 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-08-27 21:28
Now that I'm doing so much better after my ligature changes (that's another thread), I'm rethinking other aspects of my whole setup. And I finally abandoned my barrel mics because the clarinet tone recorded from out in the room is better.
Details in my Aug 27 2015 post to this thread from the Ethnic Clarinet.
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=2&i=998&t=998
Now I've had several days of experimentation with mic placement- it makes a lot of difference! Today I started by following a confidently worded suggestion for "about 1 foot away and aimed at the right hand position". That was downright pitiful, wimpy sounding, really disappointing. So I had a look at my favorite Pete Fountain video from Bravo early 1990's, to see where was his mic. About 6" away, aimed at about the center of Pete's clarinet. And that sounded best I've tried yet. Progress!
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-08-28 08:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-08-28 18:54
The barrel mic clarinet sound is not that bad, it's just missing some harmonics. I think when I tested years ago I was still playing Legeres- that plus my less developed playing technique probably means my tone wasn't that great anyway, so the difference barrel to open mic might not have been as obvious.
I am already missing the freedom I got from the barrel mics. I had enjoyed having my backing tracks playing solidly in the room, with plenty of clarinet reverb/delay through the speakers (big auditorium!), AT THE SAME TIME I was recording an isolated clarinet track. No more. Alas, headphones are now my lot.
Pianos, guitars, and probably other instruments are often miked from "unusual" places. Grand pianos inside the case or underneath. Sometimes it works well, sometimes not. Clarinet is tough. But what about an old style electric organ with a Leslie speaker? Or a classic Fender Rhodes EPiano with front/back square wave tremolo (left/right does not feel anything like front/back- and NO tremolo is just blah)? This is why we have recording engineers, and only a small fraction are really all that good at it.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-08-28 18:59)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-08-29 12:40
Just speaking as a performer who only dabbled in recording to make audition tapes (on rare occasions), the clarinet is a very difficult instrument to mic. I have ONLY had unsatisfactory experiences and that includes spending a small fortune at a studio to do a tape as well. The biggest problem is that what we associate with the classical clarinet sound involves the "room" as well. This cannot be helped since the clarinet generates a sound in a weird way too (like an organ pipe, sounding longer than it is......the wave form actually is folded back into the horn).
The recordings of Pete Fountain are sorta "in your face" and that's fine because that was pretty representative of his style. Nuanced clarinet sound is much MUCH harder to record.
There was one video (can't remember which, but I see the generalities in my memory) we were referenced on this Board recently where there were two cardioids literally stacked one on top of the other (taped together?) about five feet off to the side of the clarinet, pointed straight at it and positioned about mid clarinet height off the floor. I thought (just through my home computer audio though) the sound was amazingly satisfying and I cannot wait to experiment myself with this idea in the future.
................Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-08-29 17:10
Since clarinet puts out sound in all directions, and very different from note to note- I think the answer has to be either A) an acoustically dead space with 2 or more mics, or B) a live space with strategically positioned mic(s). I'm tempted to try my shower stall, but what if it was fantastic? Would really gum up my process, LOL.
Up to now I've just been doing my usual practicing while moving my one mic around, and not all that carefully. And of course it is not that easy. So next up I will approach it systematically and really find out the best position etc with what I have readily available. I'm thinking storage bin lids as sound reflectors, on the floor and to left and right. Stay tuned...
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-08-30 05:24
I spent a couple of hours on this today, with the best possible of all results- that I now know how I want to record and perform with mics, am happy with what I'm getting, and will not have to fuss much with it or spend any more $$ on mics or such. Silversorcerer (David), you are correct that it does not have to be difficult.
Much of the benefit of my testing today (as with other aspects of clarinet play) was in learning what does not matter, or matters only a little. Fairly large variation in mic position did little to the sound. A sort of "booth" made out of plastic bin lids (which I thought ought to do SOMETHING) made no audible difference, great- less to bother with. Swapping my $60 MB3000L (great reviews) for my $15 SP-33 (good reviews) made almost no difference- I'm sure one day I'll try a condenser but it seems what I have is already quite good. And I had already found the right EQ setting for my preamp- pull the highs down 8 dB.
