Classical songs

[guttenor]

Hi!
I have a Zoom F6 in my possession. I'm planning to record a couple of songs for piano and dramatic soprano. The mics I have right now are a couple of C 535 EB. I will put them five to ten meters from where we perform (I play the piano). Do you think the mics are good enough. My plan is to put the songs, which I have composed, on Spotify.

best regards
Gustav

[Arpangel]

These are cardioids, five to ten metres for these mic's seems a long way, I would maybe move in a bit closer and have them in an ORTF configuration if possible, adjusting the position of the soprano to suit.
This is a strange situation, you have an excellent recorder there, but not perhaps, ideal mic’s.
No doubt someone will be along in a moment to offer more advice.

[Hugh Robjohns]

The easiest way is to try it and see...

At your planned distance* with those mics I would expect the resulting sound to be rather 'roomy' as well as a little lightweight at the low end (below 100Hz) -- but probably only noticeable on the piano elements, and easily fixed in a computer DAW with a little bass boost EQ.

*A distance of 5-10 metres does seem a long way back for a piano/vocal duet, even in a nice concert hall. It really all depends on the room acoustics, though, and the nature of the songs.

Your mics have a cardioid pattern, of course, and at your (minimum) 5m distance the stereo recording angle of piano/vocalist will on be a few degrees. Either with a grand piano sideways-on and the vocalist central, or with the piano off centre one way and the vocalist off-centre the other, the source image width will be pretty narrow, with lots of room acoustic filling out the edges.

So you'll be looking for stereo array configuration that gives a relatively narrow stereo recording angle (SRA) so that the piano/vocalist occupy a reasonable proportion of the stereo width. As Tony suggests, an ORTF (17cm capsule spacing with 110 degree mutual angle) arrangement would be a fair starting point as that array has an SRA of around 90 degrees. However, may I suggest the NOS array (30cm capsule spacing and 90 degree mutual angle) which has an SRA of 80 degrees might be an even better option.

Good luck -- and please post links back here for your recordings.

[guttenor]

So, do you recommend that I use a pair of shotgun mics and not carioids. Any specific model you can recommend? I don't have a big budget, maybe 3000 € per mic. i have very little knowledge about recording music so I'm going to do some research about Ortf. Thanks for your answers!

[Hugh Robjohns]

So, do you recommend that I use a pair of shotgun mics and not carioids.

Noooooo... Horrible things. Off-axis colouration is nasty and would be revealed very clearly in your intended application.

I'd recommend not putting the mics quite so far away... I'd start at 2-3 metres for that kind of ensemble.... but as I said, it all depends on the acoustics of the room you're recording in.

Any specific model you can recommend?

There's nothing particularly wrong with the mics you already have. They're not the greatest, and there are better options, of course, but they'll definitely capture something reasonable if used appropriately. I'd start with them, and then you have a starting reference point from which to develop your recording skills and sound appreciation. If you can identify what you don't like about a recording, we can then help you improve the technique or suggest alternative mics... But I'd definitely start with the 535s and see how you go.

I don't have a big budget, maybe 3000 € per mic.

That is a pretty big per-mic budget that would cover all the high-end pro mics typically used in this kind of application -- DPA, Schoeps, Sennhesier, Neumann... etc etc... but it would be an unnecessary spend at this time.

i have very little knowledge about recording music so I'm going to do some research about Ortf.

Start here:

https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/comparing-stereo-miking-techniques

And then have a play here:

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Fragen08.htm

There are visualisations of the ORTF and NOS arrays, as well as many other popular configurations, and you can tweak the parameters to see what happens!

http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-ORTF-E.htm
http://www.sengpielaudio.com/Visualization-NOS-E.htm

[guttenor]

Imean 300 € of course. My mistake!

[MOF]

(I play the piano)

I suggest you set up your recording equipment and record one of the loudest sections, before the soprano arrives, check that there’s enough headroom and that it’s the sound you’re after. When the soprano arrives record that section again and review the recording to ascertain the best position for relative level, stereo position and reverb.

[Sam Spoons]

I suspect the soprano will be significantly louder than the piano

[MOF]

I suspect the soprano will be significantly louder than the piano

If it’s a boy soprano probably not, even so I think an adult female soprano will be singing at a volume to match the accompaniment and a Grand piano at full bore is a pretty loud piece of kit.

[Sam Spoons]

No mention of a Concert Grand (it's a reasonable assumption but by no means certain).

Wikipedia has this to say :- "A dramatic soprano is a type of operatic soprano with a powerful, rich, emotive voice that can sing over, or cut through, a full orchestra."

and this :- "Some dramatic sopranos, known as Wagnerian sopranos, have an exceptionally big voice that can assert itself over a large orchestra (of more than 80 or even 100 pieces). These voices are substantial, often denser in tone, extremely powerful and, ideally, evenly balanced throughout the vocal registers. So probably not a boy then.....

[gs06]

Never underestimate a boy soprano! If you have ever heard a soloist sing in a concert hall with an audience of 2000 people and experienced how his voice fills the whole room, you know that size doesn't matter...

[Drew Stephenson]

Any properly trained voice can be incredibly powerful. The first time you hear a professional really project is eye opening.

[Arpangel]

I suspect the soprano will be significantly louder than the piano

If it’s a boy soprano probably not, even so I think an adult female soprano will be singing at a volume to match the accompaniment and a Grand piano at full bore is a pretty loud piece of kit.

My partner was an opera singer, when I first recorded her...I’m still finding bits of the mic diaphragm in the carpet
They have fantastic dynamic range, that coupled with a grand piano, and you need to really keep those levels own -18/20 at 24/48 or 96 so you’ve got plenty of headroom.

[MOF]

Hopefully both performers will self balance, I just thought it made sense to set the maximum piano level and mic’ position first to save time (and voice, although that’s probably less of a problem for a trained opera singer, that might be on stage for an hour or more and singing for a good deal of that time) to be able to concentrate just on the performance.

[Sam Spoons]

Sorry, yes and it would at least prove the system was working as expected. You'd still need at least a level check with the singer before the performance.

Gustav, you haven't mentioned the venue or the type of piano, a concert grand in a concert hall will require a different approach to an upright in a small rehearsal room or domestic space.

[Vox Gnus]

Note, he mentioned that he'll be recording with a Zoom F6, so it's safe to assume he can use it in 32-bit mode. No need to set levels, although mic position will be critical.

Assuming the soprano is in the cove of the piano (they usually like to stand with the right hand on/near the body of the piano, so beware of tapping noises from any rings the singer might wear), I'd think you should play with an NOS setup, but don't have it directly on axis of the singer. You might find that having it particularly high (or even way down near the floor) helps keep the singer's brightness in check.

Ultimately, it depends on the room and the balance between the performers. Move the mics around, play with the music, and have fun!

[hooty2]

Hi... hope this is relevant and not intrusive.
I sent the sengpielaudio link to a friend.
How would people assess and respond to friends reply?
"...Am I correct in thinking the general approach is... Find favourite distance from musicians where it sounds best (direct / room sound) point mics at outter performers, and the formula tells you the distance between the capsules?..."

[Hugh Robjohns]

Well, he's along the right general lines....

Find favourite distance from musicians where it sounds best (direct / room sound)

This is correct. The starting point is to determine the optimum position for the mics to achieve the desired direct/reflected sound balance -- bearing in mind that (1) this balance is changed if the polar pattern is changed (as it can be if using multi-pattern mics or MS arrays), and (2) it will always be drier in the summed mono than in stereo so some position compromise may be required if the mono sound quality is deemed important. (ie, err towards being more distant rather than less!)

point mics at outer performers, and the formula tells you the distance between the capsules?..."

Not quiet...

