Hello,
I want to build a professional grade preamp and converter for grand piano recordings.
After talking to some audio professionals, and reading a lot of more experienced opinions, I am considering starting with 2 DPA MMC4006 Omnidirectional Microphone Capsules.
1) Any thoughts on that choice?
2) Is it possible that DPA provides matched capsules, or do they match the mics by adjusting the preamp in the ST4006A?
d:dicate? ST4006A Stereo Pair w. 2 x 4006A, Clips, Windscreens in Peli? Case
There are a few reasons I want to buy excellent capsules and build my own preamp+converter: saving $; finding the very best performance for the lowest price; I have access to a full electronics lab at the local university, including pcb designing and all components I might need. Since I teach there, this will also be an educational theme in the future, probably.
Recordings will be in concert halls, and I have a on going work with an *outstanding* pianist. I feel like my gear is definitely not up to her level, as you can check some of our previous work: (piano+violin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97LmxRjIluE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQqLRlG1jDc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MquYRsEsZaA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNzCXpd_anY
3) With the information I have so far, I am aiming at a preamp+ADC on par with/better than the likes of DPA MMP-A preamplifier or the Grace M-108. Is is quite a challenge! Time is on our side, though, since there is no rush to release any product soon...
I want the most neutral and flat recording as possible. Just the sheer raw pure sound as intended and played by the musicians. Later on, we can eq/color whatever we want during edition.
I also just need to store the recorded data in a SD card, in a lossless format. No need for fancy conversion, at least so far. It is also an option interfacing directly to PC, not sure about that yet.
4) For the preamp, I am thinking about the THAT1580+THAT5171. For the ADC, the AT1201. I already have a few of them. Also, I have many excellent instrumentation amps, op amps, FETs, BJTs, etc. Hardware wise, I don't think there will be any issues. Layout techniques, obviously, play a deep role here.
Looking at uncompromised performance, what do you suggest? I am sure there are lots of information and help I could use in such a daring project.
Just thought I could ask before starting to draw the schematics.
EDIT: Just to be clear, the chain I am looking at is: Stereo Mics -> Preamp -> ADC -> Storage.
Thiago
I want to build a professional grade preamp and converter for grand piano recordings.
After talking to some audio professionals, and reading a lot of more experienced opinions, I am considering starting with 2 DPA MMC4006 Omnidirectional Microphone Capsules.
1) Any thoughts on that choice?
2) Is it possible that DPA provides matched capsules, or do they match the mics by adjusting the preamp in the ST4006A?
d:dicate? ST4006A Stereo Pair w. 2 x 4006A, Clips, Windscreens in Peli? Case
There are a few reasons I want to buy excellent capsules and build my own preamp+converter: saving $; finding the very best performance for the lowest price; I have access to a full electronics lab at the local university, including pcb designing and all components I might need. Since I teach there, this will also be an educational theme in the future, probably.
Recordings will be in concert halls, and I have a on going work with an *outstanding* pianist. I feel like my gear is definitely not up to her level, as you can check some of our previous work: (piano+violin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97LmxRjIluE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQqLRlG1jDc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MquYRsEsZaA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNzCXpd_anY
3) With the information I have so far, I am aiming at a preamp+ADC on par with/better than the likes of DPA MMP-A preamplifier or the Grace M-108. Is is quite a challenge! Time is on our side, though, since there is no rush to release any product soon...
I want the most neutral and flat recording as possible. Just the sheer raw pure sound as intended and played by the musicians. Later on, we can eq/color whatever we want during edition.
I also just need to store the recorded data in a SD card, in a lossless format. No need for fancy conversion, at least so far. It is also an option interfacing directly to PC, not sure about that yet.
4) For the preamp, I am thinking about the THAT1580+THAT5171. For the ADC, the AT1201. I already have a few of them. Also, I have many excellent instrumentation amps, op amps, FETs, BJTs, etc. Hardware wise, I don't think there will be any issues. Layout techniques, obviously, play a deep role here.
Looking at uncompromised performance, what do you suggest? I am sure there are lots of information and help I could use in such a daring project.
Just thought I could ask before starting to draw the schematics.
EDIT: Just to be clear, the chain I am looking at is: Stereo Mics -> Preamp -> ADC -> Storage.
Thiago
Last edited:
They do state that the mics are closely matched, so be sure to buy them as a pair.
Hopefully you can get an educational discount.
