Stereo mic

  • Thread starter Thread starter Stefan A
  • Start date Start date
Haha - look what I have started :). Although much of the info at the end here is way over my head, I am capable of filtering out the info that won't help me. Anyway, I have gotten a lot of good advice from this thread. I am very much into the KISS philosophy for now. If there is one thing I have learned here, it's that my current mic is just not the right tool for the job. At this point I am more into mic research/interface research mode.

Stefan
 
John Willett said:
3-pin XLRs are about 50/50 single-channel audio (but could be mic. or line level) and 2-channel AES-3 - but could also be AES42.
Click to expand...

In my world (small stage and studio) it's about 10,000:1 3 pin and about 10,000:1 analog. I have an 822, have run into others with the 822 but have yet to see an 825 (with the 5 pin) outside of a store or catalog. An Altec with multiple impedance output is the only 7 pin I've seen in 20 years. I deal with a few pieces that have AES3 (from old DAT machines to a recent Apogee converter) but it doesn't get used because in our applications it isn't needed. Your info, true or not in the wider world of sound, is a distraction for people like the OP.
 
Actually, I have an 825 here at school. I am a middle school band teacher and record my band concerts onto video using the 825 for audio. I bought it because I knew I would require at least 100 ft of cabling to get from the mic to where I have to tape. I was under the impression that this particular mic would be good to avoid interference with such a long run.

The mics that I have read people use for tuba are kick drum mics such at akgd112, and the Shure beta 52. I have also heard about the shure sm57. On the tuba forum, it seems people don't like the kick drum mics because it cuts out higher overtones. But on the recording forums people seem focused on the fact that tuba is so low in frequency. So, I really don't know what to think.

Stefan
 
That is a very big misconception regarding the tuba - for there are tons of high frequencies emanating from that instrument.

The Sennheiser 825 is a good dynamic microphone and should do you well.

You may want to consider a Large diaphragm condenser microphone for the fact that it has a faster transit. Truly up to you though.
If you like what your hearing on how the 825 is capturing your instrument - no need to go further than that.
 
The AT825 is a good choice when you have a long cable run.

It's a common misconception that low range instruments lack high frequencies. You may not need a mic that's flat to 20kHz but you definitely need to capture the overtones. A kick drum might work well but a standard instrument mic could also do the job. A couple of posts back I almost said to just stick a 57 on it and go. It would probably work well enough and you can use it for just about anything.
 
Yup - lots of overtones. Of course, tuba players get this. Between the 825 and the 57, I am leaning toward the 57 just because the specs say down to 40hz as opposed to 80hz. I regularly play in the 40 range - even a bit lower. The top end for both say 15000hz. The aka d112 says up to 17000hz. So am I getting more overtones with the d112? I imagine there are other characteristics beyond frequency range, but I don't know them.

I know this is probably stuff that should be in the microphone forum, but I already started here so I hope thats OK.

Stefan
 
Stefan,
Do investigate the Prodipe RSL stereo ribbon. It gets a very good rep' in SoS April 13 and is good value at £349.

Re XLRs et al. I tend to agree we should K.I.S.S*. here! Many years ago big PA and sstate bass amps used XLR 3s as speaker outs. ELECTRICALLY the choice cannot be criticized but I wonder how many SM58s got smoked?

Again, long ago, in the absence of any other suitably robust connector I used XLR 4 to carry 100V line speaker power. Low Z speaker was left to 1/4inch jack.

At work XLR4 is used for DC power to various switching, A/B boxes and other devices and (and I shall think about this!) XLR3 for foot switch boxes. Now the stuff should never leave the premises but maybe a rethink on that latter?

Re "stereo" noobs. Means "solid" not multichannel. A gaggle of mono sources panned across the sound stage is not, some say, "true" stereo which can only come from a proper XY, M-S, spaced, ORTF, take your pick, setup!

And how many noobs THINK they have stereo but have not panned the channels hard left and right!

Dave.... *and make up!
 
Read Massive Masters reply

Massive Master said:
XLR inputs are always mono. That mic should have a special (5-pin DMX/CC type, if I recall) that goes to a splitter that has 2 XLR tails (1 white L, 1 red R). You'd need two inputs (1 and 2, which could eventually be left and right, or set up as a "stereo" input).

Whether it's good for tuba or not is another story all together... If you're trying to capture a stereo room-ish recording of a tuba, probably so. If you're trying to get a solid recording of the instrument itself, possibly no. But you'd obviously be able to use either one of the two elements also.

(EDIT)

Sorry wrong mic. That's some goofy hi-z split thing for field recording. Meh... Probably not what you're going to want.
Click to expand...

Second that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top