Mics not getting along?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tc4b
  • Start date Start date
tc4b

tc4b

Yeah I been drinkin, SO!?
Being self-taught, I could easily be missing out on some really basic concepts, so I apologize if this is a dumb question:

I watched "Let it Be" the other day and noticed that Paul was sometimes recorded with two mics taped together. That gave me the idea to record vocals with two very different mics silmotaneously as the left and right channels of a stereo track. My thinking was, to get more of the flavor of one mic or the other, all I would have to do is pan, and find where they could complement eachother the best. Or, in the case of the two seperate tracks, I could seperately adjust pan and volume for each mic to color only one performance.

The problem is, the tack came out sounding like shit. There were no lows and few mids, so it ended up sounding like I was singing through a telephone or maybe the speaker at a drive-through window. Is there some mic principle I violate by recording one performance with two mics in close proximity to one another (no tape involved, but almost touching)?

In case it matters, one is a LDC (gt55) and one is a dynamic (sm57). I had phantom power on the gt55 preamp and not on the 57. The preamp on the 57 is extremely shitty. Both mics went through a RNC on their way to the Digi001.
 
What you experienced were most probably phase issues. Due to the fact that the mics were not in identical positions, the sound hitting them was slightly different and hit them at different times. If you're working in a DAW, you can try to slide one of the tracks so that they match up on a sample level, this should take care of the worst of it.
 
how did you hold the mics together? To avoid phase (I am pretty sure) you want the capsules to be the same physical distance from the source.
Throetically with a LDC and a 57 the tip of the 57 is effectively the capsule, and on the LDC, it may be half and inch to an inch behind the grill.

Two-mic techniques generally are done as an XY configuration (capsules of identical mics at a 90-110 degree angle stacked essentially on top of each other, to be as close as possible distance-from-source (that is, if you take the two mics and set them flat on a table at that angle, it would not be as good as having them stacked vertically, but at the same angle).

When you see two mics taped together, they are usually on top of each other so the capsules are right together on that vertical plane, same idea. when working with an LDC and a 57, you have the potential problem that the LDC is actually processing the signal about 3/4 of inch behind the 57 if they are measure as close to the same distance from the source. You can experiment with shifting their orientation to fix the phasing, or considering an LDC is going to pick up most of the room anyway, enlist the rule of three (phase is less of an issue if the distance to source from one mic to another is in a ratio of 1:3 (e.g. 57 is 6 inches away, the LDC is 18 inches I guess- folks with more skills than i can comment if that is accurate).

Daav.
 
tc4b said:
Being self-taught, I could easily be missing out on some really basic concepts, so I apologize if this is a dumb question:

I watched "Let it Be" the other day and noticed that Paul was sometimes recorded with two mics taped together.
Click to expand...
That's usually done when you want two different feeds from the same source, like one mic going to a recording channel, and a second mic going to a movie camera. The recording crew brings their own mics and setup; the camera crew brings separate mics for their use.
 
also, you might have lost any proximity effect, since you can't effectively sing directly into 2 mics...unless you can line the diaphrams up...make sure both tracks are phase aligned
 
I think Harvey Gerst hit on the likely reason for what you saw in "Let It Be." Kind of like those old-time news conferences, where you'd see a politician speaking into 30 mics (I guess the news channels have figured out how to get along to the extent necessary to share a mic feed nowadays).

While it may be a purely academic point, it's hard for me to see how phase problems arising from positioning could result in "no lows." If you figure 200 Hz as about where the lows are, you're looking at a half-wavelength that's nearly three feet long.
 
Thanks for the help. I'll try lining them up and see how it goes. I'll also try it with the LDC far away and the dynamic close up. DOes anyone actually do this; two mics on one vocal for the reasons I stated? Or do most people just have such an awesome vox mic that it's not neccessary?

Thanks again for the help.
 
Harvey Gerst said:
That's usually done when you want two different feeds from the same source, like one mic going to a recording channel, and a second mic going to a movie camera. The recording crew brings their own mics and setup; the camera crew brings separate mics for their use.
Click to expand...

So, I might not have this problem if the mics were going to different sources? could send one to my laptop and one to the desktop, then unite them using a flash drive.

BTW, as good as the music in the movie is, the sound blows. Maybe I shouldn't be trying to emulate their techniques!
 
Grab a set of headphones and hook em both up and just listen to the room sounds as you move them around campared to each other. You most definately had phase issues.

I have and continue to, on some sources, use multiple mics, but placememnt is key. My mixer doesn't have a phase reverse button, but my software does, plus I have a cable that is wired reverse that comes in handy.

