rongon,
Yes, it's a sad situation.
I go mostly to classical music concerts and operas, no mics, no amplification.
The recordings I did at the time were for the Israeli Broadcasting Authority, the musicians and conductors had no say on how the recording would be done.
Yes, it's a sad situation.
I go mostly to classical music concerts and operas, no mics, no amplification.
The recordings I did at the time were for the Israeli Broadcasting Authority, the musicians and conductors had no say on how the recording would be done.
Early reflections and levels of reverberation are indicators of a soundstage. Positions of instruments and vocalists against microphones are different. Their positions against walls are different. Microphones capture different levels of direct sounds, with different time delays. The same about early reflections and tails. Overall level of reverberation in respect to direct sound depends on distance from mikes to the each particular sound source. Such a way acoustic of the environment can be heard well, and be recognizable. However, microphones should be closer to instruments and vocalists than the best listening position, if the record is made to be reproduced through speakers, otherwise the record may sound too boomy: there are only 2 directions of sound reproduction in stereo, so we can't select sounds by direction, i.e. distinguish direct and reflected sounds from each other. For headphones microphones have to be placed further, and an artificial head is the way to go.
Today it is usually done with lots of cardioids to capture groups and soloists, and one pattern 8 to add common reverberation at once. The result is a 2-dimensional mess. Especially, when dumb level panning is used.
Studer offered some very expensive and sophisticated digital console that allows to record everything in anechoic cameras, at different times, then when mastering put channels in virtual space to simulate reality.
Today it is usually done with lots of cardioids to capture groups and soloists, and one pattern 8 to add common reverberation at once. The result is a 2-dimensional mess. Especially, when dumb level panning is used.
Studer offered some very expensive and sophisticated digital console that allows to record everything in anechoic cameras, at different times, then when mastering put channels in virtual space to simulate reality.
Hmmm and if you put a carefully tweaked delay on each channel so everything lines up with the room mic, you can get rid of a lot of the comb filtering and weird image reversal (e.g. singer behind you) that such setups often produce... but it's a lot of work dialing in multiple channels all at once.
Which exactly hits the point of why a few mics positioned at the right distance to capture a good mix of direct and reflected sound often gives the best and most natural result. Also you can see how a PA at any significant volume mangles all phase relationships in the room. You now have the acoustic path from the mains and monitors to match up as best you can in the room 🙁
Right now I was listening to a CD of my friend. Everything was fine, until somebody suddenly put on top of him, his ex-wife, his guitar and bass guitar, a grand piano. It was put on top of everything together with a room where it was recorded.. BOOM! 😱
Rongon,
I totally agree with your explanation of multi-mike jazz recordings. Most muscians have NO idea of how their instruments sound, or should sound. None.
I recorded the local big band (17 piece) onto two track analog tape, using a single crossed pair of mikes. To me it sounded great, and to my surprise, it sounded great to the muscians as well. Of course, no eq, no compression, no nothing.
Pity the transfer to CD made it sound harsh and ugly, or I'd have an audipphile sales winner on my hands.
Regards, Allen
I totally agree with your explanation of multi-mike jazz recordings. Most muscians have NO idea of how their instruments sound, or should sound. None.
I recorded the local big band (17 piece) onto two track analog tape, using a single crossed pair of mikes. To me it sounded great, and to my surprise, it sounded great to the muscians as well. Of course, no eq, no compression, no nothing.
Pity the transfer to CD made it sound harsh and ugly, or I'd have an audipphile sales winner on my hands.
Regards, Allen
Yeah, and then there's the mastering to CD. I'm sorry to hear that your big band recording got messed up. They were probably trying to make it sound like this or that "commercial" recording. Pity.
Was there an electric guitar in the band? Those always ruin minimally miked recordings, except in very, very rare cases. (And I'm a guitar player, too... 🙄)
It seems to me a big band is the last type of jazz ensemble that one could call "acoustic." I propose a new genre of music -- "electro-acoustic." Mixed amplified and acoustic. That's what most call "acoustic music" these days.
