Cool XY and AB micing techniques

[kayagum]

Even though this was a gear review article on the manufacturer site (Rode NT5), the article covers a lot of different stereo micing techniques, many of which I have never seen mentioned on this board AFAIK....

http://rodemicrophones.com/reviews/Rode ... lo-res.pdf

Especially useful is the table that shows the effective coverage of different stereo mic angles. For those who are good at wave mechanics and acoustics math/physics, anyone care to elaborate on this?

Thought I'd add one on the technique side of the equation instead of the gear side.

PS I used the ORTF configuration at a live recording gig over the weekend, and I was very pleased with the results. Weird how you can place each singer in the stereo field without any visual cues.

[kayagum]

OK, now I'm pissed.... even though I'm not half as articulate or pissed off as soundguy, this takes the cake.

This post has been on for 24 hours, and not 1 response? And how many responses did the "recommend stero [sic] mics" thread get?

C'mon. Any of you so-called recordists know any of these stereo micing configurations? ORTF, NOS, DIN, RAI? I bet if we took a quiz, maybe 25% would get ORTF, and 0% for the rest. And no, these aren't brands. These are ways you can set up mics to get different stereo results, and different coverages.

I sure as hell didn't, and I thought this would be of interest. Apparently not.

Geez. I think we have way too much disposable income here. People care more about hoarding gear like squirrels with acorns. That's fine with me, since you all are maxing out your credit and I work in the financial services industry- your spending guarantees my day job. But do you know how to use them? Do you know how to use what you have to get a decent recording of hopefully a decent performance? I doubt it.

The more I read the gear posts, the less I'm trusting them. More than half the time, mics sound like shit because they're in the wrong place. Or, they're manipulated to sound like the shit that's on the radio. Hard to know how to mix a good martini if you've never had a good martini before.

Even some of the more creative techniques (e.g. speaker mics)- I don't think you'd get very far until someone will get into a pissing match and say, "what kind of speakers- the NS10s suck!" Please.

I'm going to start another thread. It's time that we separate gear as a separate topic from recording. If you have the credit cards, go to the gear section. I'd rather hear about what people do with the gear they have.

(Putting on the asbestos suit)

[Ian]

Thanks for the link........did you get the new issue(Carol Kaye) I got mine yesterday, it has a good overview of most of these stereo techniques.

[kayagum]

Thanks for the link........did you get the new issue(Carol Kaye) I got mine yesterday, it has a good overview of most of these stereo techniques.

Sure did- it was very helpful for a gig I recorded last week. It's in the "Anatomy of a Live Recording Session" thread.

[bigtoe]

'Especially useful is the table that shows the effective coverage of different stereo mic angles. For those who are good at wave mechanics and acoustics math/physics, anyone care to elaborate on this? '

get a protractor? it's not that hard...and even then the mic factors into it...not just the angle.

cool that you learned about them on paper...now try them out...like you suggest.

no offense but is someone is supposed to tell you how to use these things based on some theory? impossible. even 'those who are good at wave mechanics and acoustics math/physics' will tell you it's a crap shoot and use your ears. example: i know of a few halls built to be god that ended up sucking. that new one in LA (disney, i think) is supposed to be great.

'great' ...but what does that mean? prehaps you don't like it! and then you're back to square one.

i keep going back to XY or mono. the rooms i use kinda suck so i find it hard to even get away with stereo...trashy shit sounds better to me in mono.

the real forum advice you're looking for is use your ears so go use your ears...i suggest starting with a pair of 81's thos erode mics suck ass! haha!

Mike

[kayagum]

I'm not looking for advice... in fact, I used some of this in my recording gig last week, and I liked the results, and just wanted to share them.(see: "Anatomy of a Live Recording Session")

I thought two things were interesting:

(a) the wider the angle of the mic spread, the narrower the angle of useful coverage.
(b) different mic capsule distances can net different useful results.

These aren't cookie cutters... but I thought these would be interesting starting points for those of us stuck on XY at 90 degrees. I'm very glad I tried the ORTF setup. If I get an opportunity in the future, I'll have the other options available to try.

Plus, I don't think either of us (you, bigtoe, and I) have the physics chops to answer the question of how this works. That's why I'm asking it, and why you didn't answer it. Anyone else?

Edit: PS- I was recording a vocal concert in a nice college performance hall. Trust me, if I was recording at my favorite dive bar or in my basement, I wouldn't probably bother. GIGO, right?

PPS I'm sure I would have done fine with either NT5s or 81s for this gig. If your space is that bad, I'm pretty sure a U87 wouldn't save your ass.

[dynomike]

OK, now I'm pissed.... even though I'm not half as articulate or pissed off as soundguy, this takes the cake.

This post has been on for 24 hours, and not 1 response?

No offense, but nobody likes a whiner. Did you do this to be helpful, or to get props from internet geeks you've never met?

