Bruce Swedien oddness

[Sam Inglis]

So, a copy of a book called The Bruce Swedien Recording Method landed on my desk recently.

At one point he says "When I do a lecture or seminar, I am frequently asked 'What is that wonderful effect you used on the choir on the Michael Jackson song Man In The Mirror?' I am proud to say it is merely the most fantastic of all microphone techniques. It is the classic Blumlein pair -- nothing more, nothing less!"

This comes immediately after he describes how he recorded the choir... in a 360-degree circle around the Blumlein pair! I'm not surprised people thought he'd used some sort of effect! I guess if it sounds right, it is right...

[Jack Ruston]

I've read that book. It bangs on a lot about 'The Bruce Swedien Recording Method'. Then it says that the key to the recording method is to assemble the finest musicians in the world, in the best acoustic space available at any budget, fill it with not only the most highly prized microphones and equipment, but examples that you and you alone are the only person ever to have touched, recording the world's best songs. That's the method. It's actually really simple.

J

[Random Guitarist]

If only I had thought to do that.

It is, as they say, a fine line between clever and stupid.

[Scramble]

Then it says that the key to the recording method is to assemble the finest musicians in the world, in the best acoustic space available at any budget, fill it with not only the most highly prized microphones and equipment, but examples that you and you alone are the only person ever to have touched, recording the world's best songs. That's the method. It's actually really simple.

It's always worked for me!

[Hugh Robjohns]

This comes immediately after he describes how he recorded the choir... in a 360-degree circle around the Blumlein pair!

Doh!

I've read other books and articles from Mr Swedien, and I've often been stunned at what was written because of an apparent lack of technical understanding. I recall some utter Mid-Side nonsense, in his book on recording Micahel Jackson for example. I don't know if such occasionally blatant faux-pas are due to non-technical ghost writers and editors, or deliberate attempts by Swedien to throw people off the track, or if he really is that ill-informed.

Then again... he obviously is doing something very right and, as you say, if it sounds okay it generally is okay. I wouldn't have wanted to be the vinyl cutting engineer for that one though!

H

[Dave B]

I've read that book. It bangs on a lot about 'The Bruce Swedien Recording Method'. Then it says that the key to the recording method is to assemble the finest musicians in the world, in the best acoustic space available at any budget, fill it with not only the most highly prized microphones and equipment, but examples that you and you alone are the only person ever to have touched, recording the world's best songs. That's the method. It's actually really simple.

So what I'm hearing is .... it works ... hmmmnnnn .....

[The Red Bladder]

A lot of his tips and tricks are extremely useful and over the years I have always pricked up my little ears when he has spoken on such things as miking up drums and taking all those silly pillows, blankets, cheese sandwiches and a dead cat out of the kick drum and just putting a duvet over it and a mic inside.

He also stated “Good mics are an engineer’s secret weapon!”

He went on to state that if you compromise on the mic, you end up with a compromised recording.

He also stressed the importance of not compromising on other things, like acoustics and the importance of creating a sonic signature. Your sound!

[chris...]

and a dead cat out of the kick drum and just putting a duvet over it and a mic inside.

Put a duvet over the kick drum ? Remind me how this helps the kick sound ?

[Sam Inglis]

In this book, he talks about the importance of stuffing kick drums with blankets and breeze blocks -- he even has a photo showing how the breeze block should be positioned.

Some of it's interesting, but on the whole it's pretty thin and shoddy stuff, and I'm glad I didn't pay for it...

[Aled Hughes]

Is it a review copy? I'm looking forward !

I remember a thread a while ago (after the article about recording Thriller in SOS I think) where he had made strange comments regarding a Blumlein pair. I'm sure he had mentioned using a pair of co-incident omnis or something.

I remember there being U87s on every tom-tom (and there were quite a few!) in the photos. I can only dream...

[Sam Inglis]

I don't think I'll write a review!

[Aled Hughes]

I don't think I'll write a review!

Ha!

Here it is:

"I’ll use cardioid or omni mics for the Blumlein pairs — omnis work great — but bi-directional mics make it a little difficult."

From www.soundonsound.com/sos/nov09/articles/swedien.htm

[Hugh Robjohns]

I remember a thread a while ago (after the article about recording Thriller in SOS I think) where he had made strange comments regarding a Blumlein pair. I'm sure he had mentioned using a pair of co-incident omnis or something.

It was. November 2009. Good memory Sir!

And the nonsense you refer to was this:

“I am a firm believer in Blumlein pair. It can do a lot to enhance the width of the sound, even if the stuff gets played back on small stereo speakers. I’m also not crazy about Mid/Side; it’s a technique that is almost useless for recording like I do, so I’ll always go for spaced or Blumlein pairs. I’ll use cardioid or omni mics for the Blumlein pairs — omnis work great — but bi-directional mics make it a little difficult. Stereo mics are vastly overrated. You can do a lot more with a pair of microphones. I haven’t heard any really good stereo microphones. I’m still waiting for the first one of those.”

Complete and utter bo-larks!

A Blumlein pair is a very specific array that can only be constructed from a pair of fig-8 mics at a mutual angle of 90 degrees. No other arrangement is a Blumlein pair.

The comment about the enhanced width is either because the Blumlein array as a narrow stereo acceptance angle -- obviously, or because he allows things to come around the sides where they produce left and right channels of opposite polarity -- as per the 360 degree choir mentioned earlier).

Coincident omnis will produce a negligible stereo image, with any width only apparent at HF, and determined only by the inherent HF polar pattern narrowing of most Omni mics.

