Does anyone else think it's rediculous

  • Thread starter Thread starter antispatula
  • Start date Start date
antispatula

antispatula

Active member
to say you MUST have a matched pair of mics if you want to make a serious stereo recording? I've heard time and time again that you should use the same model of mic if you're using two mics to record guitar or piano. I usually never use the same mics on guitar or piano. In fact I find using a SDC on the upper keys on the piano, and on the 12th fret on guitar and a LDC on the lower keys on the piano and near the saddle of the guitar usually works out the best.
 
do what ever you have to do to get the sound you desire

by pleasing yourself you'll please others
 
Nothing wrong with having different things coming out of each speaker, as long as there's no phase problems. I can think of a lot of songs that use that technique to great effect.

I've heard that if you're going for even stereo imaging/spreading, and you have two mics that are maybe the same model, but have different frequency footprints, then you'll get a skew to the left or right at the frequencies where the difference is, and that'll bug you. I'm not aware of a plugin that lets you pan at different frequency ranges, but I guess that would let you fix the problem.
 
antispatula said:
to say you MUST have a matched pair of mics if you want to make a serious stereo recording? I've heard time and time again that you should use the same model of mic if you're using two mics to record guitar or piano. I usually never use the same mics on guitar or piano. In fact I find using a SDC on the upper keys on the piano, and on the 12th fret on guitar and a LDC on the lower keys on the piano and near the saddle of the guitar usually works out the best.
Click to expand...

I would call that dual mono recording, not stereo recording. Stereo recording doesn't mean two channels. It means trying to reproduce something similar to what one would hear if one were standing in the recording space. Recording two signals with significantly different microphones isn't doing that.

That's not saying that there's anything wrong with doing recording that way---indeed, it is common for close miking situations---but it isn't stereo. Close miking, by definition, is not stereo recording.
 
At the level of detail I'm getting in my recordings, which is nothing spectacular, a pair of unmatched mxl 604s does just fine. (cardio caps) Even listening through the very nice hi-fi setup in a well treated room, the anomolies in stereo imaging really don't mean much once everything else is in the mix.

We're taking jazz live in a room together, so there's enough bleed and such that those kind of sublteties don't matter.

That's not to say that you can't get great stereo imaging on drums in jazz. I demoed some Magnepan speakers with my LP of "Head Hunters" and the kit was just as 3D as you could want-- you know the kind of stereo imaging where you can practically hear that the toms sit above the kick, etc. I would love to read how that kit was miked.

Definitely a matched pair on the OH's!
 
Last edited:
dgatwood said:
I would call that dual mono recording, not stereo recording.
Click to expand...
ding ding ding ding! winner winner chicken dinner!

stereo requires 2 identical (sic) mics as you don't want any difference from the Left and Right sounds.

for dual mono, anything goes. i've used "mismatched" mics on drum overheads, acoustic guitars, lots of things over the years. typically an LDC and SDC.


cheers,
wade
 
I too have used mismatahced or different mics on many occasions, but I also recognize when I should or maybe want to use matched mics as well. With something like a piano especially it can be a real difference maker. Using two matched mics can really help to give a nice wide image with less image tilting and with less phasing issues and still making it sound like one large sound and not a couple of tracks that were panned. A lot of it depends on the nature of what you are recording. With an acoustic guitar the two mics used are often not so much for a "stereo sound" but more two pick up and almost isolate two distinctly different regions of the guitar. By using two different sounding mics you aren't really capturing capturing a stereo image of the source, but more of a dual mono image like mentioned above. In fact, when I record like that I rarely pan them out in hard stereo. Recording a choir, a piano, a string section etc... though really allows to to cover a wider range physically of space without sounding like multiple mics.
 
I tend to agree with dgatwood that the technique you describe is not really "stereo". "Stereo" is actually short for "stereophonic". It combines the Greek root words "stereo" meaning solid and implying three spatial dimensions, and "phonics" meaning sound. So, at its most fundamental level, "stereophonics" means an attempt to record and reproduce 3-dimensional sound. The term "stereo" is commonly used today and used to describe systems that fall far short of that ultimate goal.

A "stereophonic" recording of acoustic guitar uses two mikes in some array intended to produce a stereophonic illusion when the two signals are played back separately over two loudspeakers. Stereo techniques fall into the broad categories of spaced techniques (where the mikes are separated) and coincident techniques (where the capsules are as close as may be and the two channels differ based solely on directional information differences.) However, a true stereo technique is always left-right symmetrical. Using two close mikes, while creating two signals, is not "stereo". Of course, if it's a sound you like, there's no reason not to use it, anyway!

Cheers,

Otto
 
First, for the un-initiated, I'll point out that there are two levels to this question of matched stereo pairs. A true stereo pair is not only two mics of the same manufacture and model, but is also hand matched by response curve so that the two mics have equal sensitivity across the audio spectrum. In really tightly matched stereo pairs, even polar response is matched.
What Antispatula is talking about is mixed mics, presumably as a spaced pair, not as a coincident pair.
Back when there was no such thing as a stereo track, there were simply tracks on tape, this was less complicated. Now, we have DAWs that let you record mono tracks, dual mono tracks, and stereo tracks. Stereo assumes that you are capturing equally the left and right components of a soundfield, and will treat those components equally. Therefore, all channel controls and functions are ganged, and it is one file. Dual mono assumes some association between the two sources, but maintains some autonomy between them. The specifics change from program to program.
What actually constitutes true stereo is a matter of some debate, but most serious audio recordists will say that true stereo is a product of matched microphones using one of the traditional stereo placement techniques, or a stereo microphone, and using a matching signal chain. Anything else, as dgatwood points out, is dual mono as a matter of source, and should probably be so recorded in the DAW.
That's not to say that dual mono is inferior though. It is often desirable to use the differing characteristics of LDC and SDC mics, for instance, to capture different properties of an instrument. Mixing the fast transient response of an SDC with the smoother response of an LDC is a tried and true method used in top studios. The two mics may or may not end up getting panned left and right, may or may not be mixed at equal level (which they probably aren't to begin with) and they may want completely different EQ and other processing, so recording them as a stereo track is not a good idea.
 
I use matched mics, matched cables, matched preamps, matched d/a converters, matched compressors, matched EQs, and matched monitors for my un-matched ears.

Almost forgot matched mic stands and shockmounts.
 
Adam P said:
You could do a stereo recording using two very unmatched mics in M-S...
Click to expand...

Depends on how you define "unmatched". If you mean "different polar pattern," then yeah. If you mean "dramatically different frequency response," then no. You'll have problems with that.

If there's too much of a frequency on the "mid" mic (relative to the "side" mic), you'll get a narrower stereo field (everything will converge towards the center) for that frequency, and if there isn't enough of the mid channel at a particular frequency, you'll get too wide a stereo field. The result is that your piano might sound like somebody spread the strings out randomly across the stage. :D

Even more dizzying, though, would be a player that isn't in the center of the sound space (e.g. the clarinet player at the right side of the stage). It would sound as though that player were moving rapidly all around the stage depending on the note he/she was playing. Could make for a funny effect, but it probably isn't what you want....

That said, to comment on the original subject, the difference in response between unmatched but similar mics is generally close enough that a matched pair isn't strictly necessary. Whether that is true for lower quality mics or not is certainly worth debating on a mic-by-mic basis, though, and using an actual matched pair of mics certainly doesn't hurt, of course. :D
 
Well, I'm no physics expert on the subject, but I think it's safe to say if you are recording at home, then using two mics of the same brand and same model will get you results that are perfectly acceptable for the gear we commonly use at home.... I think this is safe to say for a "stereo" recording where two mics are being used to capture a sound field in the "left and right" sense.

