MS mic suggestions?

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

I'm planning to record 7 female a capella singers at an upcoming small
live venue (aka "house concert" ) soon. (Bob Ohlsson, if you're reading
this, in light of your nice comments on the Carolinas live music scene
and house concert scene generally over at prosoundweb.com, please join
us in mid-April; I'll get you VIP passes). I haven't heard the singers
yet and don't know if I'll be able to before the show. They've been
described to me as "alt.feminist.acapella" fwiw. The room is an open L
shape, 20' peaked ceiling that will hold about 70 very crowded but
normally quiet people for the show, with a small stage for the talent at
the intersection of the "L."

I'm thinking of trying MS mic technique with the 7 in a semicircle
around the mics. I'm open to reconsider that, but part of the fun of the
gig for me is trying new things, which this would be. I have a Shure
Vp88 and have used it for some video work and that, I suppose, would be
the easy way to do this one. But I'm guessing some other mics might give
a finer recording. My questions are: what, out of my mics, would beat
the vp88? and, has anyone used the Waves S1 imager plug to decode MS?

Mic choices: multipattern--AKG 414B/uls; Studio Projects C3. Figure 8 -
AEA R84. Cardoid in addition to multis above: Neumann KMS84i, akg md421,
shure sm57. Also an older Microtech Gefell with M7, but I'd rather not
futz with the power supply on the stage. I also have nice Schoeps and
ATs but only with omni and hypercardioid capsules.

Decoding: assuming I don't use the vp88, is there any reason to worry
about using the Waves S1 decoder after the fact and just record the M
and S track live without worrying about matrixing, phase reversing, or
whatever you used to have to do for MS before you could decode in software?

Thanks for any advice...
Richard Whisnant
www.room2b.com

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

"Richard Whisnant" <richardwhisnant@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3JqXd.7099$603.5993@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net

> I'm planning to record 7 female a capella singers at an upcoming small
> live venue (aka "house concert" ) soon. They've been
> described to me as "alt.feminist.acapella" fwiw. The room is an open L
> shape, 20' peaked ceiling that will hold about 70 very crowded but
> normally quiet people for the show, with a small stage for the talent
> at the intersection of the "L."

> I'm thinking of trying MS mic technique with the 7 in a semicircle
> around the mics. I'm open to reconsider that, but part of the fun of
> the gig for me is trying new things, which this would be. I have a
> Shure Vp88 and have used it for some video work and that, I suppose,
would
> be the easy way to do this one. But I'm guessing some other mics
> might give a finer recording. My questions are: what, out of my mics,
would beat
> the vp88? and, has anyone used the Waves S1 imager plug to decode MS?

Given that your VP88 is a M/S mic, where's the fun in trying some other M/S
micing technique?

If you want to do intensity stereo, the alternative to M/S is crossed
cardioids, such as implemented in the Rode NT4.

The fact thatt he VP88 is kinda rolled-off on the low end is probably less
significant, given that you're recording chicks.

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

Neil Henderson <neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM> wrote:
>"Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
>> If you want to do intensity stereo, the alternative to M/S is crossed
>> cardioids, such as implemented in the Rode NT4.
>
>Do you find that the X-Y/NT-4 setup is more intense than, for example, ORTF?
>I tend to think the opposite.

ORTF is not "intensity stereo" in that it gives you phase differences
between channels. I think this is a good thing and it gives you more
of a sense of depth, but there are cases where intensity stereo is a
good thing, especially if you're adding it to a panpotted mix.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

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

FYI, ribbon mics (which are obvious choices for side mics since they are
naturally a figure-8 pattern usually) often require a lot of clean gain.
When used as a side mic sometimes, particularly for quiet sources,
they can require even more gain since they are not getting much (if any)
direct sound. So be prepared to really crank your preamps and
potentially not even have enough gain if and when using the ribbon as a
side mic. Also, due to the amount of gain sometimes required, using a
ribbon as a side mic can sometimes give you more noise than you like if
your preamps cannot produce large amounts of gain quietly. Since the
singers will be in a semicircle around the mic, this might not be an issue.