Stereo mics are inherently coincident arrays, and are quite capable of sounding as lovely as his favoured Blumlein pair if configured appropriately.

H

[Stef Andrews]

Stereo mics are inherently coincident arrays, and are quite capable of sounding as lovely as his favoured Blumlein pair if configured appropriately.

H

One could argue a stereo mic would never sound as "lovely as his favoured Blumlein pair" given he apparently never used it correctly?!

[Jeraldo]

His remarks on the recording of the Thriller album are some of the most published and repeated.

However jumbled his understanding or articulation of Blumlein technique and MS is, and whatever he said in the SOS article (I haven't reread it yet), I have read many times elsewhere that he recorded the backup voices with two (LD Neumann) mic's placed at 90 degrees, but both mic's in the omni position. In those other instances he went on to say that it was counter intuitive (paraphrase for-"you wouldn't think it would work") for the two omni's to be positioned that way, but he really liked the sound. He may or not be the first to like coincident omni's, but he is definitely not the last. For example, some years ago Earthworks promo literature suggested using their mic coincidentally at 90 degrees.

After reading those remarks several times (long ago), I went back to the recordings, and I was underwhelmed. But I thought the sound as a whole was so processed that it made little difference anyway. I expected a generous backup sound with some significantly altered HF information, but what I heard was a narrow and rather small sound from the backup voices, even if they were at a desirable mix level.

But I don't work in that genre, so I bring less than informed ears, and I may hear things differently now.

BTW, however lamentable, I hear lots of people describe microphone pattern and positioning in such terms as: "x pattern mic in ORTF," and so on, and I wonder if he was just using that sort of lingo. (See edit below)

Edit Later: from SOS article:
"I’ll use cardioid or omni mics for the Blumlein pairs — omnis work great"

Later yet: Desculpe, Señor Ramirez got there first.

[Aled Hughes]

BTW, however lamentable, I hear lots of people describe microphone pattern and positioning in such terms as: "x pattern mic in ORTF," and so on, and I wonder if he was just using that sort of lingo.

Most probably. A co-incident cardioid pair is a perfectly valid stereo technique, just not a Blumlein pair by definition. Co-incident omnis may be odder, but as is often said, it's all about the results. I do agree it's a pity when terms and names are misused, it makes things much esier when definitions are adhered to.

He probably just doesn't have a solid grasp of defnitions and terminology, I don't think it's refleced much in his end products - he's obviously someone who knows what he's doing, just not what he's talking about!

[Hugh Robjohns]

In those other instances he went on to say that it was counter intuitive (paraphrase for-"you wouldn't think it would work") for the two omni's to be positioned that way, but he really liked the sound. He may or not be the first to like coincident omni's, but he is definitely not the last. For example, some years ago Earthworks promo literature suggested using their mic coincidentally at 90 degrees.

As I said before, this relies on omnis -- especially LDC omnis -- not being omnidirectional at HF. So you get some imaging width a HF. Nothing new or innovative there. Even the venerable Decca Tree relies on the same characteristic. Still doesn't make it a 'Blumlein Pair' though!

BTW, however lamentable, I hear lots of people describe microphone pattern and positioning in such terms as: "x pattern mic in ORTF," and so on, and I wonder if he was just using that sort of lingo.

It's understandable from an amateur, but not from a professional, let alone one of such longstanding and experience who voluntarily sticks his head above the parapet, surely? The correct and consistent use of terminology is fundamental.

H

[Sam Inglis]

I went and listened to the track on YouTube after reading that. The choir sort of sits right at the extreme left and right of a very dense arrangement (and does sound quite phasey, though that could be the YouTube sound). So perhaps in practice it was an effective way of exploiting the stereo field...

[Jack Ruston]

YT is such an image killer it's hard to say. J

[Richie Royale]

I'll check this out later I think, although I do think that Bad is a very poor album, both musically, instrumentally and the overall mix. I can't say that I can even recall a choir being on the track.

[niallharp]

Let's not forget the magic ingredient in the Bruce Swedein Method.... Monster Cable!

"Monster: Bruce, you've been a longtime, exclusive Monster user on all your projects and have been passionate about advocating the benefits of using high performance cable. Was Michael's new disc Invincible recorded with Monster?

Bruce Swedien: Absolutely! In fact, every vocal of Michael's was recorded with Monster Cable. And, the entire album was mixed with Monster Cable. My mixing set up is pretty unique and is all wired up with Monster Cable. I even use Monster Cable for the wires from the SSL to the monitor amps.

Monster: Can you recall the first time you and Michael heard the Monster sonic difference?

Bruce Swedien: Well, Michael and I were both in the control room when we first evaluated Monster Cable with a connection between the console and the tape machine. Me, Michael, and Quincy Jones-all three of us were knocked out by the dramatically noticeable enhancement in sound quality, particularly in clarity and low end response. Now, I can't live without my Monster Cable!"

I can't get away from thinking, "you may have engineered Thriller, but you are completely full of [ ****** ]"...

[Hugh Robjohns]

[Aled Hughes]

Initially I thought that was a funny mock conversation from the depths of your imagination. Seems it ain't so!

[Hugh Robjohns]

I can't say that I can even recall a choir being on the track.

It's not a huge choir, and it's only towards the end. But if you view the track on a Goniometer or phase meter you can see (as well as hear) the tell-tale effects of having a lot of out-of-phase content.

H

[tipex]

it's interesting, you often see this kind of thing with famous engineers - seems the finer points of recording don't matter much when you're using the best equipment with the best artists / material