Chili
Site Moderator
Sorry about the poor week last week, but glad to hear you're having an internet-less vacation. I did that last summer when we went to Cancun. It's a wonderful thing to disconnect!! 
J
jarl
New member
citizen77
New member
OK, back now and burnt. I hate flying - I'm 2 meters tall (6'7"). I need a couple days for my ears to reset. If I don't my mixes are shrilly. Same thing happens when I have to drive to a location over a couple hours and mix onsite. Hopefully vids and wavs or FLACs by Wednesday.
citizen77
New member
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/t86wkzftq9i4n2v/-PricWiiQE
Here is the dropbox with wav and pictures of the room.
My experience with this "experiment" were interesting. I like practicing in this room, and I hear myself quite well. Mixing is also good. Recording in this room... not so good. It's not big enough for a classical guitar. It would probably be fine for an steel string acoustic, but lacks the total warmth of the classical in a larger space. Too bad.
A second little discloser (not to make excuses, but it's a little excuse): I rented out my recording studio to "friends" to live in who are going through some horrible financial difficulty. I wasn't too worried about loosing the space initially since most of my work is done on location and I had a second room for mixing which sounds nice. Well, I know understand why my friends have financial difficulty and home life for my family has been terrible these last 7 months. We just asked them too leave before September (when we have our second child). Point is, I wasn't able to record with them doing there noisy antics - even when I tell them to shut their cakeholes - they just don't get it. AND... they keep waking up the baby (which again prevents me from recording, sleeping, any work at all!).
I hope this helps. I haven't done any critical listening yet. I used some tube mics too (Advanced Audio CM12 and an ebay seller one called EM T5000 which I got so dirt cheap I bought another one). The "M" is Millennia, "H" is Hardy, and UFX is self-explainatory. The only ribbon is the MXL R144 which I swapped out the tranny with a Lundahl and redesigned the headbasket. I have another one without the headbasket mod, and it doesn't sound as good. Amazing how a little design flaw can change the sound so much. Everything else should be self-explanatory.
I recorded some snare hits, ride with sizzle and without, some intros of classical guitar pieces, and sweeps and noise (pink and brown, I think... maybe it was white and brown? I made them a long time ago, can't remember.)
Let me know what you think sounds the best.
Yes, I did make those skyline, quadratic diffusers and bass traps myself. I am now a complete believer that room treatment is more important than any mic, pre or converter you use. I modified a couple designs to fit the frequencies of the room to even things out.... Here are the web sites I used to give me a head start on the designs:
http://www.subwoofer-builder.com/qrd.htm
http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html
http://kotiweb.kotiportti.fi/audiovideo/akustiikka/QRD/QRD.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20070429235805/http://www.mhsoft.nl/DiffusorCalculator.html
http://mixmasteredacoustics.com/room-correction-tips/
http://www.bobgolds.com/Mode/RoomModes.htm
(i know there were a couple more, but i didn't save them under a bookmark... they mostly repeated the same info, but there was one that was important.... gotta find it.)
and here it is:
http://www.mh-audio.nl/diffusor2.asp#calcul
Here is the dropbox with wav and pictures of the room.
My experience with this "experiment" were interesting. I like practicing in this room, and I hear myself quite well. Mixing is also good. Recording in this room... not so good. It's not big enough for a classical guitar. It would probably be fine for an steel string acoustic, but lacks the total warmth of the classical in a larger space. Too bad.
A second little discloser (not to make excuses, but it's a little excuse): I rented out my recording studio to "friends" to live in who are going through some horrible financial difficulty. I wasn't too worried about loosing the space initially since most of my work is done on location and I had a second room for mixing which sounds nice. Well, I know understand why my friends have financial difficulty and home life for my family has been terrible these last 7 months. We just asked them too leave before September (when we have our second child). Point is, I wasn't able to record with them doing there noisy antics - even when I tell them to shut their cakeholes - they just don't get it. AND... they keep waking up the baby (which again prevents me from recording, sleeping, any work at all!).
I hope this helps. I haven't done any critical listening yet. I used some tube mics too (Advanced Audio CM12 and an ebay seller one called EM T5000 which I got so dirt cheap I bought another one). The "M" is Millennia, "H" is Hardy, and UFX is self-explainatory. The only ribbon is the MXL R144 which I swapped out the tranny with a Lundahl and redesigned the headbasket. I have another one without the headbasket mod, and it doesn't sound as good. Amazing how a little design flaw can change the sound so much. Everything else should be self-explanatory.
I recorded some snare hits, ride with sizzle and without, some intros of classical guitar pieces, and sweeps and noise (pink and brown, I think... maybe it was white and brown? I made them a long time ago, can't remember.)
Let me know what you think sounds the best.
Yes, I did make those skyline, quadratic diffusers and bass traps myself. I am now a complete believer that room treatment is more important than any mic, pre or converter you use. I modified a couple designs to fit the frequencies of the room to even things out.... Here are the web sites I used to give me a head start on the designs:
http://www.subwoofer-builder.com/qrd.htm
http://ethanwiner.com/acoustics.html
http://kotiweb.kotiportti.fi/audiovideo/akustiikka/QRD/QRD.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20070429235805/http://www.mhsoft.nl/DiffusorCalculator.html
http://mixmasteredacoustics.com/room-correction-tips/
http://www.bobgolds.com/Mode/RoomModes.htm
(i know there were a couple more, but i didn't save them under a bookmark... they mostly repeated the same info, but there was one that was important.... gotta find it.)
and here it is:
http://www.mh-audio.nl/diffusor2.asp#calcul
Last edited:
J
jarl
New member
Hi,
It's great, and I'm listening now, but I won't write any conclusions before I hear all of them a couple of times. Anyway, thanks for your fantastic work! It is very instructive for me (and hope for others too). I will be back shortly.
It's great, and I'm listening now, but I won't write any conclusions before I hear all of them a couple of times. Anyway, thanks for your fantastic work! It is very instructive for me (and hope for others too). I will be back shortly.
J
jarl
New member
So, after hearing all these tracks several times I am inclined to say that your test confirms some of my predictions, however, obviously my personal taste has to do with the choices I made.
Firstly I'd like to thank you again for your work which is really very valuable for me. As for a methodology I agree that 2496 is not the best format when converting to 1644 (88 would be better as it can be divided by half without much loss), but in this case I don't think anyone would hear the difference. Also I absolutely agree with you that your acoustics aren't ideal for classical guitar recording (BTW, very nice playing). In general your setup is quite similar to mine, except I have rather deflectors than real diffusers. Besides your room is very heavily acoustically treated (what can be seen on the pics), mine has some fiberglass absorbers, plywood deflectors and sculpted foam diffusers, but some natural acoustics are intentionally left over as I tend to record more of acoustic stuff. Blind test could be probably more objective, but with this amount of samples I would be able to choose the best takes only, and many subtle, but very valuable differences would be lost. So it was quite good to see what was what.
Anyway, back to my first impressions.
MICS - I'm sorry to say this, but AA and EM sound like cheapos to me. I have nothing against cheap gear providing it sounds OK. Oktava is a good example. It is a decent mic - real bargain for what you pay. A little bit bright here and there, but not bad at all. ST77 quite decent for CG, less suitable for vocals (sibilants too obvious), not so good for percussion, especially hi hat, crash or ride cymbals as it sounds quite stringent IMO. Very warm sounding Ribbon MXL R144 surprised me a little bit, being slightly uneven. Bass register in CG was too boomy (proximity effect?), but for drums it gives really nice and full texture. TLM103 pretty universal. Maybe least successful on CG (slightly dull). Finally, there is my Schoeps. MK2+UFX without pre sounds very similar to what I can get with my stuff. It's OK, but it sounds clinical with a thin, slightly harsh treble, which can be heard best on CG. Hardy doesn't help much, but Millennia adds some natural warmth, especially in trebles. So this would be my choice, except MK4 sounds a tad better in your studio because it doesn't pick up room acoustics too much, which in this case seams to be preferable.
There are so many factors that influenced my choices that they can't be considered as objective, but one thing becomes absolutely clear for me. In your takes I can hear exactly the same sound characteristics of the gear we use both. MK2+UFX gives this clinical sound I was talking about no matter how recorded. Well, maybe big and nice acoustics would help, but this would mean rather hiring a big, especially treated professional studio. Not practical at all.
Now, my conclusion - I would probably use what I already have, except a good preamp is absolutely necessary. Millennia could be a nice choice, but I will make a bigger research in this field. Alternatively MK4 capsule could help in case of a small room. Another possibility is a good ribbon.
Just a couple of days ago, I had an opportunity to try a pair of Coles 4040 (I own only one) with a good preamp. It didn't sound dull at all, trebles were fine and it sounded quite balanced and warm overall. So I have to make a decision which way to go, but as I said, a good preamp is a real must in my case. Thanks a lot for all samples and pics! It reassured me in some choices and gave some new directions to follow.
All the best
Firstly I'd like to thank you again for your work which is really very valuable for me. As for a methodology I agree that 2496 is not the best format when converting to 1644 (88 would be better as it can be divided by half without much loss), but in this case I don't think anyone would hear the difference. Also I absolutely agree with you that your acoustics aren't ideal for classical guitar recording (BTW, very nice playing). In general your setup is quite similar to mine, except I have rather deflectors than real diffusers. Besides your room is very heavily acoustically treated (what can be seen on the pics), mine has some fiberglass absorbers, plywood deflectors and sculpted foam diffusers, but some natural acoustics are intentionally left over as I tend to record more of acoustic stuff. Blind test could be probably more objective, but with this amount of samples I would be able to choose the best takes only, and many subtle, but very valuable differences would be lost. So it was quite good to see what was what.
Anyway, back to my first impressions.
MICS - I'm sorry to say this, but AA and EM sound like cheapos to me. I have nothing against cheap gear providing it sounds OK. Oktava is a good example. It is a decent mic - real bargain for what you pay. A little bit bright here and there, but not bad at all. ST77 quite decent for CG, less suitable for vocals (sibilants too obvious), not so good for percussion, especially hi hat, crash or ride cymbals as it sounds quite stringent IMO. Very warm sounding Ribbon MXL R144 surprised me a little bit, being slightly uneven. Bass register in CG was too boomy (proximity effect?), but for drums it gives really nice and full texture. TLM103 pretty universal. Maybe least successful on CG (slightly dull). Finally, there is my Schoeps. MK2+UFX without pre sounds very similar to what I can get with my stuff. It's OK, but it sounds clinical with a thin, slightly harsh treble, which can be heard best on CG. Hardy doesn't help much, but Millennia adds some natural warmth, especially in trebles. So this would be my choice, except MK4 sounds a tad better in your studio because it doesn't pick up room acoustics too much, which in this case seams to be preferable.
There are so many factors that influenced my choices that they can't be considered as objective, but one thing becomes absolutely clear for me. In your takes I can hear exactly the same sound characteristics of the gear we use both. MK2+UFX gives this clinical sound I was talking about no matter how recorded. Well, maybe big and nice acoustics would help, but this would mean rather hiring a big, especially treated professional studio. Not practical at all.
Now, my conclusion - I would probably use what I already have, except a good preamp is absolutely necessary. Millennia could be a nice choice, but I will make a bigger research in this field. Alternatively MK4 capsule could help in case of a small room. Another possibility is a good ribbon.
Just a couple of days ago, I had an opportunity to try a pair of Coles 4040 (I own only one) with a good preamp. It didn't sound dull at all, trebles were fine and it sounded quite balanced and warm overall. So I have to make a decision which way to go, but as I said, a good preamp is a real must in my case. Thanks a lot for all samples and pics! It reassured me in some choices and gave some new directions to follow.
All the best