For the mid mic, I'd pick whatever mic you'd feel comfortable with if
you were mic'ing the singers in *mono*. It doesn't really matter
whether it's cardioid or hypercardioid so much. The 414 seems like the
obvious choice for the side considering your options are limited.

As far as decoding goes, I never even bother with any special software.
I just import the tracks into my DAW, double the side track and then
flip the phase on one channel. Adjust the level of the tracks to taste
and check your image in mono to be sure you don't lose too much of the
stereo image.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

Richard Whisnant wrote:
> I'm planning to record 7 female a capella singers at an upcoming small
> live venue (aka "house concert" ) soon. (Bob Ohlsson, if you're reading
> this, in light of your nice comments on the Carolinas live music scene
> and house concert scene generally over at prosoundweb.com, please join
> us in mid-April; I'll get you VIP passes). I haven't heard the singers
> yet and don't know if I'll be able to before the show. They've been
> described to me as "alt.feminist.acapella" fwiw. The room is an open L
> shape, 20' peaked ceiling that will hold about 70 very crowded but
> normally quiet people for the show, with a small stage for the talent at
> the intersection of the "L."
>
> I'm thinking of trying MS mic technique with the 7 in a semicircle
> around the mics. I'm open to reconsider that, but part of the fun of the
> gig for me is trying new things, which this would be. I have a Shure
> Vp88 and have used it for some video work and that, I suppose, would be
> the easy way to do this one. But I'm guessing some other mics might give
> a finer recording. My questions are: what, out of my mics, would beat
> the vp88? and, has anyone used the Waves S1 imager plug to decode MS?
>
> Mic choices: multipattern--AKG 414B/uls; Studio Projects C3. Figure 8 -
> AEA R84. Cardoid in addition to multis above: Neumann KMS84i, akg md421,
> shure sm57. Also an older Microtech Gefell with M7, but I'd rather not
> futz with the power supply on the stage. I also have nice Schoeps and
> ATs but only with omni and hypercardioid capsules.
>
> Decoding: assuming I don't use the vp88, is there any reason to worry
> about using the Waves S1 decoder after the fact and just record the M
> and S track live without worrying about matrixing, phase reversing, or
> whatever you used to have to do for MS before you could decode in software?
>
> Thanks for any advice...
> Richard Whisnant
> www.room2b.com

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

In article <vwBXd.7660$603.546@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> news@room2b.com writes:

> afaik, I don't want to do intensity stereo; I want true stereo

What's not true about X-Y stereo? It's just another way of capturing
clues for our brain to visualize the acoustic space.

Frankly, for a vocal group such as the one you're describing, I would
use (and have used) an X-Y pair. It gives a pretty good picture of
what the group is doing.

If you want more control in your recording, give them each a
microphone.

> I'm compromised by not knowing if these women have one or two singers
> who take the lead most of the time, or if they all contribute more or
> less equally to the sound. I'm assuming the latter.

Have you considered asking them, or getting a recording of them? Or
asking someone who has heard them? How are we supposed to know what to
suggest? Are you trying to second-guess a sound check that you might
not have or might not bring along enough equipment to accommodate what
you find if you do have a sound check?

Is this a woman's Balkan singing group? A doo-wop group? A jazz vocal
group? Most of the Balkan groups I've seen pretty much keep the same
semi-circular arrangement but members move around depending on who's
singing lead - and being a pretty democratic form of music without
clearly defined singing parts usually everybody gets a chance to sing
lead, often in pairs. You really need to know more about what you're
working with if you want to do anything more than a documentation
recording.

> They apparently are
> used to working in larger venues with each having a mic in front of
> them. I'm trying to avoid that, both to reduce stage clutter in this
> little venue and also to learn a thing or two about stereo mic techniques.

You're going to learn about stereo mic techniques at someone else's
performance??!! That's bad juju. Remember that the audience is the most
important thing here, and the artists run a very close second. If
they're used to singing on individual mics, that's probably built into
their act and they may be uncomfortable with a different setup. Do you
know if they move around?