"These specially selected d:dicate™ 4006A microphones are matched within ±0.5 dB
on both frequency response and sensitivity."
Last edited:
You can discuss this with them directly, but I am pretty sure they would not be matched
to the electronics, in terms of frequency response or output level error cancellation.
That would be bad practice. Here is what they say, which tends to confirm this.
"A wide selection of acoustic modification accessories, including nose cone and
interchangeable protection grids, allows the MMC4006 capsule to be acoustically
transformed into seven different microphone versions, making it the most
multifaceted mic in your collection and a tremendous value. By simply changing a grid
or mounting an element over the capsule, it is possible to gain several unique frequency
responses and directional characteristics from a single mic. Furthermore, these grids and
elements will not produce any phase shift, noise or distortion that would otherwise be
introduced by an electrical filter."
to the electronics, in terms of frequency response or output level error cancellation.
That would be bad practice. Here is what they say, which tends to confirm this.
"A wide selection of acoustic modification accessories, including nose cone and
interchangeable protection grids, allows the MMC4006 capsule to be acoustically
transformed into seven different microphone versions, making it the most
multifaceted mic in your collection and a tremendous value. By simply changing a grid
or mounting an element over the capsule, it is possible to gain several unique frequency
responses and directional characteristics from a single mic. Furthermore, these grids and
elements will not produce any phase shift, noise or distortion that would otherwise be
introduced by an electrical filter."
Last edited:
This is a large investment, so I'd discuss details directly with the company before buying.
I'm sure they will offer an academic discount, even if only 10%.
There is a C version that has more "body" and is smaller.
"The MMC4006 Capsule is part of the flexible d:dicate™ Microphone series. The MMC4006A, with the
MMP-A preamplifier, is the audiophile’s choice. It provides low distortion and accurate sound.
The MMC4006C, with the MMP-C compact preamplifier, offers a subtle character alteration
with a bit more 'body' to the low end. The MMC4006C is also easier to position due to its small size."
Last edited:
I don't know what talking to professionals includes, but if I were you I'd go get involved with some actual professional piano recording situations. learn how it is done. It takes a LOT more than picking a pair of mics. And even if you had to "pay for a lesson" to be there, it would be worth it.
Hello Enzo. Completely agree! As a matter of fact, thought perhaps I could find some people who make a living out of it here...
It does take a lot more, and I definitely want to hear more than what I do about room treatment, eq'ing, positioning, system headroom, room modes, resonance... Surely there are tons of materials over the internet, but some practical tips are always welcome.
I am an electronic engineering professional who loves audio, not an audio professional
So are there audio recording professionals?
I just made the specific questions about the mic and preamp+ADC because I am going to build it anyway, and aiming at right direction from the start, I would love to hear from you more experienced folks.
It does take a lot more, and I definitely want to hear more than what I do about room treatment, eq'ing, positioning, system headroom, room modes, resonance... Surely there are tons of materials over the internet, but some practical tips are always welcome.
I am an electronic engineering professional who loves audio, not an audio professional
So are there audio recording professionals?I just made the specific questions about the mic and preamp+ADC because I am going to build it anyway, and aiming at right direction from the start, I would love to hear from you more experienced folks.
Yes, of course.
And Brazil has very good ones
Search for "Engenheiros de Som" , browse the Brazilian AES chapter for prominent names.
Knowing who will you work with, they will feel doubly motivated
Edit: I mean: http://www.aes.org/sections/view.cfm?section=16 , not AES fornecedor de eletricidade.
Last edited:
Hey, that is great! I will get in touch with them!
But that was a funny typo, I should have asked "So are here audio recording professionals?" , I mean in the forum!
I'd like to have someone's opinion around here who has built (or perhaps reviewed) a preamp and/or ADC at this level, so at least I can confirm the THAT1580+THAT5171 and AT1201 option and dig into some inevitable but very important stuff around: power supply specs, voltage regulators, references, connectors and so on... it is a dyi audio project after all!
Typical application schematics and some practical considerations are mentioned in the datasheets, of course, but there is much more to the full board!!