Of course it is nice to be appreciated.. but perhaps the reason you're not getting the response you think you deserve is that this has actually been covered before. Not to discourage you from posting at all... I'm glad you're trying to help.

[nlmd311]

I thought two things were interesting:

(a) the wider the angle of the mic spread, the narrower the angle of useful coverage.
(b) different mic capsule distances can net different useful results.

...

I think the most useful thing I learned in school was that the best way to look at things when you are setting up mics (be it a stereo configuration, or a mono mic) is to imagine the mic is a flashlight, and think about what areas would be in the light if you were setting up a mic this way. Not the most scientific approach, but I think it is the best visual que I really have ever had. That would really help you visually to see the first point you brought up. Then once you figure out how much area of coverage you have from the lightsource/mic you can decide whether you want to use a cardiod vs. an omni vs. a supercardiod vs. a subcardiod. I think the main thing people need to learn (not directing this toward anyone in this thread, just general) is how to read and apply the polar patterns of microphones. Even when setting up a mono mic you have to ask yourself, "Do I want more room? Less room? Do I want more source and a little room and almost no bleed?" Pick and set your mic(s) based on that.
This can be helpful in any mono or stereo technique really. Nothing set in stone, but... ?

Maybe it's just me, but I think that rules.

-Darrill

[bigtoe]

'Plus, I don't think either of us (you, bigtoe, and I) have the physics chops to answer the question of how this works. That's why I'm asking it, and why you didn't answer it.'

figure out the question you're asking...and we'll go from there. it's not all that hard...do you want an equation? yes wrong guy here...though i took physics.

'Anyone else?'

yes please someone step up - as kaygum's being a flaming dickhead...

these online rants are so retarded. it's like some gorilla thinking they discovered fire in the 21st century.

Mike

[jspartz]

Because the topic was brought up,

I really like ORTF, M-S, and Blumliem stereo recording. I find that I have a hard time being happy with X-Y recording. Anyone else feel this way?

Jason

[matt250321]

I am also interested in something someone brought up here before once, but I can't find it again. Someone mentioned using a matched pair facing so their diaphrams are angled 180 degrees (so they are facing hard left and right with the diaphrams aligned) Then using this as a DIY figure 8 "mic". This can be combined with another mic in the middle for a M-S technique. I don't have a figure 8 mic and thought it would be cool to try. I have heard great things about M-S. Anyone try this trick? Any pitfalls or suggestions? Also thanks for the link Kayagum.

[kayagum]

BTW, bigtoe, I've always thought you've added postively to the conversation on practically every thread you've been on. Maybe your post here was a little crabby, but point taken. I just thought it was funny that people were so eager to say "ooh! ooh! buy this stereo mic!" and not care about stereo placements.

I was just interested in "the wider the mic angle, the narrower the coverage spread" phenomenon. If it's just a simple "you lose the central image when the mic is so far off to the side that the pickup pattern leaves the middle", then that's fine.

Of course, like with all techniques, YMMV. Room or hall acoustics definitely play a huge role in this. I was lucky enough to get a chance to try something new (to me) in a nice hall.

[kayagum]

OK, now I'm pissed.... even though I'm not half as articulate or pissed off as soundguy, this takes the cake.

This post has been on for 24 hours, and not 1 response?

No offense, but nobody likes a whiner. Did you do this to be helpful, or to get props from internet geeks you've never met?

Of course it is nice to be appreciated.. but perhaps the reason you're not getting the response you think you deserve is that this has actually been covered before. Not to discourage you from posting at all... I'm glad you're trying to help.

Maybe I should have just said "bump".

I just wanted to call attention to the DIN, OLSON and RAI methods. Never seen those covered before, and outside of Professor's nice description of ORTF and NOS, I hadn't seen much on that either.

I don't really care if I get called names. At least we have a few more posts now. I'll stick with "bump" next time.

[Sayer]

I just thought it was funny that people were so eager to say "ooh! ooh! buy this stereo mic!" and not care about stereo placements.

I am surprised that by now you haven't realized that so many producers/engineers will take convenience over quality.

You put a good link up and people would have looked at it if you hadn't started begging for online recognition.

Why would you care if people don't want to learn??? There's probably enough good competition already...

p.s. I wouldn't worry about becoming some type of figurehead on here like sound guy, you might be surprised at the reputation of some of the people who lurk this board...

[kayagum]

I just thought it was funny that people were so eager to say "ooh! ooh! buy this stereo mic!" and not care about stereo placements.

I am surprised that by now you haven't realized that so many producers/engineers will take convenience over quality.

You put a good link up and people would have looked at it if you hadn't started begging for online recognition.

Why would you care if people don't want to learn??? There's probably enough good competition already...

p.s. I wouldn't worry about becoming some type of figurehead on here like sound guy, you might be surprised at the reputation of some of the people who lurk this board...

True. I guess I just got really excited about finding some new techniques actually being written up, and being bummed that nobody else did, or at least right away.

I'll stick to the audio discussion, and save the preaching for... well, someone else.