Discussion in 'Microphones' started by audiokid, Jun 18, 2014.
nice site gang! Love all the audio in this.
I love my mojave MA-100 mics! Good job guys.
Yup. More gear porn for me to look at and drool over. Although, so far this week, the site that wins my interest the most was the Harrison HP/LP external EQ.
Wow, I'm have a very informative time on their new website. Very impressed.
This is a beautiful example of 2 x MA 300 close and an SF-24v back to catch some room. And people buy one U87 when you could have 2 of these. They are so versatile.
Published on Oct 16, 2013
Mojave Audio presents Miles Mosley Trio - Planetary Princess
Planetary Princes by Cameron Graves
Bass - Mojave Audio MA-300 and a Royer R-122V
Piano - 2 Mojave Audio MA-300, 1 Royer R-122V
Overheads - MA-300 and SF-24
Bass Drum - Ma301fet
Snare Drum - MA-101fet
Engineer: Peter Doell, Dusty Wakeman
Studio: Universal Mastering West
Musicians: Miles Mosley -- Bass, Tony Austin --Drums, Cameron Graves -- Piano
Standard YouTube License
That was sweet. Thanks for sharing that.
Comments on the recording (not the performance):
Bass - great.
Drums - great.
Piano - doesn't match the standard of the other two.
I agree that it's dissonant, although I didn't hear any glaring fidelity problems - the mics certainly shine, without a doubt.
His piano part seemed pretty simplistic. He's good... he's not Dave Brubeck or Vince Guaraldi, though.
Hmmm.. just got me thinking....I might start a spin-off thread using those guys as an example of ensemble miking at a time when 4 tracks was a luxury LOL.
Good comments guys! This is how we should be talking! I'm not in my studio right now (its apart) but will take a closer listen indeed.
I heard both these through my TV monitors and was really impressed. The bass is what caught my ear. Man, that is sweet. I'm really impressed over the Mojave / Royer combo's more than ever and cannot help but pass the love.
With my small requirements, two years back I had a U87ai and an MA 200 here. After an A/B, I sold the U87 and got 2 MA 300.
I've hardly had time to use them but they are a steal at the asking price. The SF24 is simply awesome.
Lets chat about the piano.
Is this what you are referring to Bos?
The Piano on both clips sounds a bit bright and maybe too percussive. Possibly less MA 300 or ( fine adjustment via the variable pattern may be better? ) and a touch more SF24 (room or closer in) would have been less percussive? What do you think?
I've found pushing an SF 24 closer towards the source ideal for blending warmth and smoothing that edge I hear. If the SF24 is too far back, it gets colder in a blend, closer up (without loosing the sides), they are amazing..
I'm thinking a Bricasti or fine touch of more natural room, just a bit less upper mids would have been my intimidate tweak on the piano but perhaps they are focused on "true to the capture" for the obvious way to show what all their mics sound like?
There are dozens of video's here. Lets keep talking shop!
How do you guys use a "Remotely controlled, continuously variable polar pattern selector adjustments" in a stereo capture like this?
I'm waiting for Jeff now
Personally speaking, for this recording, I wouldn't add any reverb at all, just take advantage of what's available in the room naturally. Jazz is a different beast than rock and pop. In most cases, and in situations similar with organic 3 or 4 piece ensembles, they're going for as natural capture as possible, with the focus on imaging. This was the mindset of most - if not all - of the classic era engineers for jazz. Check out my spin-off thread "Recording Jazz in the Classic age".
It goes into somewhat greater detail regarding the methods, which focus greatly on mic placement and natural capture as opposed to anything artificially added..
It's the piano left hand introduction from 00:45 to around 01:25 in the first video that I find difficult. It could be the tone of that actual instrument and/or floor reflections when close miked, but for me the mic positioning makes it sound in this passage too much like someone banging a set of water pipes. When the right hand comes in, things even out more and the tone seems better balanced.
It could be a simple matter of difference in recording style, but most Steinways I've recorded don't come out like that. On the other hand, I never tried using an MA300 and an R-122V on this type of job. Is it possible that an instrument with the tonal range and balance of a Steinway doesn't need the ribbon treatment, or maybe not when sited on a wooden floor?
Actually for all styles! As I develop my skills with Mid/Side use of reverbs and EQing which can be used to expand or delete room acoustics in an unnoticed way, which can help glue "nature space" missed or bleeding during capture. That's the goal at least . Anyone else use MS this way?
This is of course, "easier said than done " my goal would be to emulate the natural room of the performance and use MS verb strategically without distorting or exaggerating the overall acoustic image heard from a critical audience or individual perspective..
As an example and this is only shop talk because I really have little idea what all tracks sound like.
I would listen to this mix very "critical jazz like" and zone into the natural room , emulate the space with a Bricasti.
The Piano is a bit too bright for me so I'm asking myself, is it the mic itself or is it too loud, not balanced between the SF24 enough, maybe the variable polar pattern could be tuned different, different pre, so many variables but, I'm just learning more about variable polar pattern and if that can be used to help open up what I am getting at when suggesting using MS space to open it after the fact, lean or fall back using tools now? Follow me?
Back to reverb, I wouldn't be adding more reverb, but using the emulation to whats already there, to help that piano sit back and maybe spread wider.
I might take the MA300 piano tracks and put more "natural" room on sides to ease the "in your face sharpness" we hear. The Bricasti is better for this because you aren't adding another instruments bleed into the verb which can smear the imaging and produce a hump. You are instead, deleting the acoustic hump and re adding an emulation of the acoustic space to ease or shift it back more. Reverb can have more meaning now.
This way you wouldn't resort to removing the upper mids or making it appear I added more reverb. You wouldn't hear any reverb added, the piano would simply be less sharp and back a bit using reverb.
I would test this mono and stereo to make sure I kept my ear on phasing and balance. EQing would be the last step.
Excellent! exactly my thoughts Bos. What I'm thinking, The SF 24 (apposed to the 122) will excel in warmth when you move it closer to the source. It doesn't have the same coldish mono room sound a 122 "figure 8" can get when you get past that happy distance ( thats the negative of those I think) . I think you are spot on there, I'm hearing too much capture in the upper mids. banging pipes hehe! Isn't that the sound of Pro Tools HD conversion lol?
Separate names with a comma.