I have played with a Jecklin disc, but not a Schneider. It's a great way to record expansive sources, but doesn't have the pinpoint localisation found in some other techniques. Some people mount the mics lower than they would for X/Y or ORTF, but that's probably something to do with the fact that some binaural fans like to mount the mics low, and also like using omnis with baffles.

Baffles and omnis are wonderful for recording nature sounds, but in certain indoor environments the reverb can be overwhelming.

John

If you have the EMI Beethoven recordings of the Takacs Quartet then you have a Jecklin disc recording. Won a Grammy, BTW.

Superbly engineered by Simon Eadon.

Rich

I´m currently building a Jeckling disk just out of curiosity. Half of the fun for me as an amateur is testing this kind of things. I´ll post here when it is finished and what my experiences are.

A while ago I heard a few recordings done using that technique and was very impressed. Very much a feeling of "beeing there".

Gunnar

Sonarerec wrote: If you have the EMI Beethoven recordings of the Takacs Quartet then you have a Jecklin disc recording. Won a Grammy, BTW.

Superbly engineered by Simon Eadon.

Rich

I'm sure You meen Decca?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00067R3BG/ref=pd_sr_ec_ir_m_h_/202-4276551-8391058

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0000SWNHK/qid=1108982556/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_10_1/202-4276551-8391058

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000063WRQ/qid=1108982556/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_10_2/202-4276551-8391058

You should also look for Jürg Jecklin's own recordings on Jecklin-Disco :
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/ref=sr_sp_go_as/202-4276551-8391058
(I cant vouch for which ones beside those with string quartet that are recorded with Jecklin Disc)...

Simon Eadons recordings for Decca and Hyperion are generally very good!

/ptr

I should try a Jecklin disc sometime, I think its something I would like, ie improves the imaging of spaced omnis.

A few years back (8 or 9) there was lots of talk about the Schoeps sphere. I do not see it mentioned much anywhere anymore. Has anyone got one or know of one and are using it regularly. I seem to remember its problem was it was VERY sensitive to getting it in just the right position for the result to be convincing.

ptr wrote:
I'm sure You meen Decca?

Yes, my 1:00 AM error!

BTW, the Schoeps sphere is quite nice and quite expensive. I have used it and can report that the "3D imaging" is amazing, and it must be placed very carefully.

Rich

ptr wrote:
Simon Eadons recordings for Decca and Hyperion are generally very good!
/ptr

Are there any recordings on Hyperion that use Jecklin, to anyone's knowledge?

Mike

I have been curious about Jecklin discs as well as other similar techniques. My curiosity has not rivaled the cost of aqcuiring one of these things and have also thought about building one.

I am not permitted to begin other projects until I finish a bathroon remodel that was begun too long ago!

I've only heard bits of Takacs/Beethoven on the radio have attended their Beethoven Series in Boulder, Colorado where they perform each recital in a small [app 300 seat] hall and a few days later in a large orchestral hall. The small room is a treat.

My take on a homebuilt Jecklin disk, showing the construction.

http://hem.bredband.net/b121263/jecklin.jpg

Still looking for some fur to put on the side, so far I use some plastic foam I found.

Gunnar

PS: my bathroom modeling under way. Put up the last tiles on Saturday, sink connected on sunday. Small things left only. (Synchronized world?)

After looking at your disc, you might want to consider using the Shure A53 shockmounts, as it will be difficult to isolate the entire assembly from mechanical vibration since omnis always do quite well at capturing the lowend muck!

Rich

Gunnar,

Good start here! Of course, you are right to seek a fur or absorption material for the sides of this device. Bear in mind, you will only want significant absorption at 400 Hz and above. Between there and 200 Hz you can go with a significant decreace and below that point, there would be no benefit (and arguable deficits) in having any type of absorption.

You might want to look into a 1" acoustical foam and some way to space it as much as .5" to 1" off the disk with some type of spacer. This would give you very effective absorption as low as 250 Hz and would not add much mass to the device.

Fur would be fine, but, given the type of fur used, you might find that there is some serious diffraction or reflection of mid-range tones.

Let us know how it turns out.

j...

One more pic
http://hem.bredband.net/b121263/jecklin2.jpg

(Sorry forgot to edit pic name)

Current state is some not-very-acoustic-foam. Well, I´ll change this as soon as I can. Where to put holes, and so on will be experimented with. I also have a video stand type of head allowing me to tilt in the vertical axis, allowing the mics incident angle to be varied without dismantling anything.

