R
RAMI
Guest
Um...No. Having something facing you and then spinning (sideways) it so that it's upside down, without turning it front to back, means the same side is still facing you.
Um...No. Having something facing you and then spinning (sideways) it so that it's upside down, without turning it front to back, means the same side is still facing you.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Assume, for example, that the nameplate is on the front side of the capsule. Unless you physically take the microphone apart and change that fact, no matter how your rotate the mic around, the nameplate and the front of the capsule will *always* be facing the same way together. Whether it's upside down or sideways is irrelevant, the two will always be together.
Therefore if one mic has the nameplate and the capsule facing north, and the second mic has the nameplate facing south and therefore opposite of the first mic, you can assume that the capsule on that second mic is also facing south and therefore the opposite of the first mic.
You're right, if the label were on the side, perpendicular to the capsule face, the symmetry would be broken and the label would change sides. But that's not what's indicated in the pic (nor have I ever seen a mic labeled that way).
G.
Last edited:
M
Micter
No Title
Rocket surgery! lol
fat_fleet
Swollen Member
this has gotten crazy.
i'm sure if we were all in the same room with a sheet of paper and a pencil this part of the discussion would last about ten seconds.
i'm sure if we were all in the same room with a sheet of paper and a pencil this part of the discussion would last about ten seconds.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
No paper needed, nor do we need to be together. Just *grab an actual microphone* and try it for yourself.
G.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
My eyes are glazing over. You are both right, but you are having a semantics dispute. It's still an NTK and a K2, probably in figure 8 configuration. It doesn't matter which side of the figure 8 is facing the singer, or whether it's upside down or not. The engineer did it to put the capsules as close together as possible. This prevents phase distortion and makes it possible to do it with one pop filter. How he will mix it afterward, the engineer probably doesn't know that until he actually hears the tracks. Jesus, just let it go.-Richie
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
My eyes are glazing too, but for a slightly different reason. I've been looking at that pic in Photoshop, changing lighting levels, sharpness, zooming in and out, etc., and somehow dummy me can't see a physical difference between the two mics other than that label, which is on one side and parallel to the capsule orientation. Clue me in, Richie; how can you ID them as different mic models? What am I missing?
As I said earlier, I agree that if they are indeed different mics, then yes, getting two different mic sounds or pickups- and probably two different signal paths also - would be the reason. But in that pic, from that angle, I can't tell the two mics apart.
Well, I guess losing my eyesight is good news for me as an audio engineer, but not as a video editor
.G.
D
dodgeaspen
New member
That is kinda odd. I've never seen anything like that before.
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Well doggies, Glen. I looked at the photo more closely, and I'm convinced I was right that the top mic is an NTK. I was wrong in that the bottom mic is *not* a K-2. The spot along the rim just below the grill looks like a switch. Doesn't exist on an NTK. It sure looks like a Rode mic, but it doesn't conform to Classic II, NTK, K-2, or Broadcaster. It also looks like the grill on the upside down mic is slightly flattened over the diaphragm, like a Neumann or MXL mic. That may be an optical illusion. If it is 2 NTK's, I have no idea why both mics are up, unless the engineer wants to hear the track through 2 different preamps.-Richie
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Ah, I love that New England accent
Take a look at this magnified, sharpened and brightened detail. The more I look at it the more I'm convinced they are indeed different mic types, and the more I think the top, upside down mic is an NT-1a. Notice not only the very slightly different screen shape between the two mics - not only like you mentioned, but the top mic's screen has more rounded-looking corners - but the upper mic's screen appears to have a coarser mesh to it than the bottom one. Note also the cheesy NT-1-style mic mount that the top mic is hanging from, as opposed to the more common spider shock mount on the bottom mic.
That course screen mesh and mic mount are just like my NT-1s. What threw me originally was the gold body color, as my NT-1s are painted an awful primer gray, but haven't they changed that to a metallic burnish on the NT-1as? Such a metallic tube could easily reflect the same color light as the bottom mic.
