Mic choices for piano, harpsichord

Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 12:31 am

hummel wrote:

Clearly, harpsichord recording is an 'advanced' skill. I think I'll stick with piano and similar instruments for now until my skill level improves and then re-visit harpsichords.

Actually, I'm not sure what all the fuss about...

Yes, harpsichord is a challenging instrument to record well, but it's not *that* hard to make an acceptable recording. Certainly, I do not think it is something you should be avoiding until your skill level improves. The only way to get good at recording something is to keep trying to record it! In my experience, an acceptable harpsichord sound can be found quite quickly. A great sound takes a lot longer, however...

Unlike just about every other acoustic instrument, the harpsichord has little or no dynamic range, making it easy to get a healthy level. It also seems immune to the low frequency resonances and 'wolf notes' that can plague other string instruments.

The harpsichord is quite rich in harmonics, which places certain requirements on the microphone choice, but you can go three ways with that. One way is to take the aesthetically pleasing ribbon route as suggested repeatedly in this thread, which tends to mellow out the 'wiry' sound while maintaining detail and adding warmth. Another is to take the accurate route by using small diaphragm condensers, which will resolve all the fine detail but perhaps sound a bit etched if using cheaper condensers. Both approaches are capable of producing good recordings, with the preference being in the ear of the beholder.

The third approach is to use dynamic microphones. Think of them as poor man's ribbons in this application. They won't get the harsh etched sound of lower cost condensers, but they won't have the mellowed detail of the ribbons. I have made very acceptable harpsichord recordings with Sennheiser 421s in XY, and I suspect a pair of large diaphragm dynamics using neodymium magnets (e.g. EV N-Dym series) could also do a nice job of it. May need a bit of EQ and reverb, but you'll get an acceptable result and, with linear phase EQ and convolution reverb, who's complaining?

If you've got a good harpsichord in a good position in a good room, the problem is 40% solved. Getting your microphones (whatever you choose to use) in the right position adds another 40% to that. The next 10% will come down to the microphones themselves: ribbons, dynamics or condensers. Cheap condensers are simply not going to sound good: the harpsichord's rich character and harmonic detail is *precisely* the kind of sound that brings out the worst of cheap condensers.

The remaining 15% is the surprise that few people think about or realise: after getting the best sound you can, record a couple of minutes and ask the musician to listen to the playback. Assuming the musician thinks the sound is acceptable, you will find that, after hearing playback, the musician will alter his/her playing style (louder, softer, brighter, duller, more or less sustained, etc.) to steer the sound in his/her desired direction. I have seen and heard this happen many times in my experience of making direct-to-stereo recordings in less than ideal situations, and it never ceases to amaze me. Whenever possible these days, I try to give the musicians a listen before making any serious takes.

[Yeah, I know that 40% + 40% + 10% + 15% = 105%... That extra 5% is what you get when the musician consciously contributes to the recorded sound!]

Posted: Sat Sep 01, 2007 5:12 am

Simmosonic wrote:

...The third approach is to use dynamic microphones. Think of them as poor man's ribbons in this application. They won't get the harsh etched sound of lower cost condensers, but they won't have the mellowed detail of the ribbons. I have made very acceptable harpsichord recordings with Sennheiser 421s in XY, and I suspect a pair of large diaphragm dynamics using neodymium magnets (e.g. EV N-Dym series) could also do a nice job of it. May need a bit of EQ and reverb, but you'll get an acceptable result and, with linear phase EQ and convolution reverb, who's complaining?...

Very cool. My first reaction was that if I wanted to record harpsichord with inexpensive mics and I wanted to make sure the recording wasn't annoyingly harsh I'd just start with a pair of SM57s. I love the "dynamics are the poor man's ribbon" idea.

Posted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 6:35 pm

BobRogers wrote:

Very cool. My first reaction was that if I wanted to record harpsichord with inexpensive mics and I wanted to make sure the recording wasn't annoyingly harsh I'd just start with a pair of SM57s. I love the "dynamics are the poor man's ribbon" idea.

Some people will probably disagree with my assertion that dynamics are poor man's ribbons, which is fair enough. But when condensers are the wrong microphones for the job and you don't have any ribbons, good dynamics are worth considering.

By "good dynamics" I'm referring to something like Sennheiser's MD421, which has a very flat response and can deliver an acceptable result on just about anything. I wouldn't be using a pair of Shure SM57s to record harpsichord unless I was prepared to use a *lot* of EQ! It will sound very 'rock', due to the 57 being the mic of choice for rock and pop guitar and snare drums for decades - we learn to associate its strong characteristic sound with rock and pop music. Also, the result would probably be much harsher than you wanted due to the 57's upper midrange boost. Eeeek! You may as well use a cheap condenser. Wink

The thing I like about the 421 is that it has very little character of its own...

Another dynamic that might be worth considering is EV's RE50. It's a dynamic omni designed for ENG applications. Pioneering field recordist David Lewiston uses a pair of them when he can't use condensers, and gets acceptable results. I haven't used it myself, however. It seems like a contradiction in some ways - being an omni, it has no proximity effect and extended LF response. However, EV build a LF roll-off into it because it is primarily designed for recording interviews/reporters on the street.

Food for thought, nonetheless.

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:54 pm

Any good neutral mic will do for hchord.
For an inexpensive solution, I recommend 2 Shure KSM 137 cardioids.
These through a DAV Electronics Broadhurst Gardens No. 1 mic amp will sound very good indeed. Don't get too close because mechanism noise is undesirable.

No need to use Sonodore or the like. I have used Sonodore starting in 1988 and abandoned them some time after.

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 12:26 am

Plush wrote:

No need to use Sonodore or the like. I have used Sonodore starting in 1988 and abandoned them some time after.

Is this specifically for Harpsichord - or generally?

Thanks

Larry Elliott

This topic sponsored by: