A Recording Experiment

solidwalnut · #1 01-31-2011, 07:17 PM

I recently finished a recording experiment project and wanted to share it with you. It's a project recording my Taylor 714ce using various mic's and trying them out with my latest acquisition, a Manley Dual Mono Mic Pre, complete with audio files. Enjoy, and let me know of any comments or questions you might have.

Mic and Manley DOE
Thanks for listening,

Steve

Brent Hutto · #2 01-31-2011, 07:26 PM

Steve,

That's some amazining thorough testing but honestly, I didn't give it the hour or more it would take to read everything and listen to even the majority of the samples. Any chance you'd want to create an "executive summary" of the most important or illustrative results?

solidwalnut · #3 02-01-2011, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brent Hutto

Steve,

That's some amazining thorough testing but honestly, I didn't give it the hour or more it would take to read everything and listen to even the majority of the samples. Any chance you'd want to create an "executive summary" of the most important or illustrative results?

Hi Brent--

Actually, in the middle of the page, you'll see 'Overall DOE Summary'. That should get you started on reading about the results. That will lead you, however, to each DOE's summary. So read the overall first, then skip around to the other summaries.

Steve

dannyg1 · #4 02-02-2011, 04:26 PM

Steve,

Your tests are impressive and they do tell the reader alot about getting an optimized recording of a single guitar but I think that you may be missing the greatest strength of a high end mic pre: It's ability to keep definition and seperation in a remarkably complex soundscape.

Many people who record don't realise that what they're doing is trying to reproduce a soundstage that needs to exist when played back. On an ideal system, the effect can be pretty shocking, especially to the uninitiated.

This recording ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaKv2Zih_Ok ) of a piano and vocal, stereo mic'd in a cafe is one of the best I've heard and has a sonic complexity that would fail most any mic pre. The first impression though, is of a very subtle and simple presentation.

On a proper playback system, this recording is just shocking. Though I've never heard a Manley pre, I know that this level of detail and complexity from different sources throughout the stage's dynamics are what they're trying to reproduce accurately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by solidwalnut

I recently finished a recording experiment project and wanted to share it with you. It's a project recording my Taylor 714ce using various mic's and trying them out with my latest acquisition, a Manley Dual Mono Mic Pre, complete with audio files. Enjoy, and let me know of any comments or questions you might have.

Mic and Manley DOE
Thanks for listening,

Steve

rick-slo · #5 02-02-2011, 04:50 PM

The mike pre is a fairly small part of the whole package once you get to any pre amp that is decent. There might be more amp variation with transient power level demands in some music or with certain gain hungry mikes such as ribbon mikes. Some amps try to impart a little color (eg neve clones) but I would not say that makes them more or less spacious sounding.
I take it you guys have listened to the clips here
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/sessions.htm
I really have to use my imagination trying to hear differences. Even most of the mikes sound pretty close.

solidwalnut · #6 02-02-2011, 05:40 PM

Danny--

I like your comments about reproducing a sound stage. So true. Reproducing a sound stage without adding anything.

That is an excellent recording. I think great recordings have more to do with the mics, the placement and the room more than the mic pre. You could take my source, mics and mic pre and record them on a different soundstage and get very different results.

His recording sounds so good most likely because of the engineer. A really good engineer can work with whatever tools he or she has and make a recording and a soundstage sound great. It's not knowing the tools and inexperience that cloud recordings. Nice tools really help, but engineers can screw up the chain if they're not careful...I did so on several of these recordings on in the test. I didn't set out to show anything but how to recording this single guitar in that particular room.

So much detail can be captured with good mic's and a great room. The mics and mic pre's that can handle the transients in the most music way are so important, too.

Joseph Hanna · #7 02-02-2011, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyg1

Steve,

Your tests are impressive and they do tell the reader alot about getting an optimized recording of a single guitar but I think that you may be missing the greatest strength of a high end mic pre: It's ability to keep definition and seperation in a remarkably complex soundscape.

