Is it normal for the 2 overhead tracks to not be 100% lined up?

[mixsit]

I thought the one that said basically you can zoom and see tighter than you measured! Never considered such 'till now but.. there you go. Yet another good day at HRBBS
Damn right!

 

[Dags]

Hi guys. Just on overhead mic setup, how do you set them up so that they are equidistant from the snare head *and* are roughly parallel to the rest of the kit?
I have worked with the Glynn Johns technique to great effect on a jazz kit, but for standard rock this doesn't seem to cut the mustard.
I have dabbled with a couple of positions to varying degrees of success (behind the drummer as a near-coincident pair and as a spaced pair straight over the kit) and I always seem to have to raise one mic slightly higher than the other in order to have it the same distance from the snare as the other one (snare-side mic, for obvious reasons).
Is this to be expected or am I missing something with my setup?
Love learning new things, so all suggestions/experiences most welcome!
Dags

 

[Chili]

I've often wondered just how meticulous the software coders are about drawing the wave forms on the timeline. Whether or not they actually plot each sample exactly where it should be in time. Maybe there is a little slop when it draws the waves.

 

[bouldersoundguy]

Hi guys. Just on overhead mic setup, how do you set them up so that they are equidistant from the snare head *and* are roughly parallel to the rest of the kit?

Other than coincident pair I don't know how you'd do it. But I like coincident pairs so it's not a problem when I get to use them. A near coincident pair just moves the lowest frequency of the comb filtering up higher.

 

[RAMI]

Hi guys. Just on overhead mic setup, how do you set them up so that they are equidistant from the snare head *and* are roughly parallel to the rest of the kit?
I have worked with the Glynn Johns technique to great effect on a jazz kit, but for standard rock this doesn't seem to cut the mustard.

Hmmmmm....I don't know why it wouldn't work for rock. Glyn Johns engineered rock bands and used that technique with the Rolling Stones. I use a hybrid of the Glyn and Recorderman techniques. I have the "shoulder" mic a little closer to the floor tom, works great for me.

Of course, I have to add that I'm not using the technique in it's purest form, I do mic the kik and snare separately. If you're talking about only using 2 mics, then I can see how it wouldn't work for rock, but I don't know what would. I know people have said they've gotten "good results" with just 2 mics, but I'd like to hear what they mean by "good results" and I'd like to hear how much that kik drum cuts through a rock mix without being mic'ed.

 

[Dags]

Other than coincident pair I don't know how you'd do it. But I like coincident pairs so it's not a problem when I get to use them. A near coincident pair just moves the lowest frequency of the comb filtering up higher.

I'm trying to use a coincident pair, but with large diaphragm condensers they always end up, owing to the physical size of the mics, being side by side and one slightly behind the other to compensate for the proximity to the snare of the snare-side mic.

 

[Dags]

Hey Rami
Yes, I like micing the snare in the GJ setup as well. Keeps it centred and you can add some more punch to the mix.

The GJ setup of the 'overhead' mics seems to miss a little of the position of the toms or some of the spread of the cymbals if there are lots of little ones scattered around the kit (*sigh*.....drummers...)
For small kits, it works a treat, or for just banging out demos with a small number of mics.
But for a more modern rock sound where kick, snare, each tom, hihat and ride have their own mics, I'm really wanting to capture the 'air' around these elements and, of course, the cymbals and a bit of the room with the overheads, so putting them both above the kit seems to work for me in this situation.
My setup has worked, but I have always wondered if it is usual to have to move the snare-side mic back or up a little to bring it equidistant to the ride-side mic.
Dags

 

[Steenamaroo]

I was. I was.

I still am. I still am.

I'm getting it now. If you were able to go one level dumber, I'm pretty sure I'd begin to fully understand.

Just play the f**king drums!!!!

 

[RAMI]

Hey Rami
Yes, I like micing the snare in the GJ setup as well. Keeps it centred and you can add some more punch to the mix.

The GJ setup of the 'overhead' mics seems to miss a little of the position of the toms or some of the spread of the cymbals if there are lots of little ones scattered around the kit (*sigh*.....drummers...)
For small kits, it works a treat, or for just banging out demos with a small number of mics.
But for a more modern rock sound where kick, snare, each tom, hihat and ride have their own mics, I'm really wanting to capture the 'air' around these elements and, of course, the cymbals and a bit of the room with the overheads, so putting them both above the kit seems to work for me in this situation.
My setup has worked, but I have always wondered if it is usual to have to move the snare-side mic back or up a little to bring it equidistant to the ride-side mic.
Dags

Yo Dags,

The only thing I can suggest, if you want to keep trying to make Glyn Johns work for you, is to play around with the mic that's supposed to be way out to the side of the floor tom. I also find that a bit weird. I'm sure it worked for the Glyn, so who am I to say. But what I did was bring that mic in so that it's between my shoulder and the floor tom, and then I measure the distance to the centre of the snare from that position.

Either that or it might not be the best configuration for a kit with many toms, etc....I've never used it on anything other than a 5-piece kit, so your experience is probably more valid than mine when it comes to that.

 

[Dags]

Yo Dags,

The only thing I can suggest, if you want to keep trying to make Glyn Johns work for you, is to play around with the mic that's supposed to be way out to the side of the floor tom. I also find that a bit weird. I'm sure it worked for the Glyn, so who am I to say. But what I did was bring that mic in so that it's between my shoulder and the floor tom, and then I measure the distance to the centre of the snare from that position.

