#46
|
||||
|
||||
How 2-mic stereo effects are created depends on the mic setup. True (theoretical) co-incident pairs create stereo totally due to level differences - that's the whole concept, that mics that are in exactly the same place, but angled differently have no timing(phase) differences, because all sound hits them both at exactly the same time. As you move mics further apart (NOS, ORTF, spaced pairs), you introduce more and more timing differences as well as level differences. Of course even with X/Y you have some phase/timing differences because 100% coincidence is a theoretical concept, and not a physical possibility - the two capsules can't occupy the exact same space. But with X/Y used in situations where it was intended - like micing an orchestra from a fair distance, it's close enough to be 99.99999% level differences and virtually no timing. Placed 6 inches from a guitar, where the guitar is also giving off difference tones, levels, and phases from different parts of the top and the small differences in spacing in X/Y end up having at least a little phase info as well as tone and level differences. The same differences in theory vs the way we use mics on a guitar tends to show up with any mic set, even something like spaced pairs. Using spaced pairs on an orchestra far away is a whole different thing than closing micing a guitar, where it's almost like you're picking up two totally different sound sources.
A quick search should turn up a lot of background on how level/phase/mic placement relate. Here's on article from SOS that touches on some of it: https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/199...reomiking.html
__________________
Music: Spotify, Bandcamp Videos: You Tube Channel Books: Hymns for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), Christmas Carols for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), A DADGAD Christmas, Alternate Tunings book Online Course: Alternate Tunings for Fingerstyle Guitar |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Perhaps someone will jump in to clarify that. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
There are two places from which I listen to an acoustic guitar live and unamplified. First, I listen from above and slightly behind when I'm playing. Second, I listen from out in front, more or less, when listening to someone else play, usually some distance away from the source (I'm leaving aside listening from the left or right side when I sit next to someone playing). Rarely have I listened out front from, say, two feet away, or 8" away, and it is impossible for me to change the distance between my ears.
Every mic combination/placement I use does not match where my ears are located when I listen to an acoustic guitar being played. It is not surprising that any recording I make does not have the same soundstage, sonority and presentation that I hear when listening as detailed above. It sounds different. Not necessarily worse or better, just different. Is there a way to make a recording sound more closely to what I hear when listening in real time to the actual source (i.e., not a recording, not amplified)? I believe the answer is yes, but it's just a matter of how close or authentic. Of course, nothing says that getting close is any sort of holy grail. Moving away from or tweaking an authentic soundstage, sonority and presentation in a recording often results in very pleasing aural results. |
#49
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Derek Coombs Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs "Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love To be that we hold so dear A voice from heavens above |
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev... KevWind at Soundcloud KevWind at YouYube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD System : Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1 Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Sonoma 14.4 Last edited by KevWind; 04-12-2014 at 08:40 PM. |
#51
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Derek Coombs Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs "Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love To be that we hold so dear A voice from heavens above |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#53
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
I'm not clear as to why the differences of that method is relevant in the context of two tracks, no high or low pass and slight eq differences and slight time slip. It may well be exactly as you say "not even close with a spaced pair " positioning and I am not saying otherwise, so I see no debate. I was simply suggesting that "if" that is the case , then I presume it will be consistently identifiable in a blind test. And would be interesting to do so. Is there some reason you feel such a test would not be educational ? Or are you simply staking out your prediction as to anticipated result ? And certainly if a spaced stereo pair is the sound that you prefer then indeed that would logically be the most accurate method to that spaced pair stereo sound. And that is certainly a common and valid goal and method. However. Because I agree with what sdelsolray said that first off and foremost, no recorded sound of any method actually sounds the same same as either sitting in the room listening to an un amplified acoustic or playing an un amplified acoustic. No matter the method of recording all recorded sound is "artificial" compared to live. And I predict, that difference would be in a blind test accurately identified every time. With that in mind it then becomes simply a matter of which "artificial" method is personally preferred to get what is personally deemed "the sound I am after". In terms of getting close to having a recording sound like listening live, if that is your goal that is quite valid. BUT I happen to also agree with sdelsolray that "Of course, nothing says that getting close is any sort of holy grail". Be that as it may, in the vein of getting close to what the player hears. That was the goal of the engineer who recorded my demo songs in Nashville. He used a pair of Shure KSM 44 LDC's On was placed out from the 12th fret about 18" and up about 8" and pointing angled down at the neck. the other was placed up about 8" from right shoulder height (right handed player) directly over the body of the guitar and facing directly down. And the sound was quite good, and interestingly enough worked well in a about a 15 track mix.