Just in case you want to check the datasheets, let me save you the search:
THAT1580: http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/THAT_1580_Datasheet.pdf
THAT5171: http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/THAT_5171_Datasheet.pdf
AT1201: http://www.profusionplc.com/images/data sheets/at1201-ds.pdf
Also, the THAT design notes are useful and have some interesting and useful stuff:
http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/dn140.pdf
http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/More_Analog_Secrets.pdf
The documents above explains some approaches to the differential amplifier gain, how to avoid pops, protection techniques various phantom power issues and more. I believe I won't need phantom power, just bias, not sure yet. Worth reading if are into audio system design, IMO, specially the DN140.
The protection techniques they show are always nice, specially considering the expensive capsules and components involved.
In the case of combining the the THAT1580 with the THAT5171, all the pops, linearity and noise issues related to pots are solved, I believe. They were meant to work together. Noise wise, there is the trade of running a couple of digital lines right up to the front end differential amp., but with a careful layout, the pros should beat the cons by far, I guess.
But that was a funny typo, I should have asked "So are here audio recording professionals?" , I mean in the forum!
I'd like to have someone's opinion around here who has built (or perhaps reviewed) a preamp and/or ADC at this level, so at least I can confirm the THAT1580+THAT5171 and AT1201 option and dig into some inevitable but very important stuff around: power supply specs, voltage regulators, references, connectors and so on... it is a dyi audio project after all!
Typical application schematics and some practical considerations are mentioned in the datasheets, of course, but there is much more to the full board!!
Just in case you want to check the datasheets, let me save you the search:
THAT1580: http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/THAT_1580_Datasheet.pdf
THAT5171: http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/THAT_5171_Datasheet.pdf
AT1201: http://www.profusionplc.com/images/data sheets/at1201-ds.pdf
Also, the THAT design notes are useful and have some interesting and useful stuff:
http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/dn140.pdf
http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/More_Analog_Secrets.pdf
The documents above explains some approaches to the differential amplifier gain, how to avoid pops, protection techniques various phantom power issues and more. I believe I won't need phantom power, just bias, not sure yet. Worth reading if are into audio system design, IMO, specially the DN140.
The protection techniques they show are always nice, specially considering the expensive capsules and components involved.
In the case of combining the the THAT1580 with the THAT5171, all the pops, linearity and noise issues related to pots are solved, I believe. They were meant to work together. Noise wise, there is the trade of running a couple of digital lines right up to the front end differential amp., but with a careful layout, the pros should beat the cons by far, I guess.
Raining on your parade
I'm going to be very, very blunt and suggest that you are deluding yourself. (Enzo was far too polite)
Unless you are already experienced with existing COTS (commercial off the shelf) equipment and well versed in getting the best out of them, you have no idea what is important nor what "good" sounds like.
Unless you are already an experienced digital and analogue electronics designer (and there's few who are both, particularly the latter) even with the best components your implementation will be flawed.
Even if both are true: that is, you are both an electronics guru and a recording guru you will NOT be able to produce a one-off complex product for less than commercial prices.
You may be able to produce something better or something different to the commercial offerings but you won't be able to do it cheaper. Especially once you include the second hand market.
The one exception here is "vintage" gear - some of which is cheaper to build from scratch than outbid the "collectors".
Sorry to rain on your parade.
What do I think you should do?
Firstly, listen to as many recordings as you can find and learn about the people who did the recordings you (or your patron) like. Find out everything you can about their philosophies and techniques.
Second take some LESSONS in recording from a range of experts (preferably
those with vastly differing opinions as to what constitutes "good").
Thirdly HIRE some gear you think is decent and PRACTICE. Work out what works for you. Hire a wide range of gear and understand the differences.
Then, and only then, are you able warrant spending $$$$ on gear.
Otherwise you might as well buy a pair of used Røde NT1's and a Tascam DR-07 (or similar) and learn how to use that properly.
Again, I apologise for being blunt but if your aim is to make great recordings yourself, building your own gear is the WRONG first step. The first step is to understand what "great recordings" means to you and your audience.
For the record, I subscribe to the record-the-event as-is/where-is approach to recording (i.e. stereo mikes placed in the first or second row of seats NOT close miking). I have extensive experience in the design and manufacture of digital electronics. Including experiencing a fair bit of pain getting 8 bit ADCs to work "as advertised".
I'm going to be very, very blunt and suggest that you are deluding yourself. (Enzo was far too polite)
Unless you are already experienced with existing COTS (commercial off the shelf) equipment and well versed in getting the best out of them, you have no idea what is important nor what "good" sounds like.
Unless you are already an experienced digital and analogue electronics designer (and there's few who are both, particularly the latter) even with the best components your implementation will be flawed.
