Members PBBPaul Posted December 20, 2006 Members Share Posted December 20, 2006 Here's what I got from this particular lesson... I don't think it's so much an issue of affording or even putting the effort into creating a perfect acoustical space as much as it is using the space one has along with creative micing techniques to achieve a dramatic soundscape. I mean, we would all love to have Studio A or Carnegie Hall but the reality is that most of us (at least I) have pretty poor recording environments for getting good reflective sound. My studio is OK but not great by any stretch. I actually get my best room sound for instance, in my kitchen. The recording and the accompanying explanation from our esteemed Viking give me more inspiration to explore different micing ideas and get away from the "stick a mic in front of it and place it later" mindset. It reinforces the idea that technology can be either a tool or a crutch but when used as a crutch, the "legs" will not get stronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Martin Kantola Posted December 20, 2006 Members Share Posted December 20, 2006 Originally posted by Angelo Clematide All very nice information, but I'm wondering when the first forumite is asking what all is needed to achieve the quality Bruce is recording and mixing since fifty years. Incredible talent and lots of hard work? May I suggest three things: Depth Perspective Drama Both acoustically, but more importantly in your sonic imagination. In your mind and approach to the music. Martin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted December 21, 2006 Members Share Posted December 21, 2006 Originally posted by ultravibe Or don't want to afford it? I wonder if the quality of even "real" studio rooms has gone down because the money-men believe that any soundstage can be replicated digitally. "That Modern Sound" is the term I heard people call the kinetic in the box plugin desktop rock & pop stuff who only drops above 7 dB RMS when the guitar riff pauses or the drummer goes to the toilet, and of course all in double mono. - Has anyone heard lately a new production who was recorded in a old fashion studio, something with a string section, brass and woodwinds, with natural reverberation and wide range dynamics who song after song has an artistic quality who makes it a joy to listen thru the full compact disk length without getting pissed off? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fantasticsound Posted December 21, 2006 Members Share Posted December 21, 2006 Originally posted by Angelo Clematide ...- Has anyone heard lately a new production who was recorded in a old fashion studio, something with a string section, brass and woodwinds, with natural reverberation and wide range dynamics who song after song has an artistic quality who makes it a joy to listen thru the full compact disk length without getting pissed off? . Yes. But not from a major label. Dave Martin, who writes for several industry mags, contributes at several bass and pro-sound forums and is an all around nice guy also manages to produce fantastic recordings at his Java Jive Studios outside Nashville. The recordings I've heard of the western swing group his wife sings for (The Time Jumpers, a band that can only be described as "ringers") are absolutely wonderful, not to mention her jazz cd. Also, another contributor here, Funkjazz and his gypsy jazz group out of Utah recorded a wonderful album a year or two back that I routinely keep in the cd player. I love hearing the room, as with old time recordings such as Bruce's recording of the Basie orchestra with Joe Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 23, 2006 Members Share Posted December 23, 2006 Bruce, I am coming in late on this thread, so I may have missed part of your responses. My question is how you fit an instrument or section mic'ed in stereo (MS, X/Y, Blumlein, etc.) into the larger "created" stereo environment. I haven't heard the recording talked about here, but the description seems to have multipe stereo pairs picking up the orchestra, how do those "sub" mic pairs get placed in the larger stereo image? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 23, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 23, 2006 Originally posted by steveg Bruce, I am coming in late on this thread, so I may have missed part of your responses. My question is how you fit an instrument or section mic'ed in stereo (MS, X/Y, Blumlein, etc.) into the larger "created" stereo environment. I haven't heard the recording talked about here, but the description seems to have multipe stereo pairs picking up the orchestra, how do those "sub" mic pairs get placed in the larger stereo image? Steve Steve.... PM me your email. I'll send you the track... Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 25, 2006 Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 My self imposed rule whenever I listen to new music or a recording that I need to assess is to force myself to listen through the entire piece complete and carefully three times. This recording deserves many more listenings but I couldn't contain myself and had to post after the first three. I listened using my 80GB iPOD unit with the stock Apple headphones. Since I got this a few weeks ago, it has become my new 'consumer' reference platform. It is surpisingly good and very consistent in representing a wide range of recordings. My next listening will be on my trusty Tannoy SRM12B's moving air, the old fashinoned way I am overwhelmed by everything about this recording and have a thousand comments and a million questions, so, I will start with just a few things for now. First of all this is the finest recording I have every heard. To check my sanity I compared it to many other recordings. Standard Pop/Rock stuff holds no comparison so I went to classic Jazz recordings and listened to "So What" and "Take Five". They frankly did not even come close so I went over to a number of fine classical recordings with the NY and Chicago symphonies, still no comparison. The only way I can described this recording is that it is both what you would want and expect from a great classical style recording (less mic's, sounds real, hear the room, etc.) and what you love about "modern" recording ala Pop, where each sound source is right in front of the mic and you hear all the details. This recording has BOTH of these qualities and it does it better than anything else I have ever heard. It sounds as if you are standing in front of Joe Williams and the instruments are spread out around you. Only, it sounds WAY better than if Bruce had stuck a stereo pair in front of Joe's head. That is, it sounds like you would HOPE and IMAGINE it would sound like in front of Joe's hear but this is better than it would have actually sounded. Going back to my first point, it has BOTH the realism/room sound AND that great isolation and clarity from individual mic's. Another things is that the spectrum is very full and even, much more so than other recordings from period. Many classic recordings are likeable and quaint for all of their crunchiness, tape compression, rolled off high end, but frankly sound old. Not this one- full spectrum, clean and warm without all the over-the-top harmonics. It doesn't quite have the top end of modern gear, but in this context I don't miss it at all, it is less tiring to listen to as a result. So, I have a million questions, but here is my first: Since this appears to be a direct A/D transfer from a 15ips master, Bruce, how is the different from what I am hearing in commercial releases of other titles I mentioned such as "So What" and "Take Five"? i.e. have those been mucked with through multiple generations, re-mastering, etc., that is, is this a fair comparison? And again, thank you, this is a truly incredible recording and I only have 999,999,999 questions left! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 25, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Originally posted by steveg I am overwhelmed by everything about this recording and have a thousand comments and a million questions, so, I will start with just a few things for now. The only way I can described this recording is that it is both what you would want and expect from a great classical style recording (less mic's, sounds real, hear the room, etc.) and what you love about "modern" recording ala Pop, where each sound source is right in front of the mic and you hear all the details. This recording has BOTH of these qualities and it does it better than anything else I have ever heard. It sounds as if you are standing in front of Joe Williams and the instruments are spread out around you. Only, it sounds WAY better than if Bruce had stuck a stereo pair in front of Joe's head. That is, it sounds like you would HOPE and IMAGINE it would sound like in front of Joe's hear but this is better than it would have actually sounded. Going back to my first point, it has BOTH the realism/room sound AND that great isolation and clarity from individual mic's. Another things is that the spectrum is very full and even, much more so than other recordings from period. Many classic recordings are likeable and quaint for all of their crunchiness, tape compression, rolled off high end, but frankly sound old. Not this one- full spectrum, clean and warm without all the over-the-top harmonics. It doesn't quite have the top end of modern gear, but in this context I don't miss it at all, it is less tiring to listen to as a result. So, I have a million questions, but here is my first: Since this appears to be a direct A/D transfer from a 15ips master, Bruce, how is the different from what I am hearing in commercial releases of other titles I mentioned such as "So What" and "Take Five"? i.e. have those been mucked with through multiple generations, re-mastering, etc., that is, is this a fair comparison? And again, thank you, this is a truly incredible recording and I only have 999,999,999 questions left! Steve Steve...... Thank you, you are very kind... The recording that I sent you is an Mp3 (And all the other forumites) of a mix that I did for my private collection of my recordings. I made that mix from the 1/2 inch Three Track master of the the original session. I did that mix the day after the actual sessions took place. (In August 1960.) As you can imagine I have taken very good care of those tapes. In my personal library. Temperature and Humidty controlled. They are priceless! It is a first generation copy to 24 bit 96 k recording from the Master 1/4 inch through my UNIVERSAL AUDIO-2192 Master Audio Interface - stereo A->D & D->A converter. The Master 1/4 inch is at 15 i.p.s. I have to say that I am truly ashamed at some of what our industry offers as "High Quality" Music recordings on CD today. Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 25, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Forumites..... Take this from someone who has come from the era of Wire Recordings, Cassetes and such... Mp3's are absolutely GREAT!!! I love Mp3's!!! If you want to make great sounding Mp3's, make great sounding master recordings!!! The Phantom Viking!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted December 25, 2006 Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Another great thing about MP3s is that you can email them!! To have someone who lives halfway around the world listen to something instantaneously is priceless. Try doing *that* with a cassette (oh, and MP3s sound much better too!!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 25, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Originally posted by UstadKhanAli Another great thing about MP3s is that you can email them!! To have someone who lives halfway around the world listen to something instantaneously is priceless. Try doing *that* with a cassette (oh, and MP3s sound much better too!!). Ken..... Thank You..... Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted December 25, 2006 Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Happy holidays!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 25, 2006 Members Share Posted December 25, 2006 Bruce, Now the questions begin What was recorded onto each of the original three tracks? Going back to my very first question, did you have variable panning for each mic input, or, were they hard assigned to a track? I seem to hear polar information on the brass, is there a stereo submix within there? Why is the reverb off to the left? Was it printed to a one of the three tracks? Oh and how exactly did you make it sound SO good? Thank you again for sharing this recording and the wealth of your experience! Let me know when I have asked too many questions! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kevin Reiter Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 hope i'm not too late for the Basie listening session... I sent a PM to you Bruce. I want to check the trombone solo and the praised sound of the universal studio and the 2192 transfer from the master tape, too :D :D Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mobobog Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 So Bruce what do you think... Is it worth for all of us recording in small spaces and with soso sounding rooms to try stereophonic micing, or should we be better with the traditional one mic in front approach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 29, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Originally posted by mobobog So Bruce what do you think... Is it worth for all of us recording in small spaces and with soso sounding rooms to try stereophonic micing, or should we be better with the traditional one mic in front approach? Mobobog..... The traditional one mic in front approach will forever doom your work to be very much pedestrian. That can't be of any interest. Live a little.... Stereo recording in even a small space can be very rewarding. Besides it will separate you from all the others who have no courage or creativity. Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mobobog Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Thanks a lot Bruce... I have done for example guitar stereo tracking in my not so good room, and i have put even more pillows and stuff to get rid of the room, but find that sound (even with all the damping) more pleasing than the one mic sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mobobog Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 By the way... for a started like me, It is nice to be able to talk to you and receive advices from you! Keep posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Hi Bruce, Do you have any thoughts on the comparison between setting up two separate physical microphones versus the type that have two capsules in the same unit such as those by Neumann, AKG and Rode? On the one hand, the integrated units are very close to a point source WITH a stereo image, on the other hand they might not be able to get as much diverse information as two separate mics. I am thinking in the context of recording a single instrument such as acoustic guitar, guitar speaker, horns, overhead mics' etc thanks Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 29, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Originally posted by steveg Hi Bruce,Do you have any thoughts on the comparison between setting up two separate physical microphones versus the type that have two capsules in the same unit such as those by Neumann, AKG and Rode?On the one hand, the integrated units are very close to a point source WITH a stereo image, on the other hand they might not be able to get as much diverse information as two separate mics. I am thinking in the context of recording a