Figure 8 with DEEP null?

R

RustyAxe

New member
Looking to record a singer/songwriter and am using the "two figure 8 mic" technique to maximize separation between guitar and vocal. Neither of my cheap variable pattern LDCs seem to have a well-defined off-axis null, just enough to know the technique works, but still more bleed than I'd like. Any recommendations for better mics to use? I'd like to keep it under $500 per mic. Thanks!

- Denny
 
If the bleed is from room reflections the pattern is not the problem. As far as I know all figure 8 pattern mics will have a very deep null. Even the ribbons with the squashed pseudo figure 8 have a very strong null that's just narrower than a LDC figure 8. Maybe you could specify which "cheap variable pattern LDCs" you have so we could go look up the polar plot.
 
I have a Samson CL8 and an MXL 4000. The room is less than ideal, of course, but that isn't gonna change any time soon. I can't find a polar pattern diagram for MXL, but here's the Samson

Samson CL8 Pattern.jpg
 
That's a different mic, actually ... there's no pattern plot on the MXL4000 (but I'd think it's similar to the XL). Actually, the MXL (vocal) is doing a pretty decent job of rejecting the guitar, it's the Samson that seems to pick up too much in the off-axis. I'll continue to mess around with the exact placement and angles. Sad thing is ... I got some great tracks last session using a single mic (the MXL). The performer is a seasoned musician and knows how to work a mic ... but he insists on separate vocal and guitar tracks ... and due to an accident MUST play sitting down (putting the mics even closer to each other).
 
I was curious enough to check out the plots on some of the mics I'm familiar with (a few - a pair of CAD179s and an MP4047 I've been using a bunch exactly like this recently.
Think this begs the questions though to sort this out a bit. What is the normal' amount of attenuation vs what you're seeing or expected? (they all show about 15-20 at best- That's significant, but again, compared to what?
Also let's throw in 'what are the back sides pointed at (how dead are those surfaces and how far?
 
mixsit said:
I was curious enough to check out the plots on some of the mics I'm familiar with (a few - a pair of CAD179s and an MP4047 I've been using a bunch exactly like this recently. Think this begs the questions though to sort this out a bit. What is the normal' amount of attenuation vs what you're seeing or expected? (they all show about 15-20 at best- That's significant, but again, compared to what?
Click to expand...
I have no idea ... this is the first time I've ever attempted this, just got hip to the technique in past week. Until now I had no reason to use a figure 8 pattern, as I usually record myself vocal/guitar on a single track.

Also let's throw in 'what are the back sides pointed at (how dead are those surfaces and how far?
Click to expand...
I'll see what I can do ... any suggestions to reduce reflection into the back side of the mic?

This is all good stuff. I'm no recording engineer by any means ... just an average musician looking to make decent recordings on the cheap. Thanks all.
 
RustyAxe said:
I have no idea ... this is the first time I've ever attempted this, just got hip to the technique in past week. Until now I had no reason to use a figure 8 pattern, as I usually record myself vocal/guitar on a single track.

I'll see what I can do ... any suggestions to reduce reflection into the back side of the mic?

This is all good stuff. I'm no recording engineer by any means ... just an average musician looking to make decent recordings on the cheap. Thanks all.
Click to expand...
Think of it in terms of 'how far are the sources of reflected energy (sides, ceiling, floor-), farther compared to how close the source is always = how much your desired level is vs the 'bleed.
Just adding some soft baffling ('gobos/partitions) around the micing area- and/or to the rear of the mic in this case knocks down the stuff bouncing in. Obviously larger and/or a treated room fairs better than a smaller one.
I find in aiming the fig-8s, especially if they're slinging the guitar 'high or they're sitting down you're really kind of juggling the compromises- get closer -for better 'sig to noise, vs best tone (..lots of low boost on high-directional mics!), height and angle options get way restricted..
One thing having to rotate-aim the null usually aims the back towards the floor or ceiling- a nice up side if there's other instruments in the room ;)
 
Most condensers have a frequency-dependent pattern. Figure-8 ribbons generally have very good null points at all frequencies.
 
Last edited:
mixsit said:
Think this begs the questions though to sort this out a bit. What is the normal' amount of attenuation vs what you're seeing or expected? (they all show about 15-20 at best- That's significant, but again, compared to what?
Click to expand...

In my experience there seems to be much more that 20dB of attenuation. I suspect the polar plots only go down to -20dB as that is enough to define the pattern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top