Imaging

[E-Stat]

A 32 track close miked mixdown can have just as good imaging as a direct to disc.

We must have a different perception of imaging and will just disagree here.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

We must have a different perception of imaging and will just disagree here.

rw

Can you clue me in to your perception? I can probably tell you just how to accomplish excellent lateral imaging complete with full depth of perspective with 32 channels. It more complicated, but its has been done over over again.

[E-Stat]

Can you clue me in to your perception? I can probably tell you just how to accomplish excellent lateral imaging complete with full depth of perspective with 32 channels. It more complicated, but its has been done over over again.

There is an acoustic that exists between and among the instruments in a symphony orchestra. Close mike each instrument and you get the sonic equivalent of blown up images that lose their perspective. Just like my visual analogy by taking 32 picture slides of the instruments and viewing them simultaneously. Everything's there - but with no perspective.

Jack Renner avoids that effect by not using a "cast of thousands" mike approach. As do other engineers. I met him years ago while he was recording one of the ASO performances.

rw

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

There is an acoustic that exists between and among the instruments in a symphony orchestra. Close mike each instrument and you get the sonic equivalent of blown up images that lose their perspective. Just like my visual analogy by taking 32 picture slides of the instruments and viewing them simultaneously. Everything's there - but with no perspective.

Jack Renner avoids that effect by not using a "cast of thousands" mike approach. As do other engineers. I met him years ago while he was recording one of the ASO performances.

rw

E stat, I am not advocated close miking with 32 mikes as a practice. What I am saying is that a natural perspecitve CAN be achieved using many microphones. All that is needed is a very high sample rate, some delay boxes, and a extremely talented recording engineer who knows how to balance multi inputs.

You analogy isn't quite correct. The function of our eyes and ears are quite different, and processing for each is quite different. Ears are excellent at locate things amoungst alot of noise, are eyes cannot always locate things amoung crowds.

I don't use the "cast of thousands" as a practice, but I have used quite alot of mikes during some large symphony works to cover a large orchestra and chorus with soloist to boot.

[hermanv]

After reading some of the precending discussions, I found this web site which helps illustrate some of the techniques in a way that at least I can understand.

http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Article...echniques.html

Sir Terence; in an earlier post you said that centering a sole vocalist using conventional miking (by which I assume to be A and B miking using two microphones seperated by around 6-12 feet) would be most difficult. I think I see how that could lead to trouble.

Can you or JoeE SP9 explain (assuming it can be done in a format (short) compatible with a forum) why this problem also exists for the coincident microphone techniques, especially the MS (mid-side) three mike arrangement? From looking at the drawings and reading the description one might assume that this technique would excell at centering a soloist.

[JoeE SP9]

After reading some of the precending discussions, I found this web site which helps illustrate some of the techniques in a way that at least I can understand.

http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Article...echniques.html

Sir Terence; in an earlier post you said that centering a sole vocalist using conventional miking (by which I assume to be A and B miking using two microphones seperated by around 6-12 feet) would be most difficult. I think I see how that could lead to trouble.

Can you or JoeE SP9 explain (assuming it can be done in a format (short) compatible with a forum) why this problem also exists for