Don't make plans that you can't change when the group shows up. Or
else find out what they need and plan for that. But be prepared to be
flexible.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

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

Without intent to second guess, I think you're working at a
disadvantage right out of the gate if you're not familiar
with their act. If they are used to working on individual
mics, this wouldn't be the time to experiment with esoteric
mic setups that may bewilder them.

If I were in the audience, in terms of stage clutter, I'd
rather see four clean stands and mics that the performers
are comfortable with than some Rube Goldberg contraption
that the performers are leaning and craning to sing into
trying to figure out not only their relationship to each
other in this unfamiliar situation but how on earth (under
the pressure of performance) to relate to the funny looking
mic "thingy" in front of them.

I've worked with a bunch of barbershop quartets (Sweet
Adelines included), and although that's not what you've got,
I've found that groups like that don't adapt quickly to an
unfamiliar setup.

It's your show, but the VP88 is pretty unobtrusive, and one
more stand in the middle isn't going to contribute much to
clutter. And you only have to tell them to not worry about
it, it's just for experimental recording purposes. Let them
use their usable setup. You and they will both be happier
for it, and their performance won't suffer.

But, it's your show...



TM


Richard Whisnant wrote:
>
> afaik, I don't want to do intensity stereo; I want true stereo and I
> will have a signal with major differences from side to side. Here again
> I'm compromised by not knowing if these women have one or two singers
> who take the lead most of the time, or if they all contribute more or
> less equally to the sound. I'm assuming the latter. They apparently are
> used to working in larger venues with each having a mic in front of
> them. I'm trying to avoid that, both to reduce stage clutter in this
> little venue and also to learn a thing or two about stereo mic techniques.

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

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 18:39:43 -0500, Richard Whisnant wrote
(in article <3JqXd.7099$603.5993@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> ):

> I'm planning to record 7 female a capella singers at an upcoming small
> live venue (aka "house concert" ) soon. (Bob Ohlsson, if you're reading
> this, in light of your nice comments on the Carolinas live music scene
> and house concert scene generally over at prosoundweb.com, please join
> us in mid-April; I'll get you VIP passes). I haven't heard the singers
> yet and don't know if I'll be able to before the show. They've been
> described to me as "alt.feminist.acapella" fwiw. The room is an open L
> shape, 20' peaked ceiling that will hold about 70 very crowded but
> normally quiet people for the show, with a small stage for the talent at
> the intersection of the "L."
>
> I'm thinking of trying MS mic technique with the 7 in a semicircle
> around the mics. I'm open to reconsider that, but part of the fun of the
> gig for me is trying new things, which this would be. I have a Shure
> Vp88 and have used it for some video work and that, I suppose, would be
> the easy way to do this one. But I'm guessing some other mics might give
> a finer recording. My questions are: what, out of my mics, would beat
> the vp88? and, has anyone used the Waves S1 imager plug to decode MS?
>
> Mic choices: multipattern--AKG 414B/uls; Studio Projects C3. Figure 8 -
> AEA R84. Cardoid in addition to multis above: Neumann KMS84i, akg md421,
> shure sm57. Also an older Microtech Gefell with M7, but I'd rather not
> futz with the power supply on the stage. I also have nice Schoeps and
> ATs but only with omni and hypercardioid capsules.
>
> Decoding: assuming I don't use the vp88, is there any reason to worry
> about using the Waves S1 decoder after the fact and just record the M
> and S track live without worrying about matrixing, phase reversing, or
> whatever you used to have to do for MS before you could decode in software?
>
> Thanks for any advice...
> Richard Whisnant
> www.room2b.com

1. Two schoeps in coincident omni with their fronts angled to catch the sound
of the semi circle.

2. Mid side with the Gefell as mid and AKG 414 as side.

3. What's a KMS84i?

4. Does AKG also have an MD421, I thought that was a Sennheiser number?

5. I hope they balance well and can hear each other in a semi circle.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

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

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:41:17 GMT, hank alrich <walkinay@thegrid.net> wrote:
> T Maki wrote:
>
>> Without intent to second guess, I think you're working at a
>> disadvantage right out of the gate if you're not familiar
>> with their act. If they are used to working on individual
>> mics, this wouldn't be the time to experiment with esoteric
>> mic setups that may bewilder them.
>
> This is a situation where one is to peruse the technical rider and
> follow its directives explicitly. If any deviations are to be
> _suggested_, they must be cleared with the artist prior to invocation.
>
> I know you know this - not sure the OP realizes it.
>
>> But, it's your show...
>
> Nope, it's the singer's show. <g>
>

Who can forget this famous tech rider?

http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/vanhalen.htm

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

Ty Ford wrote:

> 1. Two schoeps in coincident omni with their fronts angled to catch the sound
> of the semi circle.
OK - but given the stage is just a very few feet from the audience and
only slightly elevated, so the mic stand might be closer to the singers
than to the front row of seats by only 2-3', would you worry about too
much audience noise? True that the crowd is usually very quiet at this
venue, but I wonder whether using the hypercardioid capsules
near-coincident, like capsules 12 cm apart and angled 60 deg or so,
wouldn't give a better signal:crowd noise result? THis seems to me to be
another important issue that I can't assess at sound check.

>
> 2. Mid side with the Gefell as mid and AKG 414 as side.
tempting, but with the large russian power supply for the gefell and
difference in mic shapes and sizes, it will certainly look rube goldbergish.
>
> 3. What's a KMS84i?
see above
>
> 4. Does AKG also have an MD421, I thought that was a Sennheiser number?
you're right, Sennheiser
>
> 5. I hope they balance well and can hear each other in a semi circle.
me too. Thanks for the suggestions
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>

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

Richard Whisnant wrote:
> hank alrich wrote:
>
> -w/r/t the ribbon mic, I have a couple telefunken v676s with 70db gain
> and acceptable noise levels that I use to amp the aea r84 (and an rca
> 74b that I neglected to mention). I just worry that a ribbon on sides
> and a condensor on mid would have such different colors that the group
> would sound wierd in stereo. the other pres are a 4 channel sytek and a
> manley dual tube.

I used a Sytek with my Coles 4038 as the side mic for a very quiet
acoustic guitar and singer and ended up having to daisy-chain the Sytek
pres to get enough signal to tape. That was back when I was battling
tape hiss, too, so with digital you probably have to worry less about
getting such a cranked signal.

Having a ribbon as the side and a condensor as the mid is not going to
give you any weird "color" issues in stereo. The ribbon mic is going to
be equally in the left channel as the right; same with the condensor.
This point is the beauty of M/S: you do not need to use matched mics.

> -I misunderstood the term "intensity stereo"; I took it to refer to a
> compression scheme that creates pseudo-stereo at low bit rates. I take
> it you mean any stereo technique that relies solely on spl differences
> (rather than phase?) for stereo image information?

Correct, intensity stereo relies on level differences instead of phase
for the stereo image information.

Cheers,
Trevor de Clercq

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

Ty Ford wrote:

> 1. Two schoeps in coincident omni with their fronts angled to catch the sound
> of the semi circle.

Cardioids wouldn't be open enough for you in this situation? Are you
thinking that the omnis would also do good work catching the
house/audience ambience and applause? If so, why coincident?

Does this system have to double for reinforcement, too?

So few braincells, so many questions.

--
ha

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

In article <gLGXd.8069$603.4715@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> news@room2b.com writes:

> -there is no technical rider. This is not a touring act, it's a bunch of
> local musicians, and they have no recordings. They want one from this
> show. Such is the nature of *some* of these house concerts.

Oh. OK. Why didn't you say it was a house concert? I used to host
house concerts. I'd put the performer(s) in a corner of the room and I
recorded with a Radio Shack PZM attached to the ceiling a couple of
feet toward the center of the room from where the performer stood or
sat. Same setup for everybody. Worked fine. Not stereo. Didn't care.