For mid-side I am not sure it matters so much. Maybe I just got lucky, I dont know, but I like the results I get better when I do mid-side with a SDC for the mid and a LDC figure 8 for the side, better than I get by using two "identical" multi pattern mics, one set cardioid and one set figure 8. Either way the result is quite remarkable with the m-s technique, but I get a lot more compliments on the sound when I use a different model SDC for the mid mic.

But for a "stereo field" recording like a large choir I would say use two mics same make same model. I used two 414's on a 30 person choir, and it was quite good when it was all done.
 
well anything can work ,but if your mics are matched i would think it would take the guess work out of what going on on setting them up:o
 
Matched would be essential for binaural recordings - along with a long list of requirements.
In the end I suppose it depends on your definition of stereo.
Sometime I get very aggro re stereo as a combo of my tinnitus & 1 ear not matching the other makes a sweet spot very hard to find.
 
It's common to use a like pair (matched pair) of mics with certain stereo recording methods... crossed pair, coincident pair, spaced pair, etc, when trying to create a true stereo perspective.

However, though not technically true stereo you can create ambience and width by many other means. I like using two different mics on acoustic guitar as well... and then pan to taste.

When I was recording music halls 20 years ago, a single matched coincident pair near the conductor’s position was the best way to capture a stereo experience for the listener.

:)
 
Stereo image with mismatched mics

Great topic.

The important thing about a stereo recording is the stereo image. When you are a comfortable distance from your speakers listening in their sweet area the stereo image lends space and reality to the audio experience. It sounds much more like live music in the room then a mono recording can.

There are many ways to record a stereo image with two or more mics. Two standard ways are X/Y where two cardiod mics are set in front of the music with the mics close together but at an angle, often 110 degrees, and Spaced Pair where two omnis are set in front and to either side of the performers.

If you use omni mics in a close X/Y configuration you usually end up pretty close to mono. Cardiod mics in a spaced pair can result in very uneven coverage of the performance area. Neither of these is recommended.

So if you got cardiods try X/Y. If you got omnis try a spaced pair.

Either of these techniques will get you a wonderful spacious stereo image.

Naturally if you are buying a pair of mics for stereo recording you will want a matched pair. Some mics, like the EV RE15 and the EV RE55 are speced tight enough that any two are supposed to be a matched pair.

But say you don't have a matched pair. Maybe you've got two EV 635a omni mics or two MXL 603 cardiod mics. Use them anyway. You'll still get a great stereo image. Most people most of the time on most hifi systems won't notice the difference.

Using different mics entirely works too. Sometimes. That is sometimes you get a real nice stereo image from mismatched mics and sometimes you don't.

It has happened that I've had an open vocal mic recording during a live performance that ended up being my right channel in a stereo image. Kind of a spaced pair with one omni and one cardiod. Sure this isn't recommended but if it's what you've got and you end up with stereo you don't say I won't use it because I didn't have a matched pair.

That said I want to address an issue I call purity. The example of mismatched mics above would be what I consider to be impure. And the problem with losing purity is that you only know what your audio sounds like on your monitors. It is very likely that in different listening scenarios, car stereos, theaters, boombox, the stereo image wouldn't be as good as it sounded on your monitors. It could be that it doesn't sound as good on a lot better monitors than the ones you used to mix it.

As an example of a pure recording I take two msh-1 omnis on a Jecklin Disc and I record acoustic guitar and then I take those signals and they become my left channel and my right channel I just balance and do some light post to make it sound great.

With a pure recording whatever system you play it on it's going to sound as good as it can. You will find some crappy systems where it doesn't sound good but you are not going to take it to a really good system and have it sound crappy. For the most part it will sound as good as the system it's being played on.

Stereo purity equals using matched mics set up carefully to capture a stereo image and then being very careful not to step on that image in post. The advantages to stereo purity are simplicity of production and post production and, more importantly, the audio will sound as good as the systems it's played on in most listening environments.

So since we have this great thread going on the theory of stereo I thought I'd add my concept of stereo purity to the mix.

Thanks,

Hairy Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top