section several times before getting one good enough to
keep.  I dutifully reassembled, but didn't read the score, thinking I knew
the music well enough.

Turns out there was no cadence at that spot.  She had stopped because of an
error earlier and is too much of a musician to just break it off.  I had to
go back and chop enough to keep the beat going and splice in at speed.

Yes, reading the score is a necessary skill.

All with a razor blade? Uphill? In the snow? Both ways?

I understand that this is SOP now for classical recording. Obviously
you can't overdub or punch in to fix things, so you just go back a
couple of measures and re-record. This is why it's important for
classical recording engineers to be able to follow a score. The
producer will have marked it up with all the information necessary for
editing and it's up to the engineer/editor/producer to find all the
bad places and replace them with good takes.

Actually, in a modern multitrack pop music production, 1,400 fixes or
one sort or another doesn't seem like an unreasonable number when you
consider re-takes, multiple punch-ins on multiple tracks, editing
drums, and comps of vocals and instrumental solos. Has anyone ever
kept track just for fun?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers - (mriv @d-and-d.com)

scotfra @aol.com (ScotFraser) wrote in

At which point you can dispense with the performer.  The editor is now
creating the music.

<< I was startled to discover how much editing goes on for some classical
releases.  >>

Wait until you work with a classical guitarist & start assembling takes
sixteenth note by sixteenth note.

Scott Fraser

<< then you
set the DPAs up as a spaced pair, >>

If you like a big hole in the middle, very confused imaging & phase issues
galore spaced omnis as a main pair will get you there.

Scott Fraser

What if he pays by the edit?

--
ha

There are folks who record stuff one bar at a time and patch them all
together to form perfect recordings that have no soul.  There are folks
who refuse to edit within movements and wind up with minor errors in
their best takes, but a great sense of style.  I suppose it depends on
the effect you are looking for and the feeling you're trying to get.

I am not big on editing within movements, but I'll do it for money.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

j @jps.net (John La Grou) wrote in

That would be against my religion.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 20:04:49 -0600, "Graham Duncan"

A friend produced a classical guitar record with a well known artist
on a top classical label. Took over one week of full time editing,
with more than 1,400 edits.

Nope -- I'm not telling.

JL

The New Stereo Soundbook by Ron Streicher and F. Alton Everest.

On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 12:48:05 GMT, "unkboy" <j.wardenb @verizon.net>
wrote:

Willie K. Yee, M.D. http://www.bestweb.net/~wkyee
Developer of Problem Knowledge Couplers for Psychiatry http://www.pkc.com
Webmaster and Guitarist for the Big Blue Big Band http://www.bigbluebigband.org

I was startled to discover how much editing goes on for some classical
releases.  I'm sure there is a whole spectrum, though.  Religious indeed.

Graham

What do you have in mind?

James Boyk

nothing to it.  you just buy a pair of DPA 4003s, and about 6-8
schoeps CMC6/mk4s, and a rack of millenia media HV-3Bs, some apogee
ADs, recording media of your choice, stands, cables, etc.  then you
set the DPAs up as a spaced pair, with a pair of flanking schoeps
depending onthe venue and size of the group to be recorded, adding
other schoeps as spot mics as needed.  no compression, no EQ, so it's
really pretty easy.  seriously, though, your question is far too
open-ended.  you might start with a good book, like the microphone
book by john eargle, then come back and ask some questions that are
more specific about what you actually want to know.

There are a lot of discussions here if you pay attention.  There are several
people that post here that have fantastic classical experience (people like
John LaGrou, Scott Dorsey, and Scott Fraser).

The short story for info:

Mics- Condensers are most popular Schoeps, Sennheiser MKH, Josephson,
Neumann, AKG (but not as much) occasionally a ribbon like a Coles 4038,
Royer, or Beyer
Preamps:  Great River, Grace, Millennia, Hardy (or other Jensen 990 based
pres)...
Editing-  A touchy subject for sure...  Commercial releases these days have
a tendency to use a lot (because they can).  It is usually a closely held
secret, though.  Working on a DAW where you have the control and flexibility
to edit single notes is important.  The popular ones are: Sonic Solutions,
SADiE, Pyramix, and Sequoia.  I know a few that use Pro Tools, as well.
Placement:  Use your ears.  It depends on the room and how many mics you
choose to use on your recording.  There is a purist camp that only uses 2
mics for everything.  There is also a thought of using considerably more, if
needed (this is where I usually work), and the Sony Classical Mic the sh*t
out of everything camp.

--Ben

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

In article <9Wkba.9682$SX @nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,

www.josephson.com has a nice introduction to stereophony.

Editing is religious issue.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."