Mics not getting along?

[60's guy]

Both mics went through a RNC on their way to the Digi001.

So, I don't think you CAN read to be honest

My eyes are just fine, Danny Boy!

Pay attention.

Go back and read what I wrote.

I acknowledged that Harvey did raise a viable question, albeit far removed and not relevant to tcb4's original post.

How should I say this?

tcb4's post was about duct taping two mics together and recording a vocal to his Digi001 and posting about his less than aniticipated results.

Someone else steered tcb4's thread into a different direction and never addressed the problem.

Movies have nothing to do with tcb4's situation!

 

[Daniel Reichman]

Let's do this line by line shall we?

My eyes are just fine, Danny Boy!

The problem doesn't seem to be with your eye's, just as, in this case, the problem is not with the microphones.

Pay attention.

Go back and read what I wrote.

Done, it hasn't changed. You wrote, among other things, that any recording with a 57 is going to sound like a telephone (I didn't realise the 57 peaked at 3kHz and completely disappeared at 4kHz, like the phone system does). The 57 I use must be broken, cos it sounds fine.

I acknowledged that Harvey did raise a viable question, albeit far removed and not relevant to tcb4's original post.

No, it isn't 'far removed' or 'not relevant', as it suggests that what tcb4 was trying to do (balance the characteristics of the 2 mics) is not what is being done in the film, and that, rather than being recorded into one destination, it may be being recorded into 2. tcb4 went on the 'tangent' about recording to 2 destinations and recombining them.

How should I say this?

You shouldn't have.

tcb4's post was about duct taping two mics together and recording a vocal to his Digi001 and posting about his less than aniticipated results.

Well, at least you got this bit right.

Someone else steered tcb4's thread into a different direction and never addressed the problem.

Um, the 2 most likely reasons, phase cancellation and proximity effect were already raised, why bother repeating what someone else already said? Why not offer an alternative interpretation of what tcb4 was seeing, which might suggest to tcb4 that the sound he was hearing was not being created by what he was seeing.

Movies have nothing to do with tcb4's situation!

Maybe one day they'll make a movie about a struggling home recordist, desperately trying to record a single source with 2 mics onto a single destination...

 

[rossM]

A note on the history - In addition to providing a 2nd feed for camera etc -the 2 mics taped together was a standard technique to get a reverb or echo effect in the 60's and early 70's for live production when the mixing desks were rudimentary or non existant - usually one mic went to a tape based echo machine ( or spring reverb ) - because there usually was n't the aux channels on the mixers like today - it was a standard way to get echo and reverb .

 

[littledog]

Why is everyone getting their panties in a bunch?

The guy set up two microphones, inspired by a Beatles movie. It was explained that the Beatles were not really recording vocals with two microphones. We all agree - no problem.

But, as pointed out, there is nothing wrong with being inspired to experiment. Inspiration can come from many sources - you could see a flock of Canada Geese in formation and say: "Gee, what if I set up my drum mics in an inverted arrowhead formation?"

Now, one could argue that the flock of geese was not trying to record music, or even that geese wouldn't recognize music if they heard it. And one would be right. But that still leaves the issue of why setting up your microphones in the shape of a flock works or doesn't work.

So now we discussed that. Clearly, the obvious reason for comb-filtered band limited kind of sound is phase cancellation. And there is an easy test - simply record each mic to it's own track, and mute one of them. If the sound regains it's natural full-spectrum, then we have shown there is cancellation going on. After all, we also all agree that a working 57 and/or a Groove Tubes mic shouldn't sound like that normally.

If not, then we have to look and see if something is broken in the recording chain - a bad cable, blown out mic, overdriven preamp, miswired patchbay, etc. That's fairly easy to isolate - just start bypassing or swapping out each component.

There... wasn't that easy? And no one had to go home with a bloody lip.

 

[tc4b]

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. I don't understand your thinking here, but maybe I'm missing the obvious solution.

I'm afraid it's my ignorance that started the argument. He just mentioned that, in the movie, one mic went to tape and the other went to a movie camera, so I thought maybe...

I'm still experimenting, I'm determined now to make it work. I guess I should just save up for a u87 (or at least a 4050) but trying to find creative ways to make my meager gear sound better than it should is cheaper and, in some ways, more fun. If I find a useful way to marry a cheap ldc with a cheaper dynamic, I'll post it here.

 

[tc4b]

Maybe one day they'll make a movie about a struggling home recordist, desperately trying to record a single source with 2 mics onto a single destination...

It's a gripping saga, I'm perfectly willing to sell the rights. And the whole soundtrack could be recorded on my shitty rig for authenticity!