halfred
New member
Any opinion on these two for recording classical piano solos on Steinway B in living room space 13 W x 20 L x 8.5 H.
PhilGood
Juice box hero
Personally I would go with the modded 603. I can't recommend Peluso based on some of my own personal observations. You could also have the 603 capsule re-machined by Marik. He does excellent work! Just got a toroid mic transformer from him I'm eager to get installed and listen to.
B
Big Kenny
New member
Have used the Oktava (Russians ) on a baby grand with nice results. placement is tough due to pianos make a lot of noise (damper pedals, striking notes, etc)
halfred
New member
Yeah I know it's tough. Can't get as close as I would like due to the damper noise. Will talk to my Steinway tech guy to see how much noise can be reduced. Otherwise have to just find the best sound from 5-7 feet away. Do omnis tend to make more self-noise the further you pull them form the sound source?
B
Big Kenny
New member
not self noise but if its a good room they work better, if its not treated it can be very hard to get a strong sigmal without picking up unwanted sounds as well as reflections
halfred
New member
Well the room is furnished. The piano is on wall to wall carpet and past the piano, the kitchen--(living room /kitchen combo) the floors are wood. I don't feel there is a lot of wall reflection, however I'm no expert. I do feel that a lot of the sound is absorbed--is that a good thing? I e-mailed Mike Jolly, and he said that if I don't close mic with the omnis, the recording would sound "roomish." What does this mean--"roomish"? Most classical pianists seem to recomend omnis. Then again people seem to say that if you don't have a space such as a concert hall, or music studio, don't use the omnis.
B
Big Kenny
New member
It will sound like the room, Big and airy if the room is lofted, not so much if 7' ceilings
halfred
New member
That's not too bad---I'll try it.
MichaelJoly
Banned
Just for the record, detail and posterity, its "roomy" and Joly. My earlier email response is below. But now that you given the size of your room I would say you'll have to stick those omnis right near the piano or use cardioids. A room that size is going to put a small box sound around your piano if the early reflections are not attenuated.
...Ah, a great piano in a not-so-great room. Living rooms can sound fine - but small. Rather than try to use omni mics in your living room - which will only reveal its small size relative to a concert stage and hall, I would suggest you get the best focused recording you can make - either using cardioid mics or more closely placed omni mics. Then, during mastering have the engineer add some high quality reverberation to your dry tracks.
I know this is not as ideal as recording at Symphony Hall in Boston, but in my opinion you should minimize the room effect and "size" of your living room and introduce stage reflections and hall ambience electronically. Reflection and reverberation software and hardware is quite good sounding these days. I would base my choice of mastering engineer partly on the quality of his / her reverb offerings.
You'll note above that I'm not dissuading you from using omni mics - because these mic will give a more natural off axis recording of the reflections that do reach them. But with omni mics you'll have to work them quite close. Of course, upon playback you may be thrown off by the sound of your playing and piano captured as such close proximity which is not usually how classical piano is recorded.
Hmm...omnis 3-6 feet out are going to be pretty "roomy" sounding. I'd think you'd be better off with cardioids and judicious aiming of them to minimize damper noise. For a totally different approach, ready about how my buddy Bill Pearson recorded a solo New Age piano album last year using ribbon mics in an unusual configuration. Later, M
...Ah, a great piano in a not-so-great room. Living rooms can sound fine - but small. Rather than try to use omni mics in your living room - which will only reveal its small size relative to a concert stage and hall, I would suggest you get the best focused recording you can make - either using cardioid mics or more closely placed omni mics. Then, during mastering have the engineer add some high quality reverberation to your dry tracks.
I know this is not as ideal as recording at Symphony Hall in Boston, but in my opinion you should minimize the room effect and "size" of your living room and introduce stage reflections and hall ambience electronically. Reflection and reverberation software and hardware is quite good sounding these days. I would base my choice of mastering engineer partly on the quality of his / her reverb offerings.
You'll note above that I'm not dissuading you from using omni mics - because these mic will give a more natural off axis recording of the reflections that do reach them. But with omni mics you'll have to work them quite close. Of course, upon playback you may be thrown off by the sound of your playing and piano captured as such close proximity which is not usually how classical piano is recorded.
Hmm...omnis 3-6 feet out are going to be pretty "roomy" sounding. I'd think you'd be better off with cardioids and judicious aiming of them to minimize damper noise. For a totally different approach, ready about how my buddy Bill Pearson recorded a solo New Age piano album last year using ribbon mics in an unusual configuration. Later, M
halfred
New member
Hello there---Sorry for the misquote. I wanted to e-mail you back to clarify what you meant by "roomy" but felt sort funny about taking up more of your time. What does it mean it, practically, that "the room will put a small box sound around my piano if the early reflections are not attenuated." How would that sound to the average ear? If I owned a pair of omnis I'd try it myself. Also do you have any opinion on small diaphram vs. medium daiphram given my recording circumstances. I was looking through your shop the other day and noticed the Oktava mk103-----
MichaelJoly
Banned
No problem! Answering email gives me an enjoyable break from the bench work.
re: "roomy" or "small box around the piano" - the classical piano recordings most of us have ever heard were recorded in pretty good sized spaces, be it a combination of concert stage & concert hall or perhaps a smaller recital stage & chamber hall or maybe even a large room recording studio like the Columbia's old 30th street facility in NYC.
My point - what we think of being a "good" solo classical piano recording includes not just the direct sound of the piano, but a relatively high percentage of reflected room sound, both moderately close (from the walls of the concert stage) and distant (from the walls and ceiling of the concert hall).
So if you record classical piano music in a living room-sized space, and capture a fair amount of reflected sound, the psychoacoustic cues contained in the reflected sound will be interpreted by our brains as being "living room size" and not "concert hall size".
It was for this reason I suggested that you try to minimize the amount of small room sound and add high quality, concert stage and hall reverberation the mixing or mastering stage.
re: MK-103 - rather than "sitting in the middle", this mic uses a diaphragm closer in size to the MK-012 than the MK-219/319 LDC mics. The MK-103 has a very flat frequency response, a very wide cardioid pattern, smooth off-axis response and a transient response similar to the MK-012. Because of the popularity of the MK-012 and MK-219/319 mics the MK-103 is not very well known, but it is an excellent mic were a flat response, wide cardioid mic with fast transient response is called for.
re: "roomy" or "small box around the piano" - the classical piano recordings most of us have ever heard were recorded in pretty good sized spaces, be it a combination of concert stage & concert hall or perhaps a smaller recital stage & chamber hall or maybe even a large room recording studio like the Columbia's old 30th street facility in NYC.
My point - what we think of being a "good" solo classical piano recording includes not just the direct sound of the piano, but a relatively high percentage of reflected room sound, both moderately close (from the walls of the concert stage) and distant (from the walls and ceiling of the concert hall).
So if you record classical piano music in a living room-sized space, and capture a fair amount of reflected sound, the psychoacoustic cues contained in the reflected sound will be interpreted by our brains as being "living room size" and not "concert hall size".
It was for this reason I suggested that you try to minimize the amount of small room sound and add high quality, concert stage and hall reverberation the mixing or mastering stage.
re: MK-103 - rather than "sitting in the middle", this mic uses a diaphragm closer in size to the MK-012 than the MK-219/319 LDC mics. The MK-103 has a very flat frequency response, a very wide cardioid pattern, smooth off-axis response and a transient response similar to the MK-012. Because of the popularity of the MK-012 and MK-219/319 mics the MK-103 is not very well known, but it is an excellent mic were a flat response, wide cardioid mic with fast transient response is called for.
halfred
New member
Thanks for the great info! So in light of you saying I'd be better off having the reverb and hall reflections added later, which I am now taking your word on and will go with, do you think I'd be better off with the MK012, or 103? Your mics are still strong contenders for me due to rave reviews up and down the board and your obviously in depth knowledge. I've been experimeting with a pair of NT1A's that I got cheap, and the sound is a real fat, in your face sound, sort of beautiful and exciting, but maybe not enough detail. I can see that adding reverb later would push it over the edge. I also have a pair of 3/4 " diaphram Pulsars, which also have a rich sound, more detailed than the LDC's, but again, maybe not what I should use if the reverb and reflections are added later. What do you think (and I know your name is JOLY. JOLLY was a typo!)
Marik
Pro Microphone Design
Hello Halfred,
The classical piano recording demands an interaction between piano itself and room sound, so the close miking is a "no no" not only because of damper, pedal, and other noises, but because of sound esthetics. So, the distant miking is a must and you need the mics at least 5-7 feet from the piano. It is also very important to find a right height and "tilt", i.e. balance between straight and reflected from the open lid sound.
Usually, the most succesfull piano recordings made in concert halls, because of their much more natural reverberation sound--something (if you are using close miking) you won't be able to simulare even with the most advanced reverberators.