Even if both are true: that is, you are both an electronics guru and a recording guru you will NOT be able to produce a one-off complex product for less than commercial prices.
You may be able to produce something better or something different to the commercial offerings but you won't be able to do it cheaper. Especially once you include the second hand market.
The one exception here is "vintage" gear - some of which is cheaper to build from scratch than outbid the "collectors".
Sorry to rain on your parade.
What do I think you should do?
Firstly, listen to as many recordings as you can find and learn about the people who did the recordings you (or your patron) like. Find out everything you can about their philosophies and techniques.
Second take some LESSONS in recording from a range of experts (preferably
those with vastly differing opinions as to what constitutes "good").
Thirdly HIRE some gear you think is decent and PRACTICE. Work out what works for you. Hire a wide range of gear and understand the differences.
Then, and only then, are you able warrant spending $$$$ on gear.
Otherwise you might as well buy a pair of used Røde NT1's and a Tascam DR-07 (or similar) and learn how to use that properly.
Again, I apologise for being blunt but if your aim is to make great recordings yourself, building your own gear is the WRONG first step. The first step is to understand what "great recordings" means to you and your audience.
For the record, I subscribe to the record-the-event as-is/where-is approach to recording (i.e. stereo mikes placed in the first or second row of seats NOT close miking). I have extensive experience in the design and manufacture of digital electronics. Including experiencing a fair bit of pain getting 8 bit ADCs to work "as advertised".
Last edited:
I was going to say something similar: I know quite a few Recording Engineers and the best are NOT DIYers.
Simply because they have no free time to be so , they are usually VERY busy recording, mixing, editing, setting up microphones, travelling all over the place, going to AES conventions, etc.
No time to grab a soldering iron, let alone do a complex build.
The only exception I knew, who built his own NEVE clone channel strips, microphone preamps, Symphonic microphone sets, etc. *and* recorded live monsters such as Paco de Lucia, Joan Manoel Serrat, Luis Miguel, Les Luthiers, etc. , still used commercial high quality equipment for most everything, notice he self built "cloned" old Analog stuff from the 70s, because he was after a certain vintage sound, modern sound is different and original hardware is hard to find and very expensive ... not forgetting that it often had to be repaired anyway, and recalibrated. Once you have to replace 100 or 250 Tantalum capacitors in a mixer, maybe you prefer to build one from scratch
Simply because they have no free time to be so
, they are usually VERY busy recording, mixing, editing, setting up microphones, travelling all over the place, going to AES conventions, etc.No time to grab a soldering iron, let alone do a complex build.
The only exception I knew, who built his own NEVE clone channel strips, microphone preamps, Symphonic microphone sets, etc. *and* recorded live monsters such as Paco de Lucia, Joan Manoel Serrat, Luis Miguel, Les Luthiers, etc. , still used commercial high quality equipment for most everything, notice he self built "cloned" old Analog stuff from the 70s, because he was after a certain vintage sound, modern sound is different and original hardware is hard to find and very expensive ... not forgetting that it often had to be repaired anyway, and recalibrated. Once you have to replace 100 or 250 Tantalum capacitors in a mixer, maybe you prefer to build one from scratch
> are there audio recording professionals?
I audio recorded 50-100 times a year for several decades and got paid for it. Am I a professional? Never was sure.
I think listening is more important than equipment. I even had people with many-dollar equipment asking for copies of my tapes made with low-buck parts, because they put their $3K mikes in a poor place. I OTOH knew the mikes and the room and often the performers, and needed the money, so I listened hard.
I won't give free tips, except I would NOT worry too much about "matching". You want the mikes very similar. But overall level and response-curve difference happens due to mike placement, and level differences are easy to fix on the gain knobs, and small response differences in spaced omnis will not be noticed due to different signals. (Crossed cardioids on headphones can be quite sensitive to response errors.)
I audio recorded 50-100 times a year for several decades and got paid for it. Am I a professional? Never was sure.
I think listening is more important than equipment. I even had people with many-dollar equipment asking for copies of my tapes made with low-buck parts, because they put their $3K mikes in a poor place. I OTOH knew the mikes and the room and often the performers, and needed the money, so I listened hard.
I won't give free tips, except I would NOT worry too much about "matching". You want the mikes very similar. But overall level and response-curve difference happens due to mike placement, and level differences are easy to fix on the gain knobs, and small response differences in spaced omnis will not be noticed due to different signals. (Crossed cardioids on headphones can be quite sensitive to response errors.)
