How does diaphragm size/polar pattern relate to mic applications?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Chris F
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The 3:1 rule is really for when you're recording mono instruments, although it has some bearing in stereo (like drum overheads).

XY places the mic capsules so close together, that they essentially pick up exactly the same signal from an instrument directly in front of them, without phase problems. As the instruments spread out from the center, they are picked up by one mic more than the other. Because they are so close together, the phase problems are minimized.

You can also use two mics, if they are exactly equal distance from the source, with out phase problems. That's the basis behind ORTF, NOS, and several "near coincidence" stereo miking techniques.
 
Harvey and others,
I just wanted to say thanks for the tip on Behringer ECM8000's. I couldn't get them in Sweden for some reason, so I had to order them from Germany. They cost about the same as you pay in the US.

And boy, was it worth the effort! As of yet I have only tried recording drums with them. I placed the mics in front of the kit instead of hanging above it. That way, they picked up more of the resonant heads of the drums, and generally gave a more true image of the drums, which I liked a lot. First I placed them about two feet above the floor. Lots of resonant heads, but the drummer preferred the s ound we got at cymbal height, so I folded.

You can hear the results at http://polyester.just.nu , the song called Medicine.

Only backside to it, it became clear to me how bad my recording room sounds...one of these days I'm gonna do it properly from the ground up.

Thanks again for this well of wisdom!

/Henrik
 
PS I just listened to that mix in some real monitors (the Mackies at my school). Holy mother of Christ, that kick is boomy. Gotta do something about that.
 
So - why does XY miking sound better than just using 1 mic?

If they are basically pikcing up the same source....just so you can easily pan? is the only goal with that? makes sense i guess....

As far as 3:1 - "mono instruments"? Obviously that doesn't mean an instrument you are recording with just 1 mic....becuase then 3:1 wouldn't come into play, so..I am not sure what a "mono instrument" is.

In terms of equidistant from the source....is that like you said always have your overheads the exact same distant from the snare? On a drumset...

I havn't tried it yet..but it seems like that would really hurt the stereo image. You just need to bring one mic in closer than the other?
 
OK, I can see where my response might have been confusing so let's see if I can clear things up a bit.
wes480 said:
So - why does XY miking sound better than just using 1 mic?

X/Y is a recording technique for getting a good stereo image of a wide sound source, using just two microphones.

If they are basically picking up the same source....just so you can easily pan? is the only goal with that? makes sense i guess....

Using multiple mics at different distances from a mono source is a technique for getting different tonal colors and interesting time delays that can add a distictive character to the sound that isn't possible with just one mic.

As far as 3:1 - "mono instruments"? Obviously that doesn't mean an instrument you are recording with just 1 mic....becuase then 3:1 wouldn't come into play, so..I am not sure what a "mono instrument" is.

An electric guitar where the sound comes out of one speaker would be a good example of a "mono source". Any instrument that isn't going to have a stereo image in the final mix would be a mono source, even if you use several mics on the instrument. When you do use several mics on one instrument that will be blended together into one sound, you have to watch for phasing problems and that's where the 3:1 rule comes into play.

In terms of equidistant from the source....is that like you said always have your overheads the exact same distant from the snare? On a drumset...

It's a good practice to follow, but sometimes you ignore the snare if you're trying to get more cymbal sounds and you use the overhead mics spread very wide. You have to listen for possible phasing problems, but if you mic the cymbals pretty close, it's not a big problem.

I havn't tried it yet..but it seems like that would really hurt the stereo image. You just need to bring one mic in closer than the other?

Since the snare is probably the main focus in a drum set, you always make sure that your multiple mic setup on drums isn't causing problems with the basic tone of the snare from mic phasing problems due to poor mic placement.

X/Y, ORTF, NOS, "near coincendence" miking are just techniques for getting a good stereo image of a wide source, using just two mics.

Whenever you go to more than just those two microphones (e.g., close miking a set of drums with 3 or more mics), you can create phasing problems caused by multiple mics picking up the same source from small differences in distance, which creates phasing problems.

Does all of this make a little more sense to you now?
 
Yes it is definately starting to make more sense. thanks a lot harvey.

So, in terms of acoustic instruments...the 3:1 rule isn't a big deal.

And, if you are recording an acoustic instrument with only 2 mics....then you really don't have to worry about phasing issues most of the time?

And XY miking is essentially just like using an AT "stereo mic" or something?

think i am getting it ;)

-Wes
 
wes480 said:
Yes it is definately starting to make more sense. thanks a lot harvey.

So, in terms of acoustic instruments...the 3:1 rule isn't a big deal.

Yeah, it is a big deal if the mics aren't the same distance from the instrument; then the 3:1 rule comes into play.

And, if you are recording an acoustic instrument with only 2 mics....then you really don't have to worry about phasing issues most of the time?

If the mics are in X/Y (or one of the standard stereo miking configurations), no, you don't hafta worry about phasing. If the mics are at different distances from the acoustic instrument, yes, you hafta worry about phasing.

And XY miking is essentially just like using an AT "stereo mic" or something?

Yeah, kinda like that.

think i am getting it ;)

Good. Sorry if my explanations aren't very clear.

-Wes
 
"Yeah, it is a big deal if the mics aren't the same distance from the instrument; then the 3:1 rule comes into play."

ah...so, for stereo miking like that, you either do 1:1 or 3:1...and you are set.
 
Time to push this back to the surface before it drowns. Wonder if we can get a bouyancy vest to fit this thread...........just keep it floating at the top forever.

:cool:
 
h kuhn said:
this llink might be interesting, complementing some of the information given by Harvey (especially the drawings are nice):
http://members.aol.com/mihartkopf/lexicon.htm

Well, Shiver Me Timbers! All very nice, but the English (if it is indeed English) is reminiscent of the instructions from Roland, and I think the MS diagram is wrong... (but it's good to keep this one afloat... )

Ahoy Mateys!