The main problem in your setup would be not even the microphones themselves, but their positioning and most of all, the RIGHT CHOICE of recording technique.
If your room has furniture and acoustical treatment is not an option, it is a much better idea to accept the room limitations and work with them, rather than fight them.
Usually, in your situation I try the MS first, as usually this is the most forgiving technique as far as room imperfections concerned. This is due to two major MS advantages:1) Unlike any other technique the mic is directed straight to the source, so it picks much less room sound, and 2) You can change room sound (S-channel) in very wide range and manipulate the "width" to your liking.
It is very hard to give more specific info for mic choice without trying in your room "at least something" and knowind how it sounds, etc., but I would not use the Octava 012 as a "M" mic as its low freq. response can and will emphasise the boxiness of the instrument in that kind of room.
My first recomendation would be trying using what you have right now and then go from there. Here I would not be afraid to try both, omni and fig8 ribbons, as well.
As a "S" traditionally there is nothing better than a good fig8 ribbon.
Hopefully it helps. Let me know if you have any other questions.
Best, M
halfred
New member
Hello Marik,
Thanks SO MUCH for the info! it's been hard to get feedback and pin it down to my particular circumstances. So I guess I should look into a good but affordable ribbon figure 8 as the "S." And for the "M" I could try out the NT1A or the Pulsar that I have. However it seems like for the "M" I should really look into buying a multi pattern to experiment with cardioid, omni and figure 8 to hear all the options. This is pretty exciting. What size diaphram mics should I be using. I guess that doesn't aply to the ribbon figure 8, but for the "M" mic---?
MichaelJoly
Banned
Halfred, please listen to Marik. Or better yet call him and talk. He's a talented classical pianist, classical recordist and mic modifyer. I'm glad he's hear to answer your questions with more authoritiy than I can bring to the table. best, M
halfred
New member
Thanks, Michael, I will. And thanks for helping me along on my "mad" journey into the world of recording. You've been absolutely great!
Regards,
Hal F.
MichaelJoly
Banned
Thanks! I think you'll enjoy the handoff to Marik - especially where piano type, piano liturature and piano technique intersect with room acoustics, microphone type and microphone technique.
halfred
New member
exactlty. Many thanks, again!!
Marik
Pro Microphone Design
For classical piano I prefer whether ribbons or small diaphragm true omni mics mostly because of their natural sound qualities. But again, I'd try the NT1A and Pulsar just because... you have them both and it is fun. Who knows, you might find that in your situation a large diaphragm can work beautifully.
Also try to find or borrow a true omni SD mic. Remember that for the same pickup omnies should be .7 times closer to the source than cardioids, so since both M and S should be in very close proximity to each other the "S" will be also closer, so if you find that the S is way too "roomy" that might be one of the ways of reducing that effect.
On the other hand, the fig8 ribbons might be very nice in your room, esp. if the room is "ringing" and the top range is accentuated, and the piano sounds very shrill. Besides their obvious sonic advantages ribbons have one very important quality which in low ceiling enviroment can get you just the right solution, i.e. their pickup pattern is much more narrow in a vertical plane drastically reducing ceiling and floor reflections pickup. This can make an illusion that your room is much bigger than it is. If (and/or when) you happen to have a couple ribbons, along with MS I'd also try a Blumlein.
The beauty of the recording (esp. classical) is that there is no general rule. Sometimes the best solutions are against any rules of physics, so only lots of experiments can help you to gain that experience. Please let us know if you have any other questions.
Best, M
halfred
New member
Ok. I'll keep experimenting with the Pulsars and NT1A. I actually was excited when I played back the recording with NT1A's. It did reduce the shrillness of the upper registers a had a beautiful sound. Only thing is that from a distance, the bass didn't seem to have quite enough definition. Since I have to send my Microtrack to M-audio for repair, and I don't have my new recorder yet, experimenting is on hold. As far as MS goes, my understanding is that the "S" must be a fig 8. And your recommendation is a ribbon fig 8, Unless I buy one, I won't have any comparison. (nowhere to borrow or rent, really.) Can you recommend a not too expensive fig 8 ribbon?
Also I looked into a SP LSD2. I assume that the figure 8 on it isn't a ribbon, but looks like the set up would be perfect for me. The "M" could be switched to cardioid, omni, or fig 8, so it would give me a lot of options. But then again, it's not a SD omni. which you also recommended. BTW, what is a "true" omni? I know there are a lot a variables here and the bottom line is probably experimenting esp. with mic postion.