Great thing, not to worry about being blunt.
Yep, agreed. Well, since you brought it, I have built from complete EEG systems, going along quite a few audio amplifiers, to addressing several industry electric and electronic engineering problems.
Good electronics designers are really short in the market. I feel comfortable discussing it - and trying to build something.
I see. I should have explained better, indeed. It might be cheaper for me, since I may already have whatever I need for the electronics. So probably the correct statement is that the investment on the preamp + converter will be less than if I bought it.
Never mind, not raining at all.... I have been doing that for about 10 years now, accompanied by some great musicians IMO, pianists, violinists, cello, guitar, drums. Some of them have built international careers as classical concert musicians. On the last 6 years, that has happened in a treated room, listening from a Philharmonic 3 set and matched monitors from Dennis Murphy.
Each one showing me their opinions, tastes, criticisms... and of course, trying to reach the best sound as they like during their own editions.
Sound wise, I take that as ground for some versions of "good"out there.
I'd love it, still didn't have the chance to have lessons with recording experts. I have read about it did my research, but I had no lessons. You see, I don't intend to make a living out of it, but I would like to improve as best as possible, in my own pace. That is one of the reasons I am posting this.
Right. I bought a Zoom H4n about 5 years ago, that is how I started. Then I had access to other mics, mostly about this price range.
Recording as many concerts and shows as I could. For free, just for the experience of it, btw.
And I would also edit video and sound with them later on, until we got to the result each one categorized as "good". That was my limited experience in the field. Listening and looking for the best sweet spot in the hall, asking for more experienced "ears" as the other musicians were playing during rehearsals, trying with blankets to accommodate the acoustics of the room, trying different distances and heights, closed, semi closed lids, asking them to play with no air conditioned to improve the sound, trying to combine different mics for a closer range and ambient sound altogether, looking for the best eq curves during edition and so on....
Many of those other videos are published online - I would gladly list a few, if anyone wishes.
The audio in the videos I posted on the first post were captured with a pair of Zoom H4n, btw.
Right? Me too... Sound awesome!
I see. It makes all sense. I guess high-caliber professionals are busy in all areas. And quite often specialized in a particular branch.
But in my case I don't wan't to become a professional recording guy, that has a living out of it. I am an electronic engineer, I build electronic stuff. I also happen to love audio, and to have paired with some great musicians. They don't expect me to offer a full studio structure, but I would like to improve, besides taking lessons from recording experienced guys, my rig.
Some of them have already recorded with professional recording engineers, in proper studio and a full treat. Just as a side example, the pianist in the video I posted has 2 CDs recorded in Juilliard School, NY, during her doctoral studies.
And I am aware that it takes a whole other universe related to recording much beyond one's rig. IMHO and from what I've heard on the last decade, most of it boils down to listening well, having solid experience in the field paired with seasoned recording guys and having references for different levels and styles of "good sound".
While I don't wan't to become a professional recording engineer, I do intend to build a professional grade preamp+converter+storage. It may turn out to be, at least, very instructive.
I'm glad to see your two posts above.
I've not tried to implement a 24 (or more) bit 96kHz (at least) ADC but challenges I've run into and can perceive.
First Assumption: we don't want to clip the ADC. This means either more bits or some sort of limiter operating over the last 3db or so.
24 real bits is 144db SNR. Even if we throw away a few bits at either end (for clipping and proper dithering) we've still got to get the noise floor 120db below the peak signal. I had once looked at overlapping two 8 bit ADCs to "fake" 12 bits of dynamic range (only had 6V rails too!) which mostly worked as long as I could keep the two ADCs properly synchronised. Not a problem "near DC" and only 8 bits but a real challenge where you are playing.
Mixing analog and digital signals is always a challenge noisewise. I had to put matching resistors on digital INPUTs on one product as the clock noise on the chip power supply was coupling through the protection diodes on the inputs. I'd be hanging on to balanced audio as long as possible!
Then you've got the fun of trying to get a pass band filter that'll get to -120db before Nyquist. Maybe that's a solved problem these days, along with noise shaping.
If you are going with oversampling/delta-sigma (all the vogue these days) you're trading of SNR issues for clock accuracy /clock synch issues (depending on your ADC design and I've not looked at the components you mentioned).