Will do some at-home testing this weekend, finally got my long awaited pair of KM-183s delivered.

Gunnar.

PS: Rich, I will test using shock mounts, I have some Audio Technica AT8410A which probably will work just fine.

Sorry, should have been
http://hem.bredband.net/b121263/jecklin2.jpg

Gunnar.

Finally got my KM183-s. A number of unfortunate delays on the way. Done my first test recordings at a rehearsal in the rehearsal room. Tried the disc for the first time and really like the results. Very full sound from the string section and very much that "beeing there" feeling.

I´ve heard often enough on this forum that Omni-s is the way to go with acoustic recordings, and I guess I am already sold on it. Will try a few different spaced and Jecklin setups.

I changed the plastic foam to something a little more acoustic and dark grey -- sort of less conspicious looking (they still stare at me though). Got my 7 year daughter to do the cutting, so it is a bit rough here and there.

Great fun though.

Gunnar

ghellquist wrote: I changed the plastic foam to something a little more acoustic and dark grey -- sort of less conspicious looking (they still stare at me though).

By "acoustic" do you mean absorptive? That is your goal.

Rich

ghellquist wrote: Finally got my KM183-s.

Do you like them, I love my KM130's, excellent omnis to be sure.

I´ve heard often enough on this forum that Omni-s is the way to go with acoustic recordings, ...

Do not believe everything you read on this forum. There are other techniques that can be a lot better than omnis in most acoustics.

But the Jecklin disk is a good start to eliminating the problems with omnis.

Two things.

By acoustic I mean that I found an open cell foam, not the white closed cell foam in the pictures. (Real Soon Now I´ll put up some new pictures). If it is the best choice or not I will keep unsaid.

And David: yes I like the KM183-s. I am still in the early part of the process learning to now these as tools, and especially to know their limitations, but so far they are very much what I was looking for.

I have two budget type omnis before, the Behringer ECM8000 and the Studio Projects C4 omni capsules. The Behringers are amazing at their price point, but generally to noisy for what I do (that is, for distant micing of strings and so on). I find that on loud sources they are quite good. The C4-s are a bit difficult. The seem to "color" the sound in some situations. Not quite sure how to describe it but I do not put the coloring on the positive side of things. In other situations they are acceptable. Compared to these two, admittedly a limited selection, the KM183-s come out on top. Less noise, less coloring.

I will have to do quite a few recordings in order to learn how to use them best I guess, but so far they have fulfilled my expectations.

Gunnar

DavidSpearritt wrote: I should try a Jecklin disc sometime, I think its something I would like, ie improves the imaging of spaced omnis.

A few years back (8 or 9) there was lots of talk about the Schoeps sphere. I do not see it mentioned much anywhere anymore. Has anyone got one or know of one and are using it regularly. I seem to remember its problem was it was VERY sensitive to getting it in just the right position for the result to be convincing.

Hello David,

I had a Schoeps Sphere from Funky Junk in London (who got it from Italian Radio) for a few years and I sold it for a specific
reason. The reason was that the diameter of the disc was wrong because when you placed it to capture the entire width of the ensemble, (90 degrees) it ended up being too distant to offer up a sound with enough presence.

This was later corrected by Jerry Bruck and Schoeps with Jerry's
360 degree sphere which was smaller in diameter. This smaller diameter sphere allowed an included angle of 110 degrees and thus was able to be placed closer to the group, catching all of it--- much better at getting *the sound.*

Image was wandering with the old sphere, good with the new.
I was jazzed about it until I actually used it. Oh well. . .

Thanks Hudson, interesting assessment, this is what I experienced also. When Gabe Wiener was alive he was always going on about the Schoeps sphere, so I purchased one of his recordings to see what all the fuss was. It was the Bach cello suites, Nathanial Rosen (is that the stuff you put on the bow?) on John Marks Records.

Anyway I found the sound quite dissappointing, too distant and the cello and playing sounded vaguely like a blowfly caught in a bottle. I rarely play this CD now, much preferring a live recording of Pieter Wispelwey I made in Brisbane, with a KM120 Blumlein pair. If I want to hear that old style legato playing of the suites I put on Janos Starker. :)