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev... KevWind at Soundcloud KevWind at YouYube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD System : Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1 Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Sonoma 14.4 Last edited by KevWind; 04-13-2014 at 08:42 AM. |
#54
|
||||
|
||||
Kevwind, if you want to, experiment with these raw recording files which are the stereo recording, the right mono track, and left mono track - all 16 bit 44100 sample rate wav files - from an earlier recording of mine.
http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/RebeccaStereo.wav http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/RebeccaR.wav http://dcoombsguitar.com/Misc/RebeccaL.wav
__________________
Derek Coombs Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs "Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love To be that we hold so dear A voice from heavens above |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Yes, along with ORTF (if both placements are far enough out in front). A pair of wide cardioids or omnis placed over the shoulders (L and R) seems to capture the above and slightly behind hearing position, but that placement makes me nervous. I swear some of my mics can hear my eyes blink.
|
#56
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev... KevWind at Soundcloud KevWind at YouYube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD System : Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1 Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Sonoma 14.4 |
#57
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Enjoy the Journey.... Kev... KevWind at Soundcloud KevWind at YouYube https://www.youtube.com/playlist?lis...EZxkPKyieOTgRD System : Studio system Avid Carbon interface , PT Ultimate 2023.12 -Mid 2020 iMac 27" 3.8GHz 8-core i7 10th Gen ,, Ventura 13.2.1 Mobile MBP M1 Pro , PT Ultimate 2023.12 Sonoma 14.4 |
#58
|
||||
|
||||
Jecklin or ORTF is meant to approximate your ears, but there are lots of other issues. If you recorded, say, from 12 inches away, and then listen to headphones, you should get a reasonable close approximation of what you would hear if you were listening from the same spot. Of course, as sdelsolrey points out, we usually don't listen to a guitar with our ears a few inches from the soundhole. And up close, our ears don't have proximity effect the same way mics (at least cardiods) do, so there may be some differences. Once you get further back, you're hearing the guitar from a more realistic audience perspective, but the room starts to dominate, and mics don't pick up quite the same way as our ears/brains, so the sound may not seem so similar.
Kev, there's also the whole collection of raw tracks in Scott Wigham's "library" that he and I recorded using different mic patterns that you could play with. That was partly why Scott set up that collection, so people could play around with raw unprocessed tracks. I'm confused about the goal tho, you just want to know if someone can hear specific stereo techniques, including artificial processing? I'd say yes, some of the time, especially if you're listening on good monitors and know what your listening for, and other times no. A very definitive "maybe" :-)
__________________
Music: Spotify, Bandcamp Videos: You Tube Channel Books: Hymns for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), Christmas Carols for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), A DADGAD Christmas, Alternate Tunings book Online Course: Alternate Tunings for Fingerstyle Guitar |
#59
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
The best recordings are the ones where I find myself captivated by the music, and the musicality, not the ones that leave me wondering about the recording techniques. Your recordings rate high on my list. |
#60
|
||||
|
||||
Thanks Larry. For me, recording's a lot like any technique, you want to put your time on the mechanics, so that when the time comes to actually use them, you don't have to worry much about them, and can just focus on the music. Like most technique things, if you do it right (which means focusing on a lot of technical details at some point), then the listener just hears the music and never notices the technique. Do it wrong, and the listener will be distracted and notice the lack of technique instead of hearing the music.
__________________
Music: Spotify, Bandcamp Videos: You Tube Channel Books: Hymns for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), Christmas Carols for Fingerstyle Guitar (std tuning), A DADGAD Christmas, Alternate Tunings book Online Course: Alternate Tunings for Fingerstyle Guitar |