--
PS -
Was there an electric guitar in the band? Those always ruin minimally miked recordings, except in very, very rare cases. (And I'm a guitar player, too... 🙄)
It seems to me a big band is the last type of jazz ensemble that one could call "acoustic." I propose a new genre of music -- "electro-acoustic." Mixed amplified and acoustic. That's what most call "acoustic music" these days.
--
PS -
Or did you mean the transfer to CD was unable to keep the acoustic intact?
Last edited:
I mean what I said. The analog tapes sound vibrant, alive and very dynamic. The CD transfer, which we did ourselves via 24 bit sound card, sounds harsh and ugly, with the dynamics becoming screeches in comparison to the huge dynamic jumps of the analog tapes.
Levels were carefully controlled in both cases, and if we made any mistakes, I don't know what they were.
There was an electric guitar in the band, but very low key, more 30's style of rhythm comping, but the electric bass player should be hung, drawn & quartered - slowly! But on the analog tapes it all sounds very much as it sounded live.
Regards, Allen
Interesting problem, Allen. Do you think the problem was in the digital capture, the digital playback, or both?
The problem is, CD can't transfer so wide dynamic band on top frequencies. Lightly compressed it would survive.
How you can produce something with gear that allows +15dB over and be the same with gear that has 0dB hard limit.
Add some nature sounds, like nicely recorded rain, or ocean, or waterfall, or whatever that will mask harshness adding clean loud upper frequency content. 😀
I have no idea, but I'd be happy to send you a CD if you PM me your snail mail address, and if you think listening to it could turn up some answers.
Regards, Allen.
Creative. Wind blowing in Taiga to dither it up too maybe.😀
Anyway, when analogue tape allows to hit high peaks in the red with progressive 2nd harmonic rising compression effect penalty only, you get an average recording level benefit that will invariably present the dynamics bolder. If you want to fit your dynamic envelope in gear with 0dB limit as digital gear is, you got to average lower. So you gotta mix differently. When with just a cross Blumlein pair and a live band, you just can't turn up the thing enough on hard disk for ear's phon curves and have your whisper and thunder there perceived intact. So you choose your trusty old Studer or Tascam/Teac and push your red fader +6. You transfer it from good sounding check on 2 inch multitrack or 1/2 2 channel to CD, you/they will push it down to fit. Deflates to the ear.
No accident they compress the commercial CD mixing to upper 20dB so it sounds loud to come across in car listening.
Hi,
Shame isn't it?
Does CD stand for Constantly Depressed?
Nevermind... We don't want to turn this thread, which is about gainless or thereabouts, linestages to turn into a pro or contra digital war.
The damage has been done sixty years ago already....
Ciao, 😉
Shame isn't it?
Does CD stand for Constantly Depressed?
Nevermind... We don't want to turn this thread, which is about gainless or thereabouts, linestages to turn into a pro or contra digital war.
The damage has been done sixty years ago already....
Ciao, 😉
Hi,
Sure. You should equalizers and who knows what else too.
IOW, average consumer muzak.....Definitely not art.
Cheers, 😉
Sure. You should equalizers and who knows what else too.
IOW, average consumer muzak.....Definitely not art.
Cheers, 😉
When the analog peaks go beyond 0dB, it's only a matter of lowering the volume so that while transferring analog to digital there will be no peaks beyond 0dB. No compression is really needed.
The matter is different altogether.
It takes a unique knowledge of how to transfer digital to analog without quality loss (beyond the quality limitations of Red Book CD).
The matter is different altogether.
It takes a unique knowledge of how to transfer digital to analog without quality loss (beyond the quality limitations of Red Book CD).
It is kind of an art. I see a mastering console with outboard gear as a musical instrument that creates a virtual reality.
Wow, thank you for the idea! 🙂
But... Where to find here something close to Siberian Taiga?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.