sax quartet recordings

[Peter B]

I've only been home recording for a few months with the ultimate aim of making a demo CD of my sax quartet. I've got a very basics set up comprising a large diaphragm condenser and a ribbon mic plugged into a Lexicon interface working into Cubase LE on a PC. The room I'm in is 18ft x 10ft, lined with book shelves on both 18ft walls and with a wall to wall curtain across one 10ft end. It's pretty dead acoustically.

I've done a few test recordings and I'm gradually getting better recordings as I experiment with mic positions, compression and reverb, but something is really bothering me, and that's why I've signed up here because I'm certain that someone will put me on the right track.

I attach a picture of the master EQ plugin displaying a playback of my quartet. You'll see that it's biassed towards the low frequency end, rolling off rapidly above around 2kHz and this is the case for all the recordings. This is just a snapshot in time, of course, but over the period of a 3 or 4 minute recording the tendancy is definitely to the low frequency end of the spectrum.

I can't understand why the recordings are like this. Is it the mics, the room a or is is just that harmonics generated by 4 saxophones played together tend towards a low frequency mean?

Any thoughts for this nOOby would be very welcome.

 

[ykarkason]

I actually belive that the real question is , Does the recording sound good to your ears?

You should mix with your ears not your eyes.

 

[Peter B]

The recording sounds OK without EQ, but better (to my ear) if I compensate by lifting the highs and reducing the lows a bit, but I'd really rather not do that, I'd rather try to understand why the recordings are coming out hat way.

 

[RAMI]

I actually belive that the real question is , Does the recording sound good to your ears?

You should mix with your ears not your eyes.

^That's the right answer.^

Having said that, I don't see where it's bias towards the low end. Seems to me like it's strong in the mid-range, aboout 700hz-2k, which would make sense for sax, no?

 

[Track Rat]

Smallish rooms, even dead ones, will be a little bass heavy. I understand your wanting to understand the physics of what you're recording but don't get too hung up on a visual "play back". Keep experimenting with mic placement and critical "listening".

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Ignore that display until your ears tell you there's a problem. Then use the display as a tool for defining the problem precisely so you can address it precisely. Mostly I don't have a use for spectral displays of the actual signal. The eq frequency response display and my ears tell me enough.

 

[clivus]

The recording sounds OK without EQ, but better (to my ear) if I compensate by lifting the highs and reducing the lows a bit, but I'd really rather not do that, I'd rather try to understand why the recordings are coming out hat way.

My guess is that the highs and high-mids are being attenuated by your curtains and the room is resonating some low-mids which could explain why your recordings sounds better with a bit of EQ as you have described. Experimenting with bass traps and removing the curtains could help (or trying a different room) change things for the better. If your room has carpet that can really kill the highs as well.

 

[Peter B]

OK thanks everyone for your very useful thoughts. I was wondering if the room was the culprit, and yes, it is heavily carpeted. I'll try some recordings with the cutains drawn back, which wll expose a large wall-to-wall window. On the other hand RAMI's suggestion that it's 'about right for saxes' may not be too far from the truth either. The trouble with that thought is that it leaves me with a decision whether to atificially improve a 'natural' sound by EQing it. Do you experienced recordists ever do that?

 

[bouldersoundguy]

The trouble with that thought is that it leaves me with a decision whether to atificially improve a 'natural' sound by EQing it. Do you experienced recordists ever do that?

Saxophones are artificial. Music is artificial. Recording is artificial. The definition of artificial is "made by a human" so why is there even the slightest concern about "artificially" improving the sound?

Eq is a tool. If you need to pound in a nail you grab a hammer. If you need to alter the spectral balance of an audio signal you grab an eq. This fear of eq sounds suspiciously like audiophoolery. While playback systems should simply be accurate, music production systems need to be accurate where they are just passing signal, but at other points in the chain they let you deliberately introduce inaccuracies for creative purposes. You are creating art, not taking a scientific measurement. Do whatever it takes to make it good.

 

[clivus]

The trouble with that thought is that it leaves me with a decision whether to atificially improve a 'natural' sound by EQing it. Do you experienced recordists ever do that?

All the frigging time! Most of us don't have access to to perfect instruments, amps, rooms, mics, etc. Gotta fix it some how.

 

[Peter B]

Ah, right, got the message. I'm being too 'precious' with it all. You've reminded me of a conversation I once had with a friend when I commented ....'but that's a sledge hammer to crack a nut'. 'Peter'...he said...'you don't get it do you, sledge hammers were designed to crack nuts'.

I am just a beginner, but I'm learning fast !!!

 

[Track Rat]

Saxophones are artificial. Music is artificial. Recording is artificial. The definition of artificial is "made by a human" so why is there even the slightest concern about "artificially" improving the sound?

Eq is a tool. If you need to pound in a nail you grab a hammer. If you need to alter the spectral balance of an audio signal you grab an eq. This fear of eq sounds suspiciously like audiophoolery. While playback systems should simply be accurate, music production systems need to be accurate where they are just passing signal, but at other points in the chain they let you deliberately introduce inaccuracies for creative purposes. You are creating art, not taking a scientific measurement. Do whatever it takes to make it good.

Badda Boom Badda Bing!