None are intractable but did spend a lot of my time going through old Bob Pease writings to understand what was going wrong.
Sounds like a nice challenge!
Last edited:
Uh, I've checked your mikes and they are a bit pricey.
A recording pro that posted on pianostreet, said on grands in a studio he used two AT4050 in the omni mode, taped to the bottom of the soundboard. Personally I would avoid the tape on a $100000 instrument, and use camera tripods. Institutions that own Steinways & Bosies around here only let people with master's degrees in piano performance (or tuner employess of the brand dealer) touch them. But the location under the soundboard in two places sounds right. These mikes are a LOT cheaper than your chosen mikes. If you want some ambient reflections use a third and or fourth mike pointed the other way.
Personally, I'd use two Shure KSM44 in omni, which are made or calibrated over in Illinois, and also a lot cheaper than $3995 the pair.
With condensor mikes pumping out 1 vac signals off the phantom power, you don't need an exotic mixer to get >72 db S/N. I'd make some recordings with a comercial Peavey mixer but one with reasonably fresh e-caps.
I've made piano recordings with Sony TC355 1/4" deck and the mikes are the limitation IMHO, not the preamp etc. Recordings from LP were fine, live stuff with cheap dynamic mikes on piano were ****. I had use of couple of RCA ribbon mikes for a couple of hours once with choir/piano , those RTR recordings were much better.
I'm on a tighter hobby budget than you and am beginning to experiment with a couple of Shure KSM27 into a Unity 12 mixer to a PC, flattening out the response curve with wind/pop filters (sock) as they are intended to be used anyway. KSM44 with switchable pattern are about $1000 used the pair around here about once every two years.
As said previously, building equipment is fun, but playing & recording music is even more so. As the performer, practicing (tuning and repairing) the piano takes most of my free time, so buying commercial on the Data Aquisition end is my intended practice. I'm also helping wire up a pipe organ installation and there are others in failing churches that need volunteer electrical repair.
There is a lot of used recording gear around here & Nashville TN anyway, although most is suitable only for guitar/mandolin/violin/voice etc. Took me 4 years to find the second KSM27 at <$200 and the KSM44 pair came up online a month before my SSI started.
There are people that make 96 khz recordings using PCI bus soundboards in ordinary PC's. These files go to disk drive, not soundcards. Many have problems with windows op system (latency) which is not really real time, so try something else. The free update from 7 to 10 drove some recorders nuts. Read associated threads on pianostreet.com and organforum.com. I'm still fooling with Audacity, Linux (ubuntu studio) and the built in codec on the PC mainboard, which doesn't sound bad IMHO compared to 1/4" 4 track tape at 7.5 IPS.
So few commercial recordings actually use the 72 db available on a CD, that I feel it is very easy to make a superior product. And youtube is so polluted with cellphone recordings, or at extremis tascam olympus korg roland portable mike/recorders (to sim card) that I dont waste much time listening to the tracks. Except for links from pianostreet or organforum.
I haven't lestend to your links yet, this PC won't do youtube and has a linux virus that mods gifs, and the PC that will do youtube tends to lose the cursor after about 6 hours, so I don't spend much time on that one.
Have fun with your hobby.
A recording pro that posted on pianostreet, said on grands in a studio he used two AT4050 in the omni mode, taped to the bottom of the soundboard. Personally I would avoid the tape on a $100000 instrument, and use camera tripods. Institutions that own Steinways & Bosies around here only let people with master's degrees in piano performance (or tuner employess of the brand dealer) touch them. But the location under the soundboard in two places sounds right. These mikes are a LOT cheaper than your chosen mikes. If you want some ambient reflections use a third and or fourth mike pointed the other way.
Personally, I'd use two Shure KSM44 in omni, which are made or calibrated over in Illinois, and also a lot cheaper than $3995 the pair.
With condensor mikes pumping out 1 vac signals off the phantom power, you don't need an exotic mixer to get >72 db S/N. I'd make some recordings with a comercial Peavey mixer but one with reasonably fresh e-caps.
I've made piano recordings with Sony TC355 1/4" deck and the mikes are the limitation IMHO, not the preamp etc. Recordings from LP were fine, live stuff with cheap dynamic mikes on piano were ****. I had use of couple of RCA ribbon mikes for a couple of hours once with choir/piano , those RTR recordings were much better.
