FWIW Keith O Johnson uses Coles Ribbon microphones plus a mix of Sennheiser FM condenser mikes for orchestral recordings. They may all be capable of 30 KHz however not much more, the diaphragms are too big. Small diaphragm mikes (B&K 1/4" 4135 & 4136 for example) are too noisy for many applications like a classical performance where you may get down to the noise level of the venue. The Earthworks mikes are 1/4" and are used for recording and good to 30 KHz. not sure about their noise performance. All of these have extended bass. Larger diaphragms don't get more bass, just lower noise.
B&K's DPA division makes several microphones based on the same core technology but are phantom powered. They are not identical however, there are differences between the measuring and recording mikes.
B&K's DPA division makes several microphones based on the same core technology but are phantom powered. They are not identical however, there are differences between the measuring and recording mikes.
I think the point is clear -- today, there are Many users of wide bandwidth condenser microphones. Plus a lot of old mic/technology. Generalizations of what type mic are used is impossible.
-RNM
-RNM
Last edited:
So no examples? Dissapointing but to be expected
Thank you, I'll try and dig that out. I have some earlier Telarc and really like the recordings from the John Eargle era
It's true, although KoJ has done some superb recordings with great performances. I have a couple of the Doug MacLeod recordings and, whilst not the style for all personally like them.
Time resolution? We had that discussion back when Kunchur published his papers and despite all the ridicule it was just a matter of definition, as he defines it as the ability of a system to resolve two consecutively happening sound events.
He simply meant something different than the so-called coding resolution.
I'm not sure what the discussion is about; according to the various statistics from the past, in Germany each year over 20000 different recording were released and I'd assume that the vast majority of these are not examples of best possible sound quality; further wrt the "loudness war" it's not the bandwidth extension that troubled me most.
But, does that mean nobody tries to do better (or should not try to do or find better)?
There always were people who tried for the best sound quality, be it direct-to-disc (some new were done within the vinyl renaissance) from the past done mainly by some smaller companies, be it semismall like Telarc - reportedly the Telarc crew pressed Stockham to raise the sample rate of his unique digital recording system to above 50 kHz, because they thought the heights weren't right at lower sample rates - and majors as well (at least for some or their sublabels).
And today there are still small companies who are doing sort of "direct-to-digital" means onepoint recordings without further editing.
Might be that it often are "only second class" musicians in "third rate venues" but (being a twelveth class musician myself), I'm not so arrogant to belief that only first rate musicians recorded in first class venues are delivering some interesting musical performances.
He simply meant something different than the so-called coding resolution.
I'm not sure what the discussion is about; according to the various statistics from the past, in Germany each year over 20000 different recording were released and I'd assume that the vast majority of these are not examples of best possible sound quality; further wrt the "loudness war" it's not the bandwidth extension that troubled me most.
But, does that mean nobody tries to do better (or should not try to do or find better)?
There always were people who tried for the best sound quality, be it direct-to-disc (some new were done within the vinyl renaissance) from the past done mainly by some smaller companies, be it semismall like Telarc - reportedly the Telarc crew pressed Stockham to raise the sample rate of his unique digital recording system to above 50 kHz, because they thought the heights weren't right at lower sample rates - and majors as well (at least for some or their sublabels).
And today there are still small companies who are doing sort of "direct-to-digital" means onepoint recordings without further editing.
Might be that it often are "only second class" musicians in "third rate venues" but (being a twelveth class musician myself), I'm not so arrogant to belief that only first rate musicians recorded in first class venues are delivering some interesting musical performances.
Last edited:
I see Jakob, perhaps it is a misinterpretation, what do you make of this? https://www.tnt-audio.com/casse/temporal_resolution.pdf
Interesting musical performance to me includes Rachmaninov playing his own works from acoustic recordings. Almost no fi but gets hairs up on the back of the neck.
??? Whats that all about? Where did that come from?
#597 doesnt count because it is not a CD?
-RNM
Last edited:
that was the ask, and the best you came come up with is 50 year old remasters from tape .
‘Sounds’ like the mechanics and drivers thing.
Some classical recordings are good others very flat. I have Maazel’s VSO recording of Sibelius’s 5th and 7th on Decca who had a name in the 60’s for doing some of the best recordings. There was some criticism because of the way they used the mics but I have others like von Karajan’s Mozart 40th (DG BSO) that are very flat. Another good one is a Columbia release of Bernstein doing stuff from Westside Story (New York Philharmonia IIRC). That was recorded in a hotel in New York.
All of these orchestras are of course 2nd rate. As were the conductors 😉
Last edited:
You could start with the Best Engineered Grammy winners in your area of interest from the past few years.... for 2020, try
Best engineered album, classical – Riley: Sun Rings Leslie Ann Jones, engineer; John Kilgore, Judith Sherman & David Harrington, engineers/mixers; Robert C. Ludwig, mastering engineer (Kronos Quartet)
THx-RNMarsh
Best engineered album, classical – Riley: Sun Rings Leslie Ann Jones, engineer; John Kilgore, Judith Sherman & David Harrington, engineers/mixers; Robert C. Ludwig, mastering engineer (Kronos Quartet)
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
So you don't have personal experience of any great recordings made with these small capsules you talk of?
Oh That is a different question. answer is yes I have. Why do you want to know that? .
However, if you really want to know all the recordings, just ask all the small diam condens mic manufactures. They will be proud to tell you which person/group/studio/recording etc used their small diam conden mics.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Scott,
Frank Sinatra preferred a Bruel and Kjaer capsule for his vocals. Measurement microphones are also used as a specialty microphone in many studios.
Then there is the issue of what was called balanced frequency response. If the microphone only went only a bit low it was expected not go as high. George can probably find a site with the formula used for getting what they considered balance.
Finally I take it by you mentioning ribbon microphones you do understand that there are many specialty microphones that have extended high frequency response.
The most popular microphone in use today is the Shure SM58. Ever use one or even look at the performance data?
Last edited:
If I get the chance I'll find you some pictures of him performing with the B&K.
Well I took a look and from the pictures it seems there wasn't a popular microphone he didn't use! The last time he played locally I did see the B&K capsules in the set up. (Back stage view during setup.)
Another interesting bit was the very procey RCA ribbon microphones were so popular, they introduced a lower cost version. It was almost the same except they added a frequency response limiting inductor. So some folks would buy the cheaper one and remove the inductor. (Related to me by the guy who used to sell them. Also one of the first pro audio dealers as the Ice Capades used to insist of the venues they played had his design sound system.)
Last edited: