Drum Phasing

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Audioamigo" <golgatha77@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:1108496805.777270.78100@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Are there any rules about phasing with microphone
> placement while recording drums>
> How about phasing with samples?
> Amigo
> CA
>

I think professor Doyle is getting wise as to which of you
hacked his account.

There are phase issues to consider any time you are using
more than one microphone. Can you tell me why?

Take an sample of a nice tom-tom with a long duration. Put
the sample on one track in any multitrack DAW software.
Now, clone that sample with a precisely matching start time
to another track of the DAW. Play only one sample from
one track and listen. Now, play both samples simultaneously
and tell me what has changed? Once you can reply to that,
I'll continue with what to do in the DAW to illustrate phase.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Maximizing the wide equalization bandwidth from drum overheads is often
a quandary due to the verity that in most drum kit recordings, the
overheads are out of phase amid the snare and toms. Adding more low
frequency content to the snare or removing low frequency content with
high-pass filtering from the overheads, will only exacerbate the
dilemma.
In mixing, some engineers will enhance the low-end of the snare through
low frequency gain,
utilizing a "Q" factor between 3-5. This will obviously create the
misapprehension that the snare sounds fuller, except, when the
over-heads are added into the mix, the effect is shattered. This
phenomena occurs due to the fact that the long wavelength of
frequencies between 70-140hz will be out of phase with each other when
they are combined together when 3-4ms apart.

Solution

Reverse the phase ON BOTH overheads.

Try going back to some of your older recording and try this and while
checking for phase problems, monitor all drum kit elements in mono. If
the snare is too loud in the overheads, insert linked compressors keyed
to a gated and limited snare trigger send. Use quick attack and release
times. You most likely not generate half-cycle distortion from a quick
release time

This process is used often and can be illustated in The song "Black
Velvet" by Alannah Myles. You will notice that the
snare sounds full and present, but by all means not great. What does
sound suitable is the fullness and sustain of the crashes on the
downbeats.

Kevin Doyle

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I've been calling your office professor Doyle. Are you
getting your messages at the campus?

Thanks,

DM


<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote in message news:1108502891.171804.110690@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Maximizing the wide equalization bandwidth from drum overheads is often
> a quandary due to the verity that in most drum kit recordings, the
> overheads are out of phase amid the snare and toms. Adding more low
> frequency content to the snare or removing low frequency content with
> high-pass filtering from the overheads, will only exacerbate the
> dilemma.
> In mixing, some engineers will enhance the low-end of the snare through
> low frequency gain,
> utilizing a "Q" factor between 3-5. This will obviously create the
> misapprehension that the snare sounds fuller, except, when the
> over-heads are added into the mix, the effect is shattered. This
> phenomena occurs due to the fact that the long wavelength of
> frequencies between 70-140hz will be out of phase with each other when
> they are combined together when 3-4ms apart.
>
> Solution
>
> Reverse the phase ON BOTH overheads.
>
> Try going back to some of your older recording and try this and while
> checking for phase problems, monitor all drum kit elements in mono. If
> the snare is too loud in the overheads, insert linked compressors keyed
> to a gated and limited snare trigger send. Use quick attack and release
> times. You most likely not generate half-cycle distortion from a quick
> release time
>
> This process is used often and can be illustated in The song "Black
> Velvet" by Alannah Myles. You will notice that the
> snare sounds full and present, but by all means not great. What does
> sound suitable is the fullness and sustain of the crashes on the
> downbeats.
>
> Kevin Doyle
>

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

> I've been calling your office professor Doyle. Are you
> getting your messages at the campus?
>
> Thanks,
>
> DM


Just kill file this bozo.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"dale" <dallen@frognet.net> wrote in message
news:1108504515.420289.153120@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> yes there are phasing issues and they require that you use a dual trace
> oscilloscope as a tool for monitoring your mic placement.

Or just your ears, if your dual-trace o-scope happens to not be working at
the time.

Neil Henderson

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 01:23:29 GMT, "Neil Henderson"
<neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM> wrote:

>> You might consider being a man, going to Kevin and telling
>> him what's happened. Rather than making it worse.
>
>Why, Chris, what's happened? Is someone hacking his account? Is that what
>you mean?

We'll know soon, but the culprit knows already. Damaging
someone's reputation is serious. He shouldn't keep making it
worse. He should take responsibilty and try make things
as right as possible for Kevin. If he's a man.

At least, that's my take on things.

Chris Hornbeck

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<kevindoylemusic@rogers.com> wrote:

> the wide equalization bandwidth

The New Age bot speaks.

--
ha

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"hank alrich" <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote in message news:1gs1euf.16u9b2ls68tywN%walkinay@thegrid.net...
> Chris Hornbeck wrote:
>
> > If he's a man.
>
> In the sense of honor, don't we already have the answer to that one?
>
> By now somebody ought to know that the phasing thing only matters when
> tracking the moon in stereo.


But what about when using a "spaced" pair ?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

walkinay@thegrid.net (hank alrich) wrote:

>David Morgan wrote:
>
>> "hank alrich" wrote...
>> > Chris Hornbeck wrote:
>
>> > > If he's a man.

>> > In the sense of honor, don't we already have the answer to that one?
>
>> > By now somebody ought to know that the phasing thing only matters when
>> > tracking the moon in stereo.

>> But what about when using a "spaced" pair ?

>Either you're just being cheeky, in which case the proper terminology is
>"spread pair", or you do not understand the basics and are about to make
>a mess of this. You can _only_ use ORTF (Orbitally Referenced
>Terrestrially Fixated) mic placement, David.
>
>I learned this directly from Harvey. I wasn't supposed to tell anybody
>but he won't remember where I learned it.

I have Alzhiemer's and Deja Vu - I think I've forgotten this before.

Harvey Gerst
Indian Trail Recording Studio
http://www.ITRstudio.com/

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers wrote:

> Only if you know how to interpret it. Most of the time, a "phase"
> display looks like scrambled eggs. If you listen and it sounds
> good, there's no need to watch a scope. And if you listen and it
> doesn't sound good, you need to fix something.

This brings up an interesting question. I always hear about striving for
perfectly matched pairs of microphones, people freaking out because of
slight level differences, etc. But does it really matter? Aren't any
discrepancies kind of moot when you are mixing for the final outcome?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Scott Dorsey wrote:


> If you are doing a minimalist recording where everything is coming
> through a single mike pair, and where you consider a convincing image
> of the room itself to be important, perfect matching is important.
>
> If you're setting up drum overheads, where the placement isn't
> necessarily perfect and you're probably using widely spaced cardioids
> to get an exaggerated image anyway, matching isn't very important.
>
> If you're miking two different sources that aren't very well correlated,
> even something like a guitar with one mike on the neck and one on the
> body, matching isn't important at all.


Thanks Scott, makes perfect sense.