From the chosen mic position you need to estimate the angle which spans the intended width of your final stereo image. This angle is called the stereo acceptance angle (SRA).

For example, in the case of an orchestra it is normal to have the back row of the first violins more or less fully left, and the back row of the cellos or basses fully right. So I would draw an imaginary line from the mic position to just left of the last violin desk, and just right of the last basses desk, and then estimate the angle between those lines to give me a target SRA.

In the case of smaller ensemble, the instrumentalists might fill a smaller proportion of the whole stereo image with the outer portions effectively containing just room sound/reverberation...for example. Each case must be judged on its merits and the required stereo image of the final production.

When you know the required SRA, and the mic polar patterns, the Sengpiel website -- or the Neumann App which I much prefer* -- can be used to offer suggestions for the appropriate mutual angle between the mics and the capsule spacing that will provide that SRA.

In general, if you increase the capsule spacing you will decrease the mutual angle to maintain the same SRA (and vice versa). For example, coincident Hypercardioids with the traditional 90 degree mutual angle gives an SRA of 109 degrees. But if you space the mic capsule by, say, 20cm, the mutual angle needs to be reduced to 45 degrees to maintain an SRA of 109 degrees.

Spacing the capsules introduces inter-channel time-of-arrival difference information while the mutual angle and polar pattern combine to create inter-channel amplitude differences, and that t-o-a information is usually perceived as giving a more spacious sound character at the expense of less imaging precision.

Of course, if you decide to change the polar pattern then the physical location of the mics in the room may well need to change, and so the SRA will change and you'll need to go around the loop once again.

...And even when you arrive at a specific solution of polar pattern, position, SRA, mutual angle and spacing, it's quite possible than on hearing what you're getting you may need to jiggle things around a bit to full optimise the setup and match your aesthetic requirements.

...And don't forget that these SRA-based processes don't take the mic height into account which may also need to be adjusted independently to achieve the desired front-back perspectives and balance of a large ensemble like a big choir of orchestra!

*Neumann Recording Tools app is preferred by me because it's more convenient on the phone on site, and it's more interactive.

[guttenor]

Well, he's along the right general lines....

Find favourite distance from musicians where it sounds best (direct / room sound)

This is correct. The starting point is to determine the optimum position for the mics to achieve the desired direct/reflected sound balance -- bearing in mind that (1) this balance is changed if the polar pattern is changed (as it can be if using multi-pattern mics or MS arrays), and (2) it will always be drier in the summed mono than in stereo so some position compromise may be required if the mono sound quality is deemed important. (ie, err towards being more distant rather than less!)

point mics at outer performers, and the formula tells you the distance between the capsules?..."

Not quiet...

From the chosen mic position you need to estimate the angle which spans the intended width of your final stereo image. This angle is called the stereo acceptance angle (SRA).

For example, in the case of an orchestra it is normal to have the back row of the first violins more or less fully left, and the back row of the cellos or basses fully right. So I would draw an imaginary line from the mic position to just left of the last violin desk, and just right of the last basses desk, and then estimate the angle between those lines to give me a target SRA.

SRA graphic.png

In the case of smaller ensemble, the instrumentalists might fill a smaller proportion of the whole stereo image with the outer portions effectively containing just room sound/reverberation...for example. Each case must be judged on its merits and the required stereo image of the final production.

When you know the required SRA, and the mic polar patterns, the Sengpiel website -- or the Neumann App which I much prefer* -- can be used to offer suggestions for the appropriate mutual angle between the mics and the capsule spacing that will provide that SRA.

In general, if you increase the capsule spacing you will decrease the mutual angle to maintain the same SRA (and vice versa). For example, coincident Hypercardioids with the traditional 90 degree mutual angle gives an SRA of 109 degrees. But if you space the mic capsule by, say, 20cm, the mutual angle needs to be reduced to 45 degrees to maintain an SRA of 109 degrees.

