 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: kenabbott
Date: 2004-10-16 11:58
Does anyone know the right way to mike an EH? Sould it be miked mid-section like a clarinet or at the bell like a sax?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LeeB
Date: 2004-10-16 14:16
I'd mic it mid-section. If you're in a room with good acoustics and not worried about bleed from other players, I'd raise the mic to start capturing some room ambience. It all depends on how focused a sound you're looking for. Distance removes the rough edges and mechanical noises (and breathing as well). If you have to close mic, convolution can put you into a room of your choice.
Because of the way a sax is constructed, when you mic the bell, you're also getting a healthy dose of the body of the instrument.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Vrat
Date: 2004-10-16 14:50
Speaking of that, is a unidirectional or omnidirectional mic better for clarinet/EH?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LeeB
Date: 2004-10-16 15:46
It depends on the situation. If you need to isolate the clarinet (because of bleed from other instruments, poor room acoustics, etc.), a cardiod mic might be the ticket. An omni will capture more room ambience (i.e. room acoustics, other players, audience, etc.). All things being equal, an omni will give you truer sound because omnis do not have off-axis coloration. The frequency response of directional mics is colored on the periphery of the pattern. A good compromise might be a mic with a switchable pattern (e.g. some variant of the the AKG C414).
The sound of clarinet or EH horn that most people are familiar with in orchestral recordings, however, is usually captured by a stereo pair (with or without outriggers) placed in front of the performance, usually with a fair amount of height. In this arena, there are a lot of options -- A/B pair, Decca tree, Jecklin disk, etc. The overall room mics may sometimes be augmented with "moused" mics focusing on specific soloists.
Really, any question of this nature should be prefaced with what the intended purpose of the recording happens to be, and the *budget* for recording equipment in general. Good mics, preamps, and convertors can get really expensive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2004-10-16 19:00
Interesting comments, Lee. How are "solo" (with and/or without piano) recordings mic'ed in the "biz"?
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2004-10-16 21:59
Boy, you think clarinetists are picayune -- what technique/what brand is as nuanced and based on preference in recording as in playing. Woodwinds can sound spectacular with ribbon mics (RCA, Sony, Royer, Coles) staged in a crossed figure-8 pattern, or with a pair of close omnis (AKG, B&K) or large-diaphragm cardioids (Neumann, BLUE, Telefunken), or... well, you get the picture. Close omni is indeed useful because of its more or less non-directional character and also for lack of proximity effect, but -- a single close omni might not get it done on a large instrument like EH. I've found that placing only one near the middle gives me a hot spot on the instrument for notes closest to the mic. I either have to compensate by backing off the mic or throwing up two mics (small-diaphragm omni on the body and maybe something large for the bell/bulb set further back to capture the low end).
As Lee said, depends on application. For what Katrina asks, in a good acoustic environment I myself fly a decca tree of either three identical Neumann large-diaphragm omni mics (yep -- I'm a member of the "Neumann mafia"), or two Neumann's and a BLUE, set about 8 - 10' back 12' up with the piano at half-stick so it doesn't completely swamp the clarinet/horn/oboe/flute/F# ocarina. If in a small studio, I break out more mics and come in closer, then replace the (lack of) ambiance in post with software acoustic simulators.
OBTW, the mic pre-amps have a lot to do with the sound as well -- I attended an insultfest (it started as a panel discussion) at last year's Audio Engineering Society annual meeting where major preamp designers took potshots at each other over circuit design, tube vs. solid state, transformer vs. transformerless, etc. Just as cantankerous as any debate over reeds, barrels, the effect of Backun bells, and silver v. nickel plating.
Best all,
Mark Sloss
Northbranch Records
Splendid Isolation Studios
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: LeeB
Date: 2004-10-16 22:51
My main experience is studio recording rather than live concert recording. I do do some location recording, though. These days, I've been using a DPA A/B 128 volt stereo pair. These microphones are mounted on a sliding bar fixture, and the separation between the mics and the angles can be adjusted. The microphone set has a variety of fixtures for tailoring the pattern in subtle ways. I mount this system on a stand that goes up to about 16'. The positioning of the mics depends on the location and performers. On occasion, depending on the situation, I'll use a variety of different spot mics. For portable work, I haul around some Metric Halo converter/pre's. Depending on how ambitious I am, I might also bring along some Millennia Media preamps. This is all pretty expensive stuff, though. I believe the mic set goes for about $7k these days. The 8 channel Millennia mic pre goes for about $5k. This is not something that most people would pick up for casual recording.
There is some reasonably cost-effective stuff out there. For recording most acoustic concerts in decent sonic environments, I'd recommend a stereo mic for no muss, no fuss set-up, and minimization of phase problems. A nice folding aluminum stand that can get you 12' or so of height is also a good idea. For lower-priced mics, I've had good luck with a Shure VP88 (a little over $800). I've never used one myself, but I've heard good reports on the Rode NT4 (around $450). These days, a portable computer and an integrated mic pre/Firewire converter box would be ideal. Digidesign make a fairly cost effective unit (that comes with ProTools software). I have a large Digidesign PT Accel system in my studio, but for recording, I use Apple/Emagic Logic on a Powerbook.
If you want to delve into these things more deeply, there are zillions of sites where these things are discussed.
For starters, I'd recommend...
Lynn Fuston's site:
http://www.3daudioinc.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi
George Massenburg's and Klaus Heyne's site:
http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/
There are also many, many sites devoted to discussion of recording applications and related technology. In my studio I use multiple PC's and Macs. For someone just getting into recording, Macs are certainly easier to set up. In fact, new Macs come with an application called Garage Band that would be an excellent starter application for someone wanting to start exploring recording.
A good place for Mac OSX related info is:
http://www.osxaudio.com/
Good luck in your recording pursuits. The cost of the technology needed to do a decent job has really dropped in recent years. You'll need to develop some skills to do a good job, but IMO, it's an easier task than becoming a virtuoso clarinetist.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2004-10-17 00:43
Lee, sweet rig! For portable, I haven't used less expensive mics like the Rode, but I've got two simple traveling setups that work well for this kind of stuff. One is a Grace pre (or Millennia depending on the gig), Apogee Rosetta and Tascam 24bit DAT (heavy and not cheap), and my new portable favorite that fits in one bag -- PowerBook running Cubase and Apogee Mini-Me (stereo pre, converters and USB interface in a paperback book-sized package). All I need is a pair of 48v DPAs and I can get that hernia surgery I've been saving for...
And hey, at least we don't have to soak the mic diaphragms in water before we get to work.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2004-10-17 04:07
Yeah, guys...I'm not in the market for any "tech-head" gear...
Just wondering what the pros would use when recording someone like Larry Combs et al...
Thanks for all the info!
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2004-10-17 16:10
You could put a tin can and a string in front of LC and get a good result. Engineering for great musicians is so much easier than trying to compensate for the, er, less talented.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