What kind of music?

> -as for the bad juju, I understand your point, but I think you'd have to
> know the financial arrangement before positively concluding that. A
> major inducement for me is the learning, and I don't charge if they
> don't like.

It sounds to me like you shouldn't be charging at all, whether they
like it or not.

> -I/we have contacted the group and hope to catch a rehearsal, but it may
> not be possible before the show. And yes, that does put me at a
> disadvantage. I will ask them if they change positions to put the
> lead(s) in the same place, such as in the middle

People do things differently in a house concert than they would do at
a stage gig. Are you using any sound reinforcement? That makes a big
difference.

> -I understand I'll have to be flexible, but am trying to avoid being
> rubber band man, given that I'll have to make final decisions at a sound
> check and have probably no more time than enough to try two or possibly
> three different mic setups.

Unless you get them over a couple of hours before dinner, you'll have
to make your decision and you'll have one chance. Decide on something
that will work no matter what and go for it. If they like the
recording, invite them to come over some time when you and they have
time and record a few songs in a more controlled environment. You can
charge them for that.

> -w/r/t the ribbon mic, I have a couple telefunken v676s with 70db gain
> and acceptable noise levels that I use to amp the aea r84 (and an rca
> 74b that I neglected to mention). I just worry that a ribbon on sides
> and a condensor on mid would have such different colors that the group
> would sound wierd in stereo.

You'd be surprised at how much this doen't matter. It's not like one
mic picks up the left side and the other picks up the right. But I
keep coming back to the "house concert" thought. The listeners want to
sit in a living room and listen to some people have fun making music.
They don't want to be part of a recording session. If you had a single
point stereo mic (did you say you had a VP88 or was that someone in
another thread) this would be a good choice. If you try to come up
with some MS or XY rig with two mics it will look awkward and be
distracting. An SM69 would be great, or a Studio Project LSD-2. You
could disguise it as an old time broadcast mic.

> -it's a good point about putting up 4 stands and giving everyone a mic,

I think I may have asked before - is there a sound system? If not,
this will look really stooooopid.

> -I misunderstood the term "intensity stereo"; I took it to refer to a
> compression scheme that creates pseudo-stereo at low bit rates.

Nope, it's one of those terms that someone invented because they
weren't satisfied with just describing the physical arrangement of a
pair of microphones.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

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

In article <7oqu211b0j2sslkrlu722ncddca9girk7r@4ax.com> playonAT@comcast.net writes:

> I would think ribbon mics would be a pretty poor choice for MS since
> with many of them, one side of the figure of eight sounds different
> than the other.

Well, maybe "many" since there are probably more Royer mics in use
today than any other ribbons, and the difference in response of the
two sides is something that apparently Royer has designed
intentionally.

The bottom line is that they work for the application. You can try to
explain why they shouldn't, but then you'd never get the job done, eh?


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

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

"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news0p2tp025c8@enews4.newsguy.com
> Richard Whisnant wrote:
>> oops, one mistake in that original post: my other audio technica
>> capsules *are* cardioid (at 4051a), not hypercardioid. I've been
>> using the omni capsules only, in a jecklin disk, for so long, I'd
>> forgotten. So maybe coincident cardioids are a viable alternative to
>> the MS approach....
>
> Quite viable. The resulting L and R from an XY at +/-45
> degrees have almost exactly the same directional
> characteristics as a matrixed M and S but with the advantage
> that you can match the two cardioids much better than you
> can a cardioid and a fig 8.
>
> Since these are intensity based methods, the matching is
> especially important in order to keep a source at a spot
> rather than distributed across an arc according to frequency
> content.

I think you just said a mouth full.

To some degree intensity stereo is intensity stereo. The number of important
variables is limited to some degree by the name of the game.

An intensity stereo mic is conceptually something like a camera lens. The
most important parameter for the mic array is something like the focal
length of the lens. This relates to the included angle between the mics and
how directional they are.