single instrument such as acoustic guitar, guitar speaker, horns, overhead mics' etcthanksSteve Steve..... Great question. Two identical monophonic microphones, properly positioned, will give an end result recording that is virtually the same as what you would get from a stereo microphone. However, the big advantage of using a stereo mike is that the two capsules are sonically matched, and the stereo mike system is very easy to use. Just set it up and away we go! Of course, some of my favorite, truly sterophonic recordings that I have done, were recorded with two, or in some cases three, separate microphones. A good example of one of these, is the overture for the soundtrack album for the movie, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Wow, great stuff- thanks!! I have used the original M49 in mono and it is fabulous, I imagine in Decca Tree that must be quite amazing! Would that recording be on the original sountrack album for Color Purple? I would like to pick it up. How about on the Basie recording? You seem to have some very intereting stereo stuff happening there. Did you have variable panning for each mic input, or, were they hard assigned to a track? I seem to hear polar information on the brass, is there a stereo submix within there? Why is the reverb off to the left? Was it printed to a one of the three tracks? Oh and how exactly did you make it sound SO good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bruce Swedien Posted December 29, 2006 Author Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Originally posted by steveg Wow, great stuff- thanks!! I have used the original M49 in mono and it is fabulous, I imagine in Decca Tree that must be quite amazing! Would that recording be on the original sountrack album for Color Purple? I would like to pick it up. How about on the Basie recording? You seem to have some very intereting stereo stuff happening there. Did you have variable panning for each mic input, or, were they hard assigned to a track? I seem to hear polar information on the brass, is there a stereo submix within there? Why is the reverb off to the left? Was it printed to a one of the three tracks? Oh and how exactly did you make it sound SO good? Steve.... Thanks... You are very kind... Yes that is the Original soundtrack album. I am the executive producer for that incredible project.... The Neumann M-49 is VERY different from a Neumann M-50. They aren't even close. You are very young. There's nothing wrong with that, learn, learn, learn. I think you are off to a good start. When I did that recording it was long before there were pan-pots. Any stereo information had to be generated in the studio with Stereo Microphone technique. That's all we had! The sound on those recordings began in my imagination! Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Originally posted by Bruce Swedien The Neumann M-49 is VERY different from a Neumann M-50. They aren't even close.You are very young. There's nothing wrong with that, learn, learn, learn. I think you are off to a good start.When I did that recording it was long before there were pan-pots. Any stereo information had to be generated in the studio with Stereo Microphone technique. That's all we had! -----------------------------....and eager to learn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 I looked up the Neumann M-50 and its predecessor, the M-150 tube. Several things grabbed my eye.... #1. I was fascinated that this mic was sold by Amazon. Apparently Amazon sells just about everything now, including $5,700 mics. #2. Amazon always mentions that customers who bought items like this also bought other items. These are often interesting, and Amazon did not disappoint!! According to Amazon, customers who bought items the Neumann M-150 tube mic also bought the Behringer UB802 Eurorack UB802 Mixer (!!! !!!). So what I'm getting from this is that the average Amazon shopper is so unbelievably tapped out from shelling out $5,700 (even though it undoubtedly qualifies for free shipping...) that s/he doesn't have enough cash to go get a Harrison console and must settle for the Behringer Eurorack. Neumann M-150 on Amazon.com ~~~~~~~~ Oh, yeah, here's the info I was actually searching for: Since the 1950s, the Neumann M 50 has been heralded as the ideal microphone for orchestral recording and string scoring. With its phenomenal transient response and unique directional characteristic, this classic mic has endeared many fans, both in the control room and on the soundstage. The new M 150 Tube takes many of the features from the original M 50 and incorporates them in a very modern microphone. With low self noise, a Titanium membrane and capsule, transformerless tube amplifier and sophisticated power supply, the M 150 Tube is not a reissue but an entirely new microphone in its own right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted December 29, 2006 Members Share Posted December 29, 2006 Here is a good link I found: http://mixguides.com/microphones/vintage_products/audio_vintage_microphones_part_2/ It seems that the M50 is all about tailoring the mid/hi response to compensate for distance, i.e. classical style recording. Interesting stuff.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.