All mic positions sound pretty good. But I got best combo of tone plus evenness of sound level per note from about 6" away, the mic just above the clarinet bell and aimed almost up (30 deg off vertical). That was a surprise, but that's why you do experiments.
And overall I like the sound, quite a step up from the barrel mics. I am pretty sure that yesterday something was bogus on my laptop that gummed up what I was hearing. I even had what sounded like buzzing in the mic, like I was overdriving it. Not a hint of that today. So I guess the moral is, with anything funny on a computer- reboot the software or the whole machine.
Again I am a happy camper- problems solved one by one. Which uncovers new ones I didn't know were there, but that's good, I think.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-08-30 06:30)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2015-08-30 22:16
Most professional recording engineers have found that placing a good condenser mike on a boom about 3-4 feet above the clarinet gives the best results. Miking directly at the bell ( ala saxophone style ) produces very nasal sounding tone.
Miking close to the body gives uneven results as the clarinet emits most of the sound from the open tone hole, which of course varies as you play up and down the scale. The boom technique evens out all of this without introducing too much "room effect".
Jerry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-08-31 05:04
Thanks- Jerry. Today I tried my (dynamic) mic about 2 ft above me, works great and much easier to deal with than mic on a stand. (The mic is hanging from a pole stretched across the room. Yep, nothing but the finest equipment and decor in my office.) I can leave it there, one less thing to set up and tear down for my practice sessions.
With clarinet reverb (from mic signal) in my headphone mix- I still feel like I'm in an auditorium rather than a small dead room. But the sound is much more accurate. And I expect that will be a very good thing for my playing, over the long term.
(Edited to add- everybody does seem to prefer condenser mics for this kind of application, so I plan to join the crowd. I can't spend a lot, but the Nady SPC-25 looks like a decent choice at around $50. I will see if I can get $30 or so for my Audio-Technica MB3000L, and use my Nady dynamic SP-33 in the meantime. Perhaps the higher output of the condenser mic will allow me to bypass the preamp and go directly into the laptop mic input. Especially since the SPC-25 uses a battery rather than phantom power.)
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-08-31 21:34)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Morton
Date: 2015-09-04 07:00
Recordists who work with clarinets suggest "3 ft. out and 3 ft. up". This sounds about right, because the mic is far enough away to minimize the effect of the different scale tones coming from different places on the instrument. The trouble for me comes in performance with a combo when I am shoulder to shoulder with a trumpet and a trombone.
My solution has been a DPA 4061 clip-on mic, recommended to me by the jazz player Anat Cohen. My longwinded account is here, with photos:
http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/read.html?f=1&i=389569&t=389569
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-04 20:10
John- that looks cool! Thanks for sharing. Interesting that this is an omnidirectional mic- that does make sense. Perhaps I can experiment with some less expensive substitutes. Price does sometimes correlate with performance, fortunately not always.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-04 20:32
Attachment: Mic-Shure-SE110.mp3 (705k)
Attachment: Mic-Nady-SP33.mp3 (687k)
Here are some audio samples.
Shure-SE110 is one of my old barrel mics. Nady-SP33 is an inexpensive dynamic mic, suspended about 2 feet above my clarinet.
Both clips are processed with reverb and digital delay for a nice stereo image (from mono recordings). Same EQ applied to both samples (currently set for best sound from Nady open mic), to be completely fair in this comparison I should have gone back to previous EQ I used with barrel mic for Shure clip.
Does anyone expect an audible improvement if and when I switch to an inexpensive condenser mic, perhaps a Nady SPC-15? (Not even wanting to spring for an SPC-25.)
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-09-04 20:57)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-05 08:31
The SHURE seemed much better from the point of lack of ambient noise pick-up. Well I think it was...I DID hear quite a bit of hiss with the Nady mike.
*************************
What, in $$, is an inexpensive condensor mike? I'm in the market myself for a couple of good mikes to record a 5 piece jazz combo (clt,tpt, bjo, double bass and drums).
