Recording orchestra with stereo pair

Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:16 am

Johannes; I'm glad you clarified this more, and I congratulate you in advance for having the desire to want to do this at all. I suspect that by the very fact that you're interested in doing this may mean you've got some serious interest in recording, and just might have a career at it. I was also under the impression you had a lot of stuff on hand there - at the school, or nearby, perhaps, etc. - than lugging it all 300km. Big difference, of course.

All that said, you may still be able to pull something off for the long run; perhaps using some of the gear that has been suggested in a "back pack" configuration. I don't envy your long bus ride to/from the venue.

yes, you're 'only' a student right now, but this is a good time for you at this level. (It may not SEEM that way now...hehe....but in 10 or 20 years, you may see it then.) You've got a good opportunity here, and even if you just go with 2 mic stereo, I'm hoping you can turn it into something you can use for a long time as you build your body of work.

Good luck getting it done, seriously. I hope it works out for you.

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:16 pm

A possible advantage to using fewer mics is that there will be more time to focus on placing them carefully. Also, I must say that I don't find the points of view criticizing multitracking to make much sense.

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2008 4:50 pm

Which points of view do you mean?

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 2:22 pm

Thank you everyone. I feel positively glowing now Smile

I know some pros that always record with only a stereo pair (and then they have this ever-raging war between coincident pair or spaced pair... childish much?) and they are, of course, able to draw on their years of experience with different halls, styles, musicians and such. They do get the job done, though, with stellar results.

I agree with aracu that an upside to this is more time to work with placement.
JoeH, thank you for your kind words as well. I have been interested in sound & recording since I was 10-12 or something, and have been wxperimenting with acoustical recordings since I was 16. Now, I'm 22 and I'm starting to realize that this is infinitely complex and immesurably fun, that's why I'm studiyng this...

See, the bus trip in itself is not an issue, really. The issue is how much equipment I can transport on the bus... And I think I'll be using my own MBox setup, or possibly a Sound Devices 702, since I don't have access to any multitrack equipment at all. It would be favorable to at least have 4 or 6 channels of recording, but as of now, this is what I've got.

Thanks everyone for your input and valuable time! To whom do I put out the check? Smile

Posted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 9:34 pm

The Sound Devices is really cool because the pres sound good and are very quiet. They sound like they attenuate high frequencies which can be nice for digital recordings. The Sound Devices I am familiar with can moniter ms recordings without processing them, so you could adjust the stereo image later if you wanted to. It's a safer way to go.
Hi Jeremy, I guess I'd rather not go into the multitracking topic.

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:52 am

Aracu; yeah I like it too. Pre:s sound really transparent. As for hf attenuation, I've played tones through it from 5 Hz to 50 KHz and it's completely linear. ±0.05dB or something like that. Creepy. That's at 192KHz though.

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:18 pm

aracu wrote:

Hi Jeremy, I guess I'd rather not go into the multitracking topic.

I understand. I just didn't understand your comment - not the intent, but the actual comment itself.

Not trying to get into the subject either way, I'm a big fan of minimalist recording and have done my fair share. However, I also understand the value of a quality multi-track rig. Call me a fence rider, but sometimes, riding high on that fence is a great way to see both sides of the issue.

Cheers-
Jeremy

Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 2:52 pm

Johannes, yes, that comment about the Sound Devices sounding like
they attenuate the high frequencies was based on a careful though subjective and unmeasured comparison of them, to Gordon pres, using a low output ribbon mic, in which they sounded like they had less top end and a more muffled sound overall. Don't get me wrong though, I like those pres a lot and use them all the time. I think that they counteract digital harshness, whether by accident or by design. It seems anyway that differences in good quality and boutique quality pres are pretty negligable compared to the differences in microphone selection and placement.

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:24 am

Plush wrote:

Call it a day, collect check, pack up everything in a knapsack. Walk out with light alu mic stand.

Now you're talking!

Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 4:32 pm

I agree with this post. I am still working to get an acoustic space to sound right with coincident pairs, even high quality DPA cardiods in ORTF!