- Wil
 
Wil Davis said:


All very nice, but the English (if it is indeed English) is reminiscent of the instructions from Roland

Well, I guess it's still better than your german, isn't it?
 
h kuhn said:


Well, I guess it's still better than your german, isn't it?

I wouldn't say "better" - "more entertaining" perhaps...

- Wil
 
Clearing up some misconceptions about tube mics and preamps.

OK, here we go about tubes. As far as most tube circuits in mics and preamps are concerned, they're usually a single tube operating as a "Class A" device. Here's a picture of how a Class A circuit works:

class_a.gif


See the signal coming in, at the bottom of the drawing? It goes into the tube (which is represented by that "S" shaped curve), hits the transfer function and can come out amplified (as in the right side of the drawing), or simply come out equally, depending on the circuit designer's intent.

It's important to realize that the output of a condenser capsule is very low, while the capsule's impedance is VERY, VERY high. Very high impedance sources don't travel well over long distances, so it's important to convert that high impedance to a lower impedance as soon as possible.

You have two choices: a Field Effect Transistor (commonly called an FET), or a tube (some tubes love seeing very high impedance sources). If you use an FET, it won't do much in the way of giving you any more signal, so you'll need to add some more transistors to boost the signal a little bit. And most transistor circuits tend to distort very easily (and in a nasty way) if pushed too hard.

Tubes, on the other hand, tend to simply round off the signal if they approach the top and bottom of the "S" shaped "Transfer Curve", resulting in more musical distortion components, i.e., more 2nd and 4th harmonic overtones, which are musically correct, creating a "warmer, fatter tone. That's what makes tube distortion so desirable in guitar amplifiers.

Some tube preamp designs add more distortion by using a very small plate voltage to effectively shrink the length of that straight line part of the "Transfer Function" so that the tube saturates quicker and distorts faster. To me, it sounds a little fake and un-natural, but a lot of people seem to like it.

So the main advantages to using tubes in mics are: natural impedance convertor, which also works as a gain stage, limiter, and as an even order distortion generator, when pushed hard. One lessor known aspect of using a tube inside the body of a micrphone is that the heat from the tube helps drive out any moisture in the capsule when used in humid environments.

Since the tube must have heater and plate voltages supplied from an outboard power supply, it also makes sense to generate the 48 volt phantom power voltage from the power supply as well. This brings up another possibility when using dual membrame capsules for multiple polar patterns: continuously variable remote polar pattern selection from the power supply.

Remember earlier in this thread, we discussed how the different pressure gradient polar patterns are created by mixing the sound from two polar patterns; omni and figure 8? We can take that one step further since a dual membrane condenser mic is made into an omni by having both sapsules charged. Flip the polarity of the back capsule's signal and you have a figure 8.

As you continuously adjust the level and polarity of the back capsule, the mic will slowly change the polar patterns starting with omni, passing thru wide cardioid, sub cardioid, hyper-cardioid, and super-cardioid on it's way to figure 8.

If you are using one of these continuously variable polar pattern mics, it can be used to remotely change the tone and the amount of proximity effect of the mic as well. As you move from omni to figure 8, the proximity effect goes from almost none to maximum.

Many engineers will use the pattern selector switch as a tone control and ignore the different polar pattern choices for a particular singer, since the mic is used in a pretty absorbent situation; an iso booth, or a very dead room. for example.

Often, the decision to use a tube mic is mistakenly made to increase distortion, resulting in what some people describe as "tube warmth". In most modern mic designs, tubes are used for the performance reasons (listed above), not to add distortion, but to eliminate the often unpleasant distortions caused by poorly designed transistor mic circuits, which can often be described as harsh, edgy, brittle, etc.

One last point about LD mic design: a 1" wavelength corresponds to a frequency around 5 to 7 kHz. Ever wonder why all 1" capsules have a peak right around that frequency range? Now you know. Explaining what to do about it is a whole 'nother subject, which we'll get into at another time.

I hope some of this has proved helpful to at least somebody out there.
 
Re: Clearing up some misconceptions about tube mics and preamps.

Harvey Gerst said:
OK, here we go about tubes. As far as most tube circuits in mics and preamps are concerned, they're usually a single tube operating as a "Class A" device. Here's a picture of how a Class A circuit works:

class_a.gif


See the signal coming in, at the bottom of the drawing? It goes into the tube (which is represented by that "S" shaped curve), hits the transfer function and can come out amplified (as in the right side of the drawing), or simply come out equally, depending on the circuit designer's intent.


Harvey,
how would the drawing differ for a class A/B or class B circuit?
cheers
Harald
 
Re: Re: Clearing up some misconceptions about tube mics and preamps.

h kuhn said:


Harvey,
how would the drawing differ for a class A/B or class B circuit?
cheers
Harald

Well, I didn't expect The Spanish Inquisition

NOBODY expects The Spanish Inquisition...

...go to it Harvey - tell it like it is! ;>

- Wil

(BTW - nice pic!)
 
Last edited:
Class AB and B divide the signal up into two section: the positive half, and the negative half. A seperate tube drives each half of the signal and they're recombined in the output stage. Unless the cirduit is designed very carefully, right where each side shuts off (as it hits the zero point) can create a slight lag, causing what's called "crossover" or "notch" distortion. It's a very ugly sound.

Class AB trys to prevent this by having each side operate as Class A at very low levels (i.e., both sides passing the whole signal), gradually switching to class B as the signal gets louder and louder.

Class A is usually used in low level signal amplification (preamps, mics, etc.), whereas speaker amplifiers generally use Class AB, or other classes of amplification.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top