The issue you raised about element matching ahs got to be important. It may
be *the* important second-order effect. It is something like contrast and
freedom from geometric distortion in a camera lens.

Matching of the elements thus highly significant, and so is the degree to
which the element's off-axis response matches their on-axis response.

Two highly-regarded mics that are not-so-well matched, or have response that
changes more off axis, might perform worse in a coincident array than two
lesser mics that are well-matched and/or have more consistent performance
off-axis.

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

On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:20:31 -0500, hank alrich wrote
(in article <1gt5ng2.1eut4cz1hwi5bqN%walkinay@thegrid.net> ):

> Ty Ford wrote:
>
>> 1. Two schoeps in coincident omni with their fronts angled to catch the
>> sound
>> of the semi circle.
>
> Cardioids wouldn't be open enough for you in this situation? Are you
> thinking that the omnis would also do good work catching the
> house/audience ambience and applause? If so, why coincident?

Maybe. A lot depends on the room. I do a five person madrigal group in a
church with coincident schoeps hypers. Coincident for mono compatibility and
stereo image. (Yes coincident omnis DO record stereo information if
positioned for it.)


> Does this system have to double for reinforcement, too?

Not when I record.

> So few braincells, so many questions.
>
> --
> ha

Amen!

Ty ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com

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

In article <E_ZXd.238$qW.148@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net> news@room2b.com writes:

> > Two highly-regarded mics that are not-so-well matched, or have response that
> > changes more off axis, might perform worse in a coincident array than two
> > lesser mics that are well-matched and/or have more consistent performance
> > off-axis.
> >
> which I would take to mean for me: try a coincident approach with the AT
> 4051a cardiods,

That would probably work out quite well with proper placement and in a
room where X-Y works well.

versus this:
>
> Mike Rivers wrote:
>
> > You'd be surprised at how much this [the difference in sound between
> > unmatched mics in an m/s setup] doen't matter. It's not like one
> > mic picks up the left side and the other picks up the right. But I
> > keep coming back to the "house concert" thought.
>
> which I would take to mean: figure out an m/s setup that would look cool
> given that it *is* a house concert, as the op noted in the first line,
> and the look and feel does matter to the overall experience.

No, I didn't really mean to pick something that looks cool, I meant
that you can try M-S with what you have as long as you have a figure-8
mic and a cardiod or omni mic. If your cardioid is an AT 4051, your
figure-8 could be a C414, a U87, a Royer, an M130, and so on. There IS
no "matching" figure-8 mic to the 4051. Of course off-axis response
will be different between a figure-8 and a cardioid (it's supposed to
be).

> SO (after trying this out in the studio and assuming it sounds ok), I'll
> go in first with the ms setup of: the rca 74b "jr velocity" ribbon for
> figure 8, and the c414b/uls butted up to it as cardioid.
> THese happen to look pretty cool next to each other!

That should work, but given what you've told us about what you have to
work with, I'd try the C414 as the side mic and the 4051 as the mid
mic.

o
-
/ \
\ /
| |

That looks cool, too, isn't quite so large and imposing, and at least
it looks to the performers like you have at least one mic pointed
toward them.


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

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

T Maki wrote:
> Well, in the final analysis, that's what recording is all
> about Anno Domini 2005...

I doubt it's any more so now than whenever. Whoever designed the rca 77
wasn't just thinking about sound, and I also think that's true for the
1920s era WE carbon mic and WE amp I have.

But I use the phrase "looks cool" as shorthand for "won't bother the
singers and may even help improve their performance" which is, of
course, another thing that recording is about, and also "won't detract
from the listeners' experience," which is a related and really big deal
at this venue. Everyone is so close to the stage and paying such rapt
attention that any distractions up there matter a lot more than in a big
venue or a typical bar or wedding where few, if any, are really watching
the band. The intimate, living room feel is 90% of the attraction for
the audience, and important for a lot of the musos.

Whatever makes them sing better, I'm for that. A relaxed, happy crowd
and comfortable performance space are big big parts of whatever hits the
disk.