I have a 4 track Yamaha MT3X recorder/mixer which I plan to use. It has pretty much all the knobs and sliders necessary for good amateur recording and it uses single side only, CrO2 cassette (yes cassette) tapes running at 9.5 cm/sec.
I figure this should enable a good recording, with of course, suitable mikes. Having read up a little on the subject, it seems condensor would be the most suitable type.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-05 14:41
The Nady sounds DRAMATICALLY more like a clarinet !
Of course I come from a traditional classical clarinet point of view.
............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2015-09-05 17:28
The Nady has a lot of noise. That might be because it is a dynamic mic you need it far enough with a very high gain for a good sound but then you raise the noise from your entire chain and the clarinet input is low.
A condenser could be better but keep in mind it might also capture more of the environment noise, depending where you are recording and it could be a noisy mic too.
The pickup sound has in some parts the usual mid sound of clarinet pickups, but the difference is much smaller and lower priority than many reasons to use a pickup in some situations.
I don't have a DPA mic but a few friends do and I have a few clip-on mics from other companies that are also excellent. I wouldn't buy them for recordings, except maybe to not use as a clip-on for a recording like this, then use it as a clip-on live. That is if you want a mic for both live playign and recordings.
The distances suggested are all fine, but it really depends. I recently recorded a bass clarinet, which is even trickier than clarinet, and had two mics pretty close to the clarinet. I guess about a foot away. The sound was excellent.
I once had an absolutely terrible recording with two of the best microphones placed a bit farther away.
So it really depends...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-05 20:26
Attachment: Mic-Nady-SP33mix.mp3 (789k)
Ned- condenser mics come in all shapes and sizes, many of which are clearly not appropriate for this application (lavalier, omnidirectional, boundary mics, drum mics). I also rule out "USB" mics, which might work well in some very simple setups, and all the old Radio Shack / Optimus condensers (I owned a couple back in the day- maybe they were really OK). I rule out "no names". Of what remains, my guess is that any would sound great for me. And some are available quite reasonably priced, why should I pay more? I see little difference between the Nady SPC-15 ($40 for one or two, LOL) and the Nady SPC-25 ($50), other than the 15 needing phantom power while the 25 carries a battery. Perhaps bypassing my Behringer XENYX 1202FX mixer with the 25 would reduce noise?
I'm recording in a home office / bedroom. I turned off the loudest laptop and my cooling fan- that really makes it quieter. But 2 other computers and central AC still running, plus family noise from the hall etc. So ambient noise will be there no matter what mic. I do get more static etc from PC mic input and mixer? with the additional gain required from the outside mic- I hope the condenser will reduce this. And I have not yet done the best possible effect choices to eliminate hiss. But I'm not too concerned. All of my clarinet clips will go in rather busy sequenced mixes, really solo clarinet phrases will be rare. Check attached sample- same Nady clip in the mix. So a bit of hiss/fan/grandchild squeal at low level on the clarinet track is unlikely to audibly affect my final product. Though of course I would prefer the "perfection" of a high end studio.
Miking for live performance is another matter. I will address that later.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-06 16:50
The reason I went years with the barrel mics is precisely because they are really quite good. And as I have pointed out, they carry significant practical advantages, both in recording and live performance situations. But alas, they lose critical tone nuances.
David, you are correct to point out the absurdity of spending great $$$ and time and energy on producing the most wonderful clarinet sound we can muster- and then passing that sound through an inferior channel. Even if the difference is subtle, we routinely go to great lengths for very minor improvements, that we really are not that sure do anything. 70% of this BBoard is such stuff.
Now I have a whole set of YouTube videos that I must redo. Over the brief years I've been at this, many aspects of my play have improved considerably, so the older videos were already a bit painful for me to hear, and I was working my way through updating them. But now I feel I must redo even the most recent of them. Whatever it is we do, we should always do the best we are able.