Pete
 
tc4b said:
So, I might not have this problem if the mics were going to different sources? could send one to my laptop and one to the desktop, then unite them using a flash drive.
Click to expand...

No. The two aren't meant to be combined in this technique. One mic is strictly for the movie soundtrack.
 
tc4b said:
Is there some mic principle I violate by recording one performance with two mics in close proximity to one another (no tape involved, but almost touching)?
Click to expand...
The short answer, at least within my limited knowledge, is no, provided that the diaphrams of the two mics were in alignment with each other and facing toward you. I just don't quite grasp the fact that you experienced a phase problem, unless one of the tracks you were recording to on the Digi001 was phase reversed itself.

IMO, the "telephone" sound could possibly be the result of having used the SM57 to record your vocal.

It might be best to re-record the vocal using the LDC alone and then copy the track and give whatever post treatment you deem neccessary to make it fuller sounding.

I'm just saying...... :)
 
sjjohnston said:
..While it may be a purely academic point, it's hard for me to see how phase problems arising from positioning could result in "no lows." If you figure 200 Hz as about where the lows are, you're looking at a half-wavelength that's nearly three feet long.
Click to expand...
This seems likely to me too. 1" should be messing with the highs.
Try flipping polarity on one of them.
 
tc4b said:
So, I might not have this problem if the mics were going to different sources? could send one to my laptop and one to the desktop, then unite them using a flash drive.
Click to expand...
Hold up there a minute!

Your first post indicated that you were recording both tracks to the the Digi001 and experienced a problem.

And now you want to complicate matters further by recording to two seperate destinations?

Sorry. :confused: I don't understand your thinking here, but maybe I'm missing the obvious solution. :confused:
 
In all seriousness, learn to get a good vocal sound with one mic. That's how 99.9% of the recordings you have heard throughout history have been done. Harvey explained why there were two mics - the recording was only using one of the two.

Now, if you want to get creative and experiment with off-beat recording techniques go right ahead - maybe you'll discover something we'll all be imitating someday. But if you think that the way the Beatles got their recorded sound was by taping two mics together, that's just wrong.

So, I repeat: learn to get a good sound with one mic. Having accomplished that, if you want to put an omnidirectional mic inside of a peanut butter sandwich and shove it up the singer's butt, I'd certainly be willing to hear the results. (Suggestion: use a singer who is much smaller and weaker than you.)
 
littledog said:
So, I repeat: learn to get a good sound with one mic. Having accomplished that, if you want to put an omnidirectional mic inside of a peanut butter sandwich and shove it up the singer's butt, I'd certainly be willing to hear the results. (Suggestion: use a singer who is much smaller and weaker than you.)
Click to expand...
What a waste of a perfectly good peanut butter sandwich
 
littledog said:
Harvey explained why there were two mics - the recording was only using one of the two.
Click to expand...
That's not entirely true.

Harvey acknowledged the possible reason why two mics were used when "Let It Be" was recorded, but the original post by tc4b simple stated that he tied two mics together in near proximity to each other and recorded them to two seperate tracks to the Digi001 and ended up with shitty results.

Harvey brought up the "two destination" track thingy and tc4b went off on a tangent thingy about recording to his laptop and desktop.

Am I the only here that can read? :rolleyes:

I have the utmost of respect for Harvey, but damn!, the original post concerned recording to a single destination...........not two destinations.
 
60's guy said:
That's not entirely true.

Harvey acknowledged the possible reason why two mics were used when "Let It Be" was recorded, but the original post by tc4b simple stated that he tied two mics together in near proximity to each other and recorded them to two seperate tracks to the Digi001 and ended up with shitty results.

Harvey brought up the "two destination" track thingy and tc4b went off on a tangent thingy about recording to his laptop and desktop.

Am I the only here that can read? :rolleyes:

I have the utmost of respect for Harvey, but damn!, the original post concerned recording to a single destination...........not two destinations.
Click to expand...
Actually, the original post was that tc4b was inspired to record 2 signals to one destination by seeing the 2 mics taped together. He assumed that both signals were going to one destination and Harvey suggested the possibility that they weren't. So, I don't think you CAN read to be honest
 
Daniel Reichman said:
Actually, the original post was that tc4b was inspired to record 2 signals to one destination by seeing the 2 mics taped together. He assumed that both signals were going to one destination and Harvey suggested the possibility that they weren't. So, I don't think you CAN read to be honest
Click to expand...

Couldn't have said it better! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top