Spacing the capsules introduces inter-channel time-of-arrival difference information while the mutual angle and polar pattern combine to create inter-channel amplitude differences, and that t-o-a information is usually perceived as giving a more spacious sound character at the expense of less imaging precision.

Of course, if you decide to change the polar pattern then the physical location of the mics in the room may well need to change, and so the SRA will change and you'll need to go around the loop once again.

...And even when you arrive at a specific solution of polar pattern, position, SRA, mutual angle and spacing, it's quite possible than on hearing what you're getting you may need to jiggle things around a bit to full optimise the setup and match your aesthetic requirements.

...And don't forget that these SRA-based processes don't take the mic height into account which may also need to be adjusted independently to achieve the desired front-back perspectives and balance of a large ensemble like a big choir of orchestra!

*Neumann Recording Tools app is preferred by me because it's more convenient on the phone on site, and it's more interactive.

Thanks for your explanation and for recommending the Neuman recording tools! So, I suppose I should start finding the prefered "audience position" and check the SRA from that position and then position the mics (I use cardioids) relative to each other according to the Nemann app?

Judging from the Nemann app it seems that if I am recording in a relatively dry room with a narrow stereo image something like Ortf may be ideal. On the other hand if I am recording in a church with a wide stereo image something like xy-90 may be more ideal. Am I making the right assumptions?

And, for everyone who is curious, I will accomany the soprano on a grand piano.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Judging from the Nemann app it seems that if I am recording in a relatively dry room with a narrow stereo image something like Ortf may be ideal.

Yes, in a dry room you'd want to place the mic array further back, and so would need a narrower SRA for a given recorded image width. ORTF or NOS would be good starting points with cardioids.

On the other hand if I am recording in a church with a wide stereo image something like xy-90 may be more ideal. Am I making the right assumptions?

In a very reverberant space you would need to go closer and thus need a wide SRA, so crossed cardioids might be more appropriate.

[guttenor]

Judging from the Nemann app it seems that if I am recording in a relatively dry room with a narrow stereo image something like Ortf may be ideal.

Yes, in a dry room you'd want to place the mic array further back, and so would need a narrower SRA for a given recorded image width. ORTF or NOS would be good starting points with cardioids.

On the other hand if I am recording in a church with a wide stereo image something like xy-90 may be more ideal. Am I making the right assumptions?

In a very reverberant space you would need to go closer and thus need a wide SRA, so crossed cardioids might be more appropriate.

I read an informative reply you wrote regarding the recording of a pipe organ:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.soundo ... rgan%3famp

More specifically, I'm interested in the things you wrote about critical distance. Is the Dc something I should always try to find, regardless in what room I'm recording in. Is it even possible to find the Dc in a room with a minimal amount of reverbance.
Also, you said the prefered distance from the source with cardioids is about Dc/2. Would you say this distance is also preferable when you are recording a chamber ensemble or, in my case, grand piano and song?

One more question: the SRA obviously needs to be wider than the physical width of a small chamber ensemble, or a pipe organ for that matter.
Are there any guidelines for how the width of the SRA vary in relation to the distance from the source or in relation to the amount of reverbance?

[Hugh Robjohns]

Is the Dc something I should always try to find, regardless in what room I'm recording in.

Yes... It's an essential element in deciding the position of a mic array. But with experience it can be judged pretty accurately by ear.

Is it even possible to find the Dc in a room with a minimal amount of reverbance.

It's always possible to calculate, if not physically measure, but it's certainly possible for the Dc to be outside the maximum dimension of the room.

Also, you said the prefered distance from the source with cardioids is about Dc/2. Would you say this distance is also preferable when you are recording a chamber ensemble or, in my case, grand piano and song?

It's regardless of the source -- it's just about the wet/dry balance. But it is a starting point; you can still move the mic a bit closer/further to adjust the perspective as required to suit the material.

Are there any guidelines for how the width of the SRA vary in relation to the distance from the source or in relation to the amount of reverbance?

The SRA is just about how you want the sources to fill the stereo width.