 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: claricolin
Date: 2020-05-12 06:30
My upcoming clarinet exam has been changed to video submission, and I am experimenting with recording techniques to try to get the best sound that I can. I’ve researched quite a bit, and now realise that recording a clarinet is not so straightforward (or maybe I’m over-thinking it?). I’ve attached my best effort so far, and I’d love any suggestions or feedback (no pun intended).
So track A is using an SE-X1A condenser mic about 2 feet above the clarinet, aimed about 2/3 the way down the instrument (sort of pointed at my right hand). I like this sound, but the 5th note (clarion B) sounds terrible, presumably because all the tone holes are closed and no sound is coming to the mic. You can see this in the waveform, which shows reduced volume at this point.
Track B is from a Rode Videomic pro, about 2 feet below, pointed up at the bell. It doesn’t sound great, but it does pick up the clarion B.
Track C is the mix, probably around 80% A and 20% B. I think it improves the clarion B.
I’ve tried a few different locations in my house, different mic distances, but haven’t been able to produce anything I like better than track C. I have had a lot of fun, though. Since this will be for an exam, I can’t alter the recording in any way, but I reckon mixing two mic sources should be OK.
How do you record yourself? Any suggestions for other techniques to try would be great.
Thanks
Colin
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-05-12 06:51
I look forward to hearing the examples.
But in the meantime I would say that because clarinet is an "area," and not a point source (like voice or trumpet), I would suggest putting your mics much further away. Even in a dry studio setting you need that air in between horn and mic. One odd position that seems to work well is above you. Even if you have standard height ceilings, just get as close to the ceiling as possible and sit four or five feet back from there (angular distance of at least eight feet should be good).
See what that does for you.
.................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ken Lagace
Date: 2020-05-12 06:52
You might look into Audacity, a free audio editing program. It might take a bit of time learning a few basics, but you will get experience in audio recording and make your sound into anything you want. There are dozens of tutorials on YouTube.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-05-12 07:03
I really like the sound of the SE-X1A. The Rode is a shotgun mic........don't use that one.
Yeah, distance will really bring out the nicest qualities of the SE mic. Traditionally even if you put your mic somewhat level with your horn you need about fifteen feet of distance. Room interactions are a must when recording clarinet.
If you don't want to mess with learning audio engineering (some programs are actually pretty easy as Ken says), you just need to find a room that has a nice ring without being "swampy" like a bathroom. Living rooms are pretty good. Just play with where the mic is vs. the clarinet (keep listening back until you find the sound you like best).
Of course if you have a small recital hall at school that will be unoccupied for the time you need to record, that may have the best acoustic (still need the distance!).
................Paul Aviles
P.S. Don't worry about waveforms!! It's all about how it SOUNDS.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claricolin
Date: 2020-05-12 07:17
thanks for the suggestions Paul and Ken. I do use Audacity and Audition, but am not allowed to alter the recording at all (exam requirement). So as you say Paul, environment and mic distance will be the things to play with. I love playing in the bathroom but not sure I should submit a video from the bathroom for an exam (or maybe I should?).
I'll try much greater distances to get some room interactions.
For the actual recording I'm planing to use Audition to overdub myself onto a recorded accompaniment.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-05-12 08:00
Sounds like a plan.
[NO BATHROOM !!!!! Even practicing. The swishy sound hides all your note endings and even rough attacks. This is why everyone thinks they are Garth Brooks in the shower].
..............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Luuk ★2017
Date: 2020-05-12 12:55
The opened tone holes play a role in the resulting sound. The sound wave in the bore doesn't stop at the first open hole, but extends further down the bore. In this, the bore with the array of open holes acts as a high-pass filter. The resulting sound coming from the bell has more high frequencies left, and thus the sound recorded 'in line' with the clarinet sounds shrill.
When you have one mic and can't use room acoustics then point it at the tone holes, from above. Don't record from the bell.
The mix of all sound coming from the clarinet's openings is the most natural: use room acoustics to get the complete result, as pointed out above.
By the way, this effect is used by Mahler in his symphonies where he asks for 'Schalltrichter auf' (Bells up), and also by jazz clarinetists pointing their clarinets at the audience.
Regards,
Luuk
Philips Symphonic Band
The Netherlands
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claricolin
Date: 2020-05-12 17:02
Thanks Luuk and Paul, I've had another go using greater distance with the SE-XA1 in a room with better acoustics, and the recording is sounding much better
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BflatNH
Date: 2020-05-12 18:03
Consider ribbon mics, that have a ribbon element that has a uniform [frequency] pick up pattern over about 140 degree horizontal (vertical ribbon element) and 90 degrees vertical.
-Ribbons are not as bright as condensers but more uniform frequency-wise over their pick up [angle] range.
-Also applicable to Bb clarinets, I have used it successfully for the bass clarinet that has its sound-emitting holes (bell to upper side key hole) over 42". I orient the ribbon element horizontal so that the 140 degree pick-up range is directed to the length of the body with the holes, slightly below the connection between the upper and lower joint, and spaced about 30" from the clarinet.
-Ribbons have a lower output so that you may have more background hiss if your recorder has cheap amplifies.
-Your sound may seem more mellow in comparison to condensers, but you can go into your recording software (e.g. Audacity) equalization and tweek the frequency response as desired.
-they cost about $100 (e.g. MXL r144 on Ebay)
Post Edited (2020-05-12 21:48)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Tom H
Date: 2020-05-12 20:40
Maybe some silly "old school" questions but--
-- Have you contacted the people giving the exam audition and asked what there preference would be as to how it's recorded?
-- Will you have to buy equipment to make the recording? How much $?
-- How good does the sound quality have to be? Will they take into consideration that it is a recording and you are not a recording engineer expert?
At out outdoor band concerts I have a cassette tape boom box that I place about 10-12 feet from where I sit. My first chair clarinet solos come out great. But, no video of course. I do believe that whatever device(s) you use, it is not good to place it close to the clarinet-- with the sound coming from holes and at times through the bell. Having it close to a brass instrument works better.
The Most Advanced Clarinet Book--
tomheimer.ampbk.com/ Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001315, Musicnotes product no. MB0000649.
Boreal Ballad for unaccompanied clarinet-Sheet Music Plus item A0.1001314.
Musicnotes product no. MNO287475
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: bmcgar ★2017
Date: 2020-05-13 00:17
I listened to the examples.
The one thing that's going to increase the quality of your recording is to get farther away from the microphone, as Paul Aviles said.
To my ear, the differences in the "technical" audio quality between the three recordings is not that great. However, the mic. sounds too near, and you're picking up a lot of extraneous sounds like articulation and "finger movement" sounds that would not be audible were you in a better position in relation to your "audience," the microphone. Also, the mic. is so close that you're not recording the acoustic influences of the room, which probably would (might) add to the "presence" of your sound.
If I were you, I'd be experimenting with mic placement and distance (and maybe the location you're recording in) instead of concentrating on choosing the particular hardware and software you should use.
B.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2020-05-13 05:49
I beg to differ with the assessment of the mics in the examples sounding the same. If you listen through monitors or even decent headphones, you pick up WAY more frequencies on the SE. Large diaphragm condensers are the standard go to microphone for a majority of singer and wind instrument recording.
Since I'm rambling about mics, I'd also add that even though the suggestion for finding a better mic (as the poster above references ribbon), there is ALWAYS a better (read: more expensive) mic. Some cost as much as a Mercedes so you might want to put a practical limit on that idea.
The SE used by Colin sounds really good to me for a $100 mic. Other considerations are the preamp or interface being used (the AD/DA converters and amplifier quality become the second most important considerations to sound after the mic and often in conjunction with mics........you want the quality of the matching to be similar or you are over supplying quality to the other link in the chain that will hold you back sonically).
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claricolin
Date: 2020-05-13 05:55
Tom - this is just an ASRSM-type of exam, and they are just adapting to the current social-distancing situation...I don't think they expect studio quality recording, and probably a mobile phone would suffice at a pinch. Having said that, I'd like to achieve the best quality I can with the tools I have on hand, and also learn a bit about recording in the process.
...and what I've learned so far from everyone's comments is that mic placement and acoustic environment is the main place to start...I've already improved the recordings a lot simply by getting the mic further away and choosing a better room
Thanks everyone for your help!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BflatNH
Date: 2020-05-13 06:30
Re the suggestion to use a mobile phone, some are good,
but be careful as some phones have functions to optimize speech and avoid feedback when used hands-free, etc. that could compress, threshold (cut-off completely) or otherwise screw up the dynamics. I am editing audio for an on-line concert band and some of the recordings are very strange (in recorded quality) for this reason. If you run into this problem, check your cell phone for a 'music' or 'manual' recording setting.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: kdk
Date: 2020-05-13 16:54
claricolin wrote:
> Tom - this is just an ASRSM-type of exam,
Is this a typo for ABRSM, or another organization?
Karl
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: claricolin
Date: 2020-05-13 17:36
Karl, yes typo, I meant ABRSM, although the actual organisation I’m doing this for is AMEB, which is the Australian equivalent of ABRSM.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