I did consider retaining the barrel mics for live solo performance. I've played at my own church about 15-20 times over the past several years through them, and in a couple of other venues. I know from an occasion or 2 when the barrel mic failed at an inopportune time, that the natural clarinet sound does not carry much in our auditorium without reinforcement, especially with my sequenced backing tracks pumping through the system. So that means mostly what people were hearing was the barrel mic tone- might as well have been one of my barrel recordings. And it will sound better from an "outside" mic, so now that's what I will deal with. Eventually I will experiment with instrument mounted condensers- but I think that's just convenience not sound, for solo clarinet.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarnibass
Date: 2015-09-06 19:05
>> The Nady is not noisy;- it is picking up noise. <<
It is not always possible to know that, but in the examle posted it sounds more like noise from the recording chain and not ambient noise.
The mic was probably put far away so it can capture the clarinet more or less evenly. Since it's a dynamic mic this means it needs very high gain because they are usually not meant to be used from so far away. Then it raises the noise from the mic/console/etc. and signal is relatively weak.
It's like a lot of sound engineers try to amplify a clarinet using one dynamic mic and not being able to get a really even response and a high volume on a loud stage before feedback, which is pretty common.
A condenser might capture more ambient noise, but it might need lower gain (or not, it depends) to counter that.
When a mic is "quiet" or "noisy" it's not like you get extreme quiet with one mic and a lot of white noise with another... but the difference can be significant in some situations.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-06 21:27
Great content, all of you- thanks! BBoard threads can continue to be a resource on all manner of topics for years to come- what maybe didn't apply for the OP does or will apply to someone else reading then or much later. Or maybe to the OP years later when he/she finally understands, LOL.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John Morton
Date: 2015-09-09 06:45
The mic problem for me centered on the uneven response across the range. You can test this economically with a cheap Radio Shack lavalier mic, mounted at different spots while you play scales. You might need to fudge some kind of phony gooseneck substitute to do this, but the point is to find the spot where the response is even while being as close as possible to the clarinet. Close, to eliminate leakage from any sounds that are not your clarinet.
Fidelity is another matter. The DPA gets me that.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-10 02:08
I just purchased an MXL 990 condenser mic from "that site" for $39 with shipping. Can't wait to test it...
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-10 09:29
I'm glad I stumbled across a mic you've had good experience with. I see MXL990's with shock mount (which mine has other stuff instead) retailing around $90, so I figured $39 wasn't bad for a used and slightly dented one- so long as it sounds right.
Your avant garde band stuff seems well polished for no rehearsal, let it rip. Is there a map of the music, of sorts? Or you just kind of show each other what you're doing, and/or latch onto what others have started? I could imagine ending up with 30 tracks and only using 3 in the final mix. And are there arguments over that mix, like "Where is my kazoo solo?". Seriously, I hear a boatload of work.
The Sass track is more up my alley, nice. I was amused back with early synths that they provided "fret noise" to add realism to guitar voices, and I assume that's deliberately part of sampled guitar and bass even today. But aren't mechanical noises like from the fingers not actually part of the designed musical output of a guitar or bass? They're more like, you can't help it, but you wish it wasn't there? Like noise from the action of a piano, or the keys of a clarinet or sax? Do recording engineers seek to minimize these, or do record producers prefer to hear them? And if guitar fret noise, why not clarinet key noise? ...to make it more "real".
Anyway, what you have recorded through MX's does sound mighty good. I think I did well compared to my other choices at under $40.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-11 04:20
''but one complaint with them at the time was QC, but apparently the defective ones failed so quickly that the issue resolved quickly;;
SS, what is ''QC"" please?
**********************
And a couple of general questions from a recording novice. If the MXL990 is ommnidirectional, can this directionality be limited by placing some sort of baffle behind it (ie) on the ''audience'' side of it? Would this elmininate extraneous sound and room reverb/echo to any discernible degree?
An MXL990 will cost me upwards of one hundred and seventy aussie dollars, by the way.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-11 05:46
David,
You say ''The MXL 990 is a cardioid pick-up pattern condenser. It is not omnidirectional....''
So that's a ''figure 8'' pattern then? Pardon my lack of knowledge, but that indicates...what am I trying to say?...err, if I switch the position of the mike by 90deg intervals at a time, then that pick-up pattern will vary (by 90deg) according to the relative direction of the mike? Hopefully that makes some sort of sense!