The bottom mic with the different screen and the rectangular thingamajig on the screen collar makes that definitely not an NT-1.
Which I think solves it. You were right fron the start. They are two different mics most likely facing the same way and picked to grab different vocal tone and probably to run through different signal chains as well. Whether the bottom is a fig 8 or not is only a small detail change for the explanation; it still remains two mics/signal chains for two sounds. The only thing you may have missed is actual the model numbers, which considering the quality of the pic is understandable. Hell, I thoughtthey were the same
.
Last edited:
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
I'm still convinced the top mic is an NTK. The strap over the top separating the 2 grills and it's shape give it away, not to mention the heavy multipin cable. What the bottom mic is, I have no clue, except I don't think it's a Rode mic, or it's been modded. It could also be an older version of a known model, as Rode has changed specs on a lot of their mics over the years. Beats me.-Richie
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
D'oh, you're right. I can't believe I looked right at that strap and didn't make the disconnect from an NT-1 there
. And yeah, I just looked at the NTK and it does have the rounded screen and the black nameband around the base. I'm kinda suprised that the NTK uses the awful NT-1 style mount. But yeah, I'd agree that's an NTK. Score one for Richie .I gotta go make an appointment with my optomitrist....
G.
O
ofajen
Daddy-O Daddy-O Baby
Maybe it's figure of 8 and omni. You can track them separate, then process them separately and recombine. You could then have different directionalities at different frequencies.
Check out the user guide for the Josephson Series 7 mikes for a good introduction to the many possibilities available when you track both omni and figure 8 separately (and the stereo version which has omni plus crossed figure of 8 capsules, with three separate outputs which lets you control the instantaneous stereo field at mixdown.) Now THAT's the mike I'd like to have.
Cheers,
Otto
R
Richard Monroe
Well-known member
Maybe it's figure of 8 and omni. You can track them separate, then process them separately and recombine. You could then have different directionalities at different frequencies.
Check out the user guide for the Josephson Series 7 mikes for a good introduction to the many possibilities available when you track both omni and figure 8 separately (and the stereo version which has omni plus crossed figure of 8 capsules, with three separate outputs which lets you control the instantaneous stereo field at mixdown.) Now THAT's the mike I'd like to have.
Cheers,
Otto
Well it isn't that. The top mic is an NTK, which is a cardioid only mic. The bottom mic is the question. Currently, it has not been definitively identified, and the polar pattern could be anything-Richie
darrin_h2000
Banned
The actual question is why the placement...Id have to guess that they couldnt decide which mic they wanted to track with and decided to set up both...chances are there isnt really a label on the back of the top mic and could be a smudge or something.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
ditto plus a million
O
ofajen
Daddy-O Daddy-O Baby
Yup, it's not figure of 8 and omni, but the technique I mentioned is more interesting and powerful than just randomly tracking two separate mikes... at least to me!
YMMV.Cheers,
Otto
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
There are at least four possibilities that I can think of, for each of which it wouldn't be the first time it's been done:
The first is as you say, that they weren't sure which one they eventually want to go with and wanted the option.
The second is a variation on the first: that the artist had a fave mic they preferred (perhaps even brought it with him), but the producer or engineer had an idea they preferred, so they decided to use them both and then reach a consensus in post playback. Some folks on both sides of the glass are just so married to a certain mic that they insist upon it.
The third is that they purposely plan to combine the two; the may have liked the transient and "air" response of one mic/preamp chain, but preferred the bottom of the other, or something like that. They then either run them through a crossover matrix or simple EQ or bandpass filtering and get the best of both worlds.
Fourth, and probably not so likely, but it's not a novel idea; that it's all just showboating on the part of the studio.
G.
I
iownrocknroll
New member
Billy Corgan of the smashing pumpkins used this technique on every record they recorded, he'd use one mic for the verse and the other mic for the choruses.
X
XLR
______
Looks like it's just two mic's put up for comparison.