I'm on a tighter hobby budget than you and am beginning to experiment with a couple of Shure KSM27 into a Unity 12 mixer to a PC, flattening out the response curve with wind/pop filters (sock) as they are intended to be used anyway. KSM44 with switchable pattern are about $1000 used the pair around here about once every two years.
As said previously, building equipment is fun, but playing & recording music is even more so. As the performer, practicing (tuning and repairing) the piano takes most of my free time, so buying commercial on the Data Aquisition end is my intended practice. I'm also helping wire up a pipe organ installation and there are others in failing churches that need volunteer electrical repair.
There is a lot of used recording gear around here & Nashville TN anyway, although most is suitable only for guitar/mandolin/violin/voice etc. Took me 4 years to find the second KSM27 at <$200 and the KSM44 pair came up online a month before my SSI started.
There are people that make 96 khz recordings using PCI bus soundboards in ordinary PC's. These files go to disk drive, not soundcards. Many have problems with windows op system (latency) which is not really real time, so try something else. The free update from 7 to 10 drove some recorders nuts. Read associated threads on pianostreet.com and organforum.com. I'm still fooling with Audacity, Linux (ubuntu studio) and the built in codec on the PC mainboard, which doesn't sound bad IMHO compared to 1/4" 4 track tape at 7.5 IPS.
So few commercial recordings actually use the 72 db available on a CD, that I feel it is very easy to make a superior product. And youtube is so polluted with cellphone recordings, or at extremis tascam olympus korg roland portable mike/recorders (to sim card) that I dont waste much time listening to the tracks. Except for links from pianostreet or organforum.
I haven't lestend to your links yet, this PC won't do youtube and has a linux virus that mods gifs, and the PC that will do youtube tends to lose the cursor after about 6 hours, so I don't spend much time on that one.
Have fun with your hobby.
Last edited:
I've listened to your tracks listed in post #1. They are pretty good. The players are excellent.
Your background noise is non-existent in 2014. I can't tell about the frequency response of the mike used in 2014 because Ms Chacon doesn't play high or low frequencies in those selections. She stays in the middle octaves.
I also listened to the Chopin Fantasy recorded by Ms chacon in 2013. The 2014 recordings are a major improvement. The 2013 track has distorted piano tone, plus a lot of crowd noise. The Chopin piece does go up the keyboard to nearly the top, so that mike set doesn't really supress the top frequencies like a voice mike would, but all frequencies were somewhat distorted. I have a Steinway in my living room (console, not a grand) so I have some idea what one is supposed to sound like. Plus I heard a real Steinway grand from 10 m away in a church a month ago. It had more ping with the top down and the muffler blanket left on.
What your 2014 tracks do not have is ping, or attack, from the piano. Pianos have a tremendous volume peak at the beginning of the note, and the four tracks in post 1 do not have it. I've heard a Kawai grand at a church in the next county, and even that one has more ping with the top down than one in the JS Bach track had. Of course a Steinway grand should have more volume variation than exhibited in these tracks.
I heard no crowd noise in the 2014 tracks. I suppose your 2014 mike set are cardioids? The problem may be that the mixer (preamp?) gain is up too high, to allow the electronics to reproduce the piano attack for the A/D converter. Or perhaps that mike brand compresses volume when it is loud - I don't know. But the sound is mellow and Steinway grands are not like that. Not even Kawais. The start of the sound should be very distinct on Steinway, and pretty good on Kawais.
I would definitely like 3 tracks to record Ms Chacon & Ms Guarnieri together, for three mikes.
If you want to hear the Shure mike set I was talking about, on piano, see the KET.org program Harry Pickens in the Garden of Music https://www.ket.org/episode/KMUSE 000302
Also Tin Can Buddha https://www.ket.org/episode/KMUSE 000403
I've seen KSM series Shures on stage on KET programs Jubilee and I think they use them a lot for an area coverage mike. I have a pretty decent HDTV I get the over the air programs with. I hope the streaming video version of the programs have equivalent sound quality. I can't tell if they use KSM27 (5 db vocal presence peak), KSM32 (flatter) or KSM44 (multi-pattern) but the mikes are obviously one of the above. I'll try to put a recording on pianostreet in the next week to see if the pings are better from my piano/setup(KSM27) than what you've got. KET recordings are better, I believe.
Best of luck in improving your art.
Your background noise is non-existent in 2014. I can't tell about the frequency response of the mike used in 2014 because Ms Chacon doesn't play high or low frequencies in those selections. She stays in the middle octaves.