I'd buy from ''that site'' if I knew where to find you on it. Recently I bought a battery from ''that site'' for my grandson's kiddie car for $30 (in Oz), whereas I could also buy it from an Oz retailer for $100+.
So, I'm in the market for 2x MXL990s...and still looking.
chrs,
John
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-11 05:53
''I wanted to get some luthier supplies from a good seller in Australia''
David, I also inhabit a website called THE STEEL GUITAR FORUM and this bloke regularly contributes, he's a Pommy living in San Francisco, or thereabouts. He's a luthier and here is an example of his work: I hope the link works: http://bb.steelguitarforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=286880&highlight=
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2015-09-12 19:01
This thread is an excellent example of just how far off the OP's topic can go if one person chooses to derail the discussion to ramble on his own subjects. If some of the posters here wish to express thoughts on divergent subjects, let them start a new thread, otherwise stick to the original topic, please......
Jerry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-13 09:16
I take it Jerry, that you are unhappy.
I'm not sure you are correct in your musings though. If you are referring to the latter part of this thread, I'd say it is well ''on topic'' as it were.
For my part, I have been well informed by a few of the correspondents with respect to recording the clarinet with a microphone. They have supplied me with answers to recording specifics, as I wish to record a combo, not just one instrument.
Topics such as this can mushroom, but overall, it seems that folks have tended to limit the discussion to clarinets and microphones. I'd say also, that if the moderators were in doubt, then they could edit or delete any post, as is necessary.
By making this post you have actually done what you are accusing others of indulging in. Did you consider starting a new topic yourself?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-13 16:35
Attachment: Mic-MXL990.mp3 (725k)
Attachment: Mic-MXL990mix.mp3 (834k)
Attachment: mxl990overhead.JPG (332k)
OK- MXL990 arrived yesterday (fast delivery- yay!) and I am very pleased. Compare new samples with old. And see photo of mic position.
And I could post raw clips, but to me that's like sampling uncooked steaks, and I'm not a fan of tartare.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-09-13 16:40)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: saxlite
Date: 2015-09-14 03:39
Yes, I am unhappy that the discussion has gone so far off topic. No, I did not consider that my last observation was an attempt to start a new topic. I considered only to respond to the OP's original query about miking clarinets and limited my remarks to that topic. I find nothing in the OP's post discussing recording of combos, etc. Go back and reread the original post and also my response. Then consider your rambling discussion of many topics. My point has made; I'm done here. You may have the last word if you choose to.
Jerry
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ned
Date: 2015-09-14 05:51
Very good Stan - I had a listen - and I see that your boom is about 3-4 feet above as recommended by Jerry.
Can you direct me to the supplier please - I understand that your purchase was via that site. Feel free to email me directly if you like. Yours was purchased for US$39, second hand, I believe?
thanks,
john
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Paul Aviles
Date: 2015-09-14 07:39
Newbie question here. You guys refer to the cardioid unidirectional mic. It seems to imply there are other types of unidirectional mics. Are there?
...............Paul Aviles
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: fskelley
Date: 2015-09-14 08:13
John- Actually that photo showed me the mic was higher than I intended (the Nady hung lower below the boom). So today I dropped the boom down about 6 inches and slid the mic a couple inches further away from me. I suppose eventually I'll just leave it alone and move on to other issues.
I purchased from an individual, a good example at a good price, just the luck of the draw. I suggest you do a saved search and set it to notify you when something shows up. If you're ready to pay retail or close to it, you can always find popular items. But if you insist (as I must) on a great deal- you may have to be patient. Maybe David will find you another MXL990.
David- Thanks for listening and offering your evaluations and helpful suggestions. FYI with the Nady on the preamp I had cut the highs, but with the MXL the preamp EQ is completely flat. Then I used the same EQ in Sonar for both. The MXL requires much less gain from the preamp.
Stan in Orlando
EWI 4000S with modifications
Post Edited (2015-09-14 08:15)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