Ahh, got it. So its no longer pointing across the floor tom to the snare. Have you also raised it to shoulder height (interpreted from your description) or do you still have it just above floor tom height (ie, at your elbow)? And in your configuration is the hi hat mic still directly above the hi hat?

Either that or it might not be the best configuration for a kit with many toms, etc....I've never used it on anything other than a 5-piece kit, so your experience is probably more valid than mine when it comes to that.

LOL - I doubt it
I'm still finding out how much I *don't* know the more I play around with audio engineering

Dags

 

[RAMI]

Ahh, got it. So its no longer pointing across the floor tom to the snare. Have you also raised it to shoulder height (interpreted from your description) or do you still have it just above floor tom height (ie, at your elbow)?

I keep it about shoulder height. One thing I found out by accident once was that if that mic is too low, then your arm blocks the signal path from the snare to the micif you switch from your hi-hat to the ride cymbal, where your arm is extended and blocking the path of the snare signal getting to the mic.

And in your configuration is the hi hat mic still directly above the hi hat?

I don't mic the hi-hat. But if you meant the snare, then yes, that mic is pointing straight down at the snare.

 

[Dags]

I keep it about shoulder height. One thing I found out by accident once was that if that mic is too low, then your arm blocks the signal path from the snare to the micif you switch from your hi-hat to the ride cymbal, where your arm is extended and blocking the path of the snare signal getting to the mic.

That makes perfect sense

I don't mic the hi-hat. But if you meant the snare, then yes, that mic is pointing straight down at the snare.

Oh, yes, I meant the mic that's over the hihat pointing at the snare.

Thanks for giving me some ideas for an alternate GJ setup, Rami! Hopefully I'll get a chance to try it out soon.
Dags

 

[Bobbsy]

With a spaced pair of overheads there will always be things that don't line up. If you correct for one source you will throw other sources further out of phase. There is no "correct" alignment, just various compromises. I wouldn't even try to align drums with spaced overheads.

Using a coincident pair of overheads can somewhat solve this as you can align all the other sources to this reference, but even then bleed in other mics can never truly be all in alignment.

I spent a year or so using a coincident pair for overhead miking and it did make a difference. However, after lots of thinking about it, I decided I actually preferred the spaced pair sound. It may simply be that, since that's the most common, my brain is imprinted with "that's how it should sound, phase issues and all".

The main thing is that every sound you hear with two ears is riddled with phase differences. As soon as you record outside an anechoic chamber or use more than one mic, they'll exist. The trick is to just get a sound you like and not worry about what the waveform looks like. As somebody (besides my wife) said, inches--or even millimetres--matter.

 

[gecko zzed]

However, after lots of thinking about it, I decided I actually preferred the spaced pair sound. It may simply be that, since that's the most common, my brain is imprinted with "that's how it should sound, phase issues and all".

That's the way I look at it as well.

 

[WillyBite]

I'm more into doing than posting so you won't see many threads from me anywhere. I usually read a bit to maybe get a tip, but there's not much new under the sun. Your four overheads is worth replying to because I am preparing to use four tube, multi pattern mics as overheads. Sure I'll record in cardioid as a matter of course, but I'm interested in experimenting with omni and fig.8, and steps between them and cardioid, for more and less room sound (a beautiful big, high, timber and heavily draped room with a few square metres of treatment). But the thing I'm doing different is using two big boom mic stands with mic bars, one from behind the drummer and one from the front of the kit. One pair of mics will be set XY and the other to ORTF (17cm apart 110 degrees opposed). The "front" pair (front and back pairs will be almost touching each other) will be ORTF, to bring a wider image to the cymbals. I may substitute solid state condensers for the front pair to get a less "applied", more interesting and holistic sound, depending on listeners' opinions. I'll have to experiment with height. I'll be starting off at 60".

When I mike up a kit, I most often use four mikes: kick, snare and overheads x 2. In Reaper, I assign kick and snare to separate tracks, but the overheads get recorded to a single stereo track. As a result, I've never had cause to examine whether they are lined up or not, and have never noticed any issues.

 

[RAMI]

. Your four overheads is worth replying to because I am preparing to use four tube, multi pattern mics as overheads. Sure I'll record in cardioid as a matter of course, but I'm interested in experimenting with omni and fig.8, and steps between them and cardioid, for more and less room sound (a beautiful big, high, timber and heavily draped room with a few square metres of treatment). But the thing I'm doing different is using two big boom mic stands with mic bars, one from behind the drummer and one from the front of the kit. One pair of mics will be set XY and the other to ORTF (17cm apart 110 degrees opposed). The "front" pair (front and back pairs will be almost touching each other) will be ORTF, to bring a wider image to the cymbals. I may substitute solid state condensers for the front pair to get a less "applied", more interesting and holistic sound, depending on listeners' opinions. I'll have to experiment with height. I'll be starting off at 60".

Good lick with all that. But nobody said anything about using 4 overheads.

 

[gecko zzed]

Good lick with all that. But nobody said anything about using 4 overheads.

I think Willybite might have been misled by me saying "overheads x 2", which he took to mean two pairs of overheads.

I agree with 'eek'. I really can't get excited about more compexity when the results are fine with less.

 

[RAMI]

I think Willybite might have been misled by me saying "overheads x 2", which he took to mean two pairs of overheads.

Possibly. I thought he was thrown off by this:

When I mike up a kit, I most often use four mikes

Either way. I can't see any good reason to over-complicate things any more than they already are by using 4 overheads. again.