I also listened to the Chopin Fantasy recorded by Ms chacon in 2013. The 2014 recordings are a major improvement. The 2013 track has distorted piano tone, plus a lot of crowd noise. The Chopin piece does go up the keyboard to nearly the top, so that mike set doesn't really supress the top frequencies like a voice mike would, but all frequencies were somewhat distorted. I have a Steinway in my living room (console, not a grand) so I have some idea what one is supposed to sound like. Plus I heard a real Steinway grand from 10 m away in a church a month ago. It had more ping with the top down and the muffler blanket left on.
What your 2014 tracks do not have is ping, or attack, from the piano. Pianos have a tremendous volume peak at the beginning of the note, and the four tracks in post 1 do not have it. I've heard a Kawai grand at a church in the next county, and even that one has more ping with the top down than one in the JS Bach track had. Of course a Steinway grand should have more volume variation than exhibited in these tracks.
I heard no crowd noise in the 2014 tracks. I suppose your 2014 mike set are cardioids? The problem may be that the mixer (preamp?) gain is up too high, to allow the electronics to reproduce the piano attack for the A/D converter. Or perhaps that mike brand compresses volume when it is loud - I don't know. But the sound is mellow and Steinway grands are not like that. Not even Kawais. The start of the sound should be very distinct on Steinway, and pretty good on Kawais.
I would definitely like 3 tracks to record Ms Chacon & Ms Guarnieri together, for three mikes.
If you want to hear the Shure mike set I was talking about, on piano, see the KET.org program Harry Pickens in the Garden of Music https://www.ket.org/episode/KMUSE 000302
Also Tin Can Buddha https://www.ket.org/episode/KMUSE 000403
I've seen KSM series Shures on stage on KET programs Jubilee and I think they use them a lot for an area coverage mike. I have a pretty decent HDTV I get the over the air programs with. I hope the streaming video version of the programs have equivalent sound quality. I can't tell if they use KSM27 (5 db vocal presence peak), KSM32 (flatter) or KSM44 (multi-pattern) but the mikes are obviously one of the above. I'll try to put a recording on pianostreet in the next week to see if the pings are better from my piano/setup(KSM27) than what you've got. KET recordings are better, I believe.
Best of luck in improving your art.
Last edited:
Hello thoglette,
Sorry for the delay. A business trip got delayed much more than expected!
I agree with yor concern about the issues concerning analog and digital. Balanced signaling will have to be carefully matched, and I am considering asking an intern to find some matching components under a 34401A 6.5 dgt DMM scrutiny!!
) Advantages of producing just 1 or 2 final units...Surely a challenge, but nothing spectacularly NASA-CERN stuff, I guess. Imagine biomedical signals, like EEG: just a few hundreds nV, although BW < 100 Hz. And we run sometimes 128 channels over someone's head.
Pease's books and collections are among my favorites too. What is all this preamp+converter stuff, Anyhow?
I am still not sure if those THAT1580+THAT5171 + AT1201 ADC are a great choice, but since I had no feedback on that, I guess I will give it a go and see how it sounds, even pairing it with other quality mics first.
Let's see...
Hey indianajo! Thanks for the detailed reply. I carefully listened to the ket.org programs, and the Shure sound really nice. Clarity is evident. I am just not convinced on the timber variantions, they were not apparent to me. Specially on the Garden of Music, not so much on Tin Can Buddha. But then maybe it is the Yamaha, and maybe IMO the player is not trying to set a point on timbre as barroque music often requires.
Then following many of you's advice, I should listen other options besides DPA. The thing is many people say "DPA sounds much much better than everything else I've heard for classical piano" , and many people say: "don't spend all that in a DPA pair!! You can get the same quality for half the price" . That happened everywhere I asked.
Considering it is a large sum of money, and there is no consensus, I'll have to listen. The issue is that there is no easy to find DPA mics in Brazil... Eventually I will find some pairs.
Then following many of you's advice, I should listen other options besides DPA. The thing is many people say "DPA sounds much much better than everything else I've heard for classical piano" , and many people say: "don't spend all that in a DPA pair!! You can get the same quality for half the price" . That happened everywhere I asked.
Considering it is a large sum of money, and there is no consensus, I'll have to listen. The issue is that there is no easy to find DPA mics in Brazil... Eventually I will find some pairs.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.