Determining a Hardness factor...

JKestle

JKestle

New member
I'm reading about a technique for matching a mic to a source and vice versa.

The technique is as follows (taken from Mixing with your Mind):

1) Listen to the source and rate its perceived "Hardness" from 1-10 (H1-H10).

2) Set up your entire mic collection and and rate each mics perceived "Hardness" from 1-10 (H1-H10).

and finally,

3) Select a mic that is has the opposite Hardness factor to your source.

i.e. Source = H2, select mic with H8

My question to you is....

What characteristics of a source/mic contribute to its perceived Hardness?
What are you listening for?

Hardness=Dry In Your Face? Extra upper mid range? Crunch?

Any help setting me straight is greatly appreciated.




(By the way its a great book)
~JK
 
If Stav has neglected to explain what he means by "hardness", then I can only presume that that was a secret he didn't want to share.

:rolleyes:
 
If Stav has neglected to explain what he means by "hardness", then I can only presume that that was a secret he didn't want to share.
Click to expand...
If one speaks in vague generalities without being concrete it's easy to sound like your teaching something unique.
 
Well, I think you could use some common sense. It doesn't take too much of a stretch of the imagintion to figure out that some "harder" sources might be snare drum, rock amp, rock kick drum. And "softer" sources might be things like flute, Spanish guitar played lightly, soft voices.

But I really don't get his logic. Say, snare must be the hardest source - ules you have a jack hammer laying around. So then I should match that with my "softest" mic. I dunno. Then I'd be miking snares with a Royer 121 or some kind of neutral tube mic.

Certainly harsh and fast transients can be tamed with a ribbon or a tube mic.

I dunno. Theory sounds kind of retarded. If flute would be a softer source, according to his theory you shouldn't be using any soft mics on a soft source. A 121 would be a top pick for recording a flute. And a 57 would probably get classified as a harder mic. But the 57 is a classic mic for snare.

2) Set up your entire mic collection and and rate each mics perceived "Hardness" from 1-10 (H1-H10).

ding, ding, ding, ding. That's dumb! What sort of source should you use to determine the hardness or softness of a mic? A hard source? A soft source?

I haven't read the book. But I reckon that if it causes you to think and listen and explore - it's probably doing it's job. Not every road in audio exploration is going to lead to a perfect destination. Sometimes you've got to go down blind alleys and bumpy roads with potholes, and find out where really fucking up gets you.
 
Last edited:
Dot said:
Well, I think you could use some common sense.
Click to expand...

I have my common sense, I'm just trying to start a discusion...give me some slack.

Dot said:
I dunno. Theory sounds kind of retarded. If flute would be a softer source, according to his theory you shouldn't be using any soft mics on a soft source. A 121 would be a top pick for recording a flute. And a 57 would probably get classified as a harder mic. But the 57 is a classic mic for snare.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the insight.

Its a dumb question to ask i know, but I want to know other people think.

Can a hard (real, unforgiving, harsh) source matched with a soft (Easily molded, Not brilliant or glaring) mic, and a soft source matched with a hard mic provide some sort of balance?
 
Two wrongs don't make a right...

I think that applies here; but what is pleasing to my ears may not be so to yours, so you could give your theory a shot.
 
JKestle said:
I have my common sense, I'm just trying to start a discusion...give me some slack.
Click to expand...

JKestle, those were general comments made by me for the discussion. Not directed at you.

The common sense comment was more in response to ausrock's. "If Stav has neglected to explain what he means by "hardness", then I can only presume that that was a secret he didn't want to share.

I think we can get an idea of what Stav means by hardness without too much trouble.
 
The book is , in my opinion, not bad at all and there is a few neat tricks and suggestions in there.Choosing a source to determine the hardness of your mics is not an issue in my opinion.Just choose whatever source and test ALL YOUR MICS on the same source.I'm pretty sure you'll be able to tell which mic the snare sounds "softer" with, and which one it sounds "harder" with.

cheers
 
Dot said:
JKestle, those were general comments made by me for the discussion. Not directed at you.

The common sense comment was more in response to ausrock's. "If Stav has neglected to explain what he means by "hardness", then I can only presume that that was a secret he didn't want to share.

I think we can get an idea of what Stav means by hardness without too much trouble.
Click to expand...


Sorry for the misunderstanding Dot,

We all have our own definition of "Hard", but it seems to make sense (even without trying it out) that mis-matching sources and mics in terms of their hardness/character/realism/unforgivingness can bring some interesting textures to a mix.

Sure, a drum set is a different monster altogether, I don't think this theory applies to eveything we record.
 
Last edited:
I'm getting hard just thinking about all this. (oh gosh, that was such a poor joke)
 
Read the book and all I can say, to basterdize Abraham Lincoln; never has so little been conveyed in so many words.

The idea of zone mixing is pretty well captured in the book but beyond this basic precept, I found little else enlighting contained therein. In fact I bothered not to buy it but spent about 30 minutes scanning it.

If you want a better book for learning mixing get the "Engineers Handbook".

All that said, mics are either soft i.e. they respond to subtle details or hard, they don't respond to subtle details. Put a soft mic on a vocal ballad and a hard mic on something with excessive transients i.e. drums.
 
Middleman said:
All that said, mics are either soft i.e. they respond to subtle details or hard, they don't respond to subtle details. Put a soft mic on a vocal ballad and a hard mic on something with excessive transients i.e. drums.
Click to expand...


Which would mean "hard" mics go with "hard" sources and vice versa. I think that makes more sense. As it was said earlier, I wouldn't want an sm57 on my acoustic guitar while I had a C414 on a full-metal-distortion amp.

BTW...I know some people would argue about the 414 on the amp, but in the case I mentioned, I'd rather have them switched.
 
Middleman said:
If you want a better book for learning mixing get the "Engineers Handbook".

All that said, mics are either soft i.e. they respond to subtle details or hard, they don't respond to subtle details. Put a soft mic on a vocal ballad and a hard mic on something with excessive transients i.e. drums.
Click to expand...

I've read most of the books out there already.

My view of a soft mic is one that is the most forgiving to a given source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top