Many people who record don't realise that what they're doing is trying to reproduce a soundstage that needs to exist when played back. On an ideal system, the effect can be pretty shocking, especially to the uninitiated.

This recording ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaKv2Zih_Ok ) of a piano and vocal, stereo mic'd in a cafe is one of the best I've heard and has a sonic complexity that would fail most any mic pre. The first impression though, is of a very subtle and simple presentation.

On a proper playback system, this recording is just shocking. Though I've never heard a Manley pre, I know that this level of detail and complexity from different sources throughout the stage's dynamics are what they're trying to reproduce accurately.

Danny,

Where this is a beautiful recording and an even more so brilliant vocal, you're making connections here that just aren't happening.

There may be sonic complexity in this recording and in part it may or may not be because of any pre amp choices. That said the wives tale of pre-amp's somehow equaling detail or even imagining is just that...wives tales.

The only constant in your audio example is lovely musical talent

solidwalnut · #8 02-02-2011, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rick-slo

The mike pre is a fairly small part of the whole package once you get to any pre amp that is decent. There might be more amp variation with transient power level demands in some music or with certain gain hungry mikes such as ribbon mikes. Some amps try to impart a little color (eg neve clones) but I would not say that makes them more or less spacious sounding.
I take it you guys have listened to the clips here
http://www.thelisteningsessions.com/sessions.htm
I really have to use my imagination trying to hear differences. Even most of the mikes sound pretty close.

Rick--

Thanks for that links. I love listening to samples. But you're right. Sometimes there are only very subtle differences. I guess one person's ears are going to be different and say that they can hear such-and-such.

Most of the time the main differences are going to be in the 'bump' response of the mic and how they characterize the different frequency bands. When those are known, then it's how each pre handles that 'bump' or band response. Can be fun. But there's so many great pieces of equipment out there all capable of recording great stuff. I say it's all up to the Indians, not the arrows themselves.

dannyg1 · #9 02-02-2011, 06:30 PM

Joseph,

The brilliance is in the smallest details and I can say with 100% surety that you're getting perfectly and completely caught in your own conclusive beliefs and you've lost the point of what I wrote. There's no wive's tale happening.

That Bill Henderson recording, on that record, through a worthy playback system contains a level of information that imparts a startling image; one that answers any question of whether the notion of reproducing 'there', over here, convincingly, is possible.

It takes the ability to listen, knowledge and capable tools to capture the moment. As I said before, that's what the purpose of extremely high end equipment is all about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph Hanna

Danny,

Where this is a beautiful recording and an even more so brilliant vocal, you're making connections here that just aren't happening.

There may be sonic complexity in this recording and in part it may or may not be because of any pre amp choices. That said the wives tale of pre-amp's somehow equaling detail or even imagining is just that...wives tales.

The only constant in your audio example is lovely musical talent

Scott Whigham · #10 02-18-2011, 07:44 AM

Wow - that is quite a detailed breakdown you went through! Kudos for the effort!

I'm guilty of this kind of overkill too in my own recording tests (and let's be honest: it is overkill!), and for the same reasons you listed in your post. I think it's a great way to learn the depth and the breadth of your gear and your space. I know my mics and spots now so well after doing this kind of stuff that, 90% of the time, I can just approximate and hit 'record' to get a great sounding recording.

So yes, this stuff is overkill and most people who aren't of this mindset will probably say, "Just stop all of that and play some music!" but the lessons learned will be with you for the rest of your life. A worthwhile trade IMO!

Ty Ford · #11 02-19-2011, 08:32 AM

Steve,

About soundstage perception. It was not until I tried the Event Opal audio monitors that my years long sense of soundstage reproduction changed.

To be specific, I have a bout half a dozen CDs that I use for getting a sense of what a system or studio sounds like. One of them is a double set of Henry Mancini's orchestral recordings. The Pink Panther Theme is a great cut because it's a live recording on a large soundstage. On the Opals, it as though you at a large doorway looking and listening into the studio. The sense of the dimension of the soundstage and placement of the instruments is palpable.

So monitors and monitor placement also makes a difference.

Regards,

Ty Ford