If you have 4-channels to record with, throw up 2 of the 4006 in A-B stereo and bring one more pair of high quality cardiods for a closer ORTF if you need some presence for a particular section or soloist and/or can't locate the omni's where you'd like.

JoeH wrote:

My choice is the 4006's in a spaced stereo pair config.

I usually add a spot mic for any soloist, just to be covered, although the soloist is often strong enough in the stereo pair that I don't need the spot for much at all. It really depends on the type of music, where they're standing, and placemnt of the stereo pair.

You may be ok with just the pair, but you'll probably have to experiment a little. Hopefully you can get some time during the dress rehearsal to try it out.

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 9:14 pm

Is there a website that sells the bulk of these mics?
I just want to compare prices.

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:40 am

TheFraz wrote:

Is there a website that sells the bulk of these mics?
I just want to compare prices.

Give froogle.google.com a shot - you can get a general idea there of "street" prices on gear that online stores sell. You can usually get a better deal by working with a salesman at a retail store but froogle gives you an idea of an average price. This average price often equates to the lowest advertised price a manufacturer allows its dealers to publish which explains why you can almost always get a lower price working directly with a salesman.

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:51 pm

This is all really great advice guys.
All of it getting me rather ecstatic to get into it my self.
I am trying to decide on on a stereo pair to start me off with.
Now that it is becoming more apparent that I will need much more then a good stereo pair, I am rethinking my budget. Perhaps I should start with something a little less pricey.
I noticed that earthworks sells some stereo pairs for quite cheep. Like the TC30 and SR30. Are theses even remotely close to the quality I should be expecting?

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:38 pm

The SR30 wouldn't be my recommendation for a stereo pair to record orchestra with. I love them when trying to isolate a location in a large ensemble like when a choir is singing with an orchestra. Additionally, these mics are amazing at presenting a crystal clear picture as drum overheads or in tight-miking situations with acoustic instruments like strings, acoustic guitar, percussion, etc. The SR30 is crisp and has a focused pickup pattern.

I'd recommend trying out the QT series if you're looking for a single stereo pair for miking an orchestra. I have no experience with any of Earthworks' omni microphones but I have had such great success with the SR30s (and the SR77s before them) that I'd be surprised if they weren't awesome.

I'm partial to the idea of omni microphones for classical recording, especially if you're only going to use a small number of total microphones. I have no experience with out-rigging, Decca trees or surround recording of orchestras so please understand my opinions on all classical recording options as limited. I have been enjoying using omni's in my recordings and can recommend it to you.

Maybe a good place for you to start might be with the latest Mojave Audio package. I believe that the MA-100 has interchangeable capsules so you could experiment with cardiod vs. omni on your projects. I've used the MA-200 with great success but haven't tried the MA-100. Again, I can rely on my history with the designer (David Royer) to make this assumption. Here is a link to the MA-100 product page:

http://www.mojaveaudio.com/MA-100.html

I heard that they released a non-tube version of the MA-200 to be called the MA-201 at the NAMM show but haven't seen any change to their website. I'd love to have 4 of every model that Mojave and Royer make!

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:47 pm

aracu wrote:

The Sound Devices is really cool because the pres sound good and are very quiet. They sound like they attenuate high frequencies which can be nice for digital recordings. The Sound Devices I am familiar with can moniter ms recordings without processing them, so you could adjust the stereo image later if you wanted to. It's a safer way to go.
Hi Jeremy, I guess I'd rather not go into the multitracking topic.

I haven't noticed the hi-end attenuation with my 722, although I have only had a chance to use it four times. I've recorded two choirs, a small jazz combo and a salsa band each time in different locations. I used two matched DPA 4021 cardiods in ORTF with fairly good results on all 4 recordings.

I'm thrilled with the SoundDevices recorder! The meters are so sexy cool. I'm going to experiment more with XY and other microphones (including the Earthworks SR30s) to see if I can get stereo recordings that sound more like the room.

This topic sponsored by: