skippy
New member
Sure. I didn't realize that you were multitracking yourself- sorry about that. If that's the case, all my advice goes out the window- you have to do what you have to do. But it'll make it impossible to get the sparkle that comes from printing the performance of all the voices working off one another, and to me that's the heart of a capella.
Anyway, all of those are stereo micing techniques, either coincident or near-coincident. They are different ways of setting up two mics to capture a stereo image.
The simplest is XY, which is a pair of cardioids set up with the capsules nearly touching each other, and an angle of 90deg between them. You then aim the pair into the center of the group you are recording, with the left mic aimed 45deg to the left of center, and the right mic aimed 45deg to the right center. This is intensity stereo- there are no phase differences to "enhance" the imaging. And because the capsules are coincident, you don't have any comb-filtering effects- so you get excellent mono compatibility. This has the least pronounced stereo imaging, and offers the least amount of room sound. Working live for sound reinforcement, I'll actually often use hypercardioids in XY to get the maximum gain before feedback. In any case, XY seems to work best in "challenging" rooms.
Next simplest is ORTF, named after the French radio network that developed it. It's similar to XY, done with a pair of cardioids, but with one big difference- the mics are splayed 110deg, and spaced 7" apart. This is semi-coincident micing, so its mono compatibility is reduced due to the phase differences caused by the spacing (you do get some comb filtering, but only up in the very high frequencies where few will notice it). However, that same phase difference gives you a much more pronounced stereo image. And because of that, you get more of the room in the resulting stereo tracks.
Blumlein is XY done with figure-8 mics instead of cardioids. In a really good room, it can produce wonderful results. In a bad room, it will be downright unlistenable. This technique allows the greatest amount of room sound into your tracks, so the room had better be up to the task! Once again, it's intensity stereo- coincident capsules, no comb filtering, excellent mono compatibility.
The last one is a little more complex, and requires either some additional hardware, or some polarity inversion magic in your preamps or board. MS stands for "mid-side", and is the only one that is done with an unmatched pair of mics- they are completely different, in fact. The mid mic is usually a cardioid aimed right at the center of the group (although some folks use an omni here as well), and the side mic is a figure-8 that is aimed *perpendicular* to the group (the center of the group is looking right into the null between the lobes- into the "dead spot"). To produce stereo output, you do what is called "matrixing": the left channel is derived from "mid+side", and the right channel is "mid-side".
The reason this works is that the two lobes of a figure-8 are 180deg out of phase with each other: a handclap on one face of the mic will produce a positive voltage, for example, whereas the same handclap on the other side of the mic would produce a negative voltage. So if you add the side signal to the mid, you get one channel- and if you subtract the side signal from the mid, you get the other one. You can vary the width of the stereo image by playing with the relative gains of the mid and side channels. Magic!
There are preamps that will do this matrixing for you, or you can take the output of the side mic preamp, invert its polarity, and sum the straight and inverted versions back to your mid mic's signal to get left and right in your mixer. It is a lot of work, but you get an enormous room sound. And with a very good cardioid for the mid mic, you can get downright astonishing results. Lastly, since it is a coincident technique, you get no comb filtering and excellent mono compatibility. The range of tonal possibilities is endless with your choice of mics, as well...
These techniques all sound different, even with the same artist in the same room, and they are all worth experimenting with. MS will always be my favorite to try first for recording small, tight harmony vocal groups, though- especially once I get a better side mic.
There are other techniques that can work well also- baffled omnis, the Jecklin disc... the list goes on seemingly forever. But I still go back to "less is more" almost every time. Hope that helps!
Anyway, all of those are stereo micing techniques, either coincident or near-coincident. They are different ways of setting up two mics to capture a stereo image.
The simplest is XY, which is a pair of cardioids set up with the capsules nearly touching each other, and an angle of 90deg between them. You then aim the pair into the center of the group you are recording, with the left mic aimed 45deg to the left of center, and the right mic aimed 45deg to the right center. This is intensity stereo- there are no phase differences to "enhance" the imaging. And because the capsules are coincident, you don't have any comb-filtering effects- so you get excellent mono compatibility. This has the least pronounced stereo imaging, and offers the least amount of room sound. Working live for sound reinforcement, I'll actually often use hypercardioids in XY to get the maximum gain before feedback. In any case, XY seems to work best in "challenging" rooms.
Next simplest is ORTF, named after the French radio network that developed it. It's similar to XY, done with a pair of cardioids, but with one big difference- the mics are splayed 110deg, and spaced 7" apart. This is semi-coincident micing, so its mono compatibility is reduced due to the phase differences caused by the spacing (you do get some comb filtering, but only up in the very high frequencies where few will notice it). However, that same phase difference gives you a much more pronounced stereo image. And because of that, you get more of the room in the resulting stereo tracks.
Blumlein is XY done with figure-8 mics instead of cardioids. In a really good room, it can produce wonderful results. In a bad room, it will be downright unlistenable. This technique allows the greatest amount of room sound into your tracks, so the room had better be up to the task! Once again, it's intensity stereo- coincident capsules, no comb filtering, excellent mono compatibility.
The last one is a little more complex, and requires either some additional hardware, or some polarity inversion magic in your preamps or board. MS stands for "mid-side", and is the only one that is done with an unmatched pair of mics- they are completely different, in fact. The mid mic is usually a cardioid aimed right at the center of the group (although some folks use an omni here as well), and the side mic is a figure-8 that is aimed *perpendicular* to the group (the center of the group is looking right into the null between the lobes- into the "dead spot"). To produce stereo output, you do what is called "matrixing": the left channel is derived from "mid+side", and the right channel is "mid-side".
The reason this works is that the two lobes of a figure-8 are 180deg out of phase with each other: a handclap on one face of the mic will produce a positive voltage, for example, whereas the same handclap on the other side of the mic would produce a negative voltage. So if you add the side signal to the mid, you get one channel- and if you subtract the side signal from the mid, you get the other one. You can vary the width of the stereo image by playing with the relative gains of the mid and side channels. Magic!
There are preamps that will do this matrixing for you, or you can take the output of the side mic preamp, invert its polarity, and sum the straight and inverted versions back to your mid mic's signal to get left and right in your mixer. It is a lot of work, but you get an enormous room sound. And with a very good cardioid for the mid mic, you can get downright astonishing results. Lastly, since it is a coincident technique, you get no comb filtering and excellent mono compatibility. The range of tonal possibilities is endless with your choice of mics, as well...
These techniques all sound different, even with the same artist in the same room, and they are all worth experimenting with. MS will always be my favorite to try first for recording small, tight harmony vocal groups, though- especially once I get a better side mic.
There are other techniques that can work well also- baffled omnis, the Jecklin disc... the list goes on seemingly forever. But I still go back to "less is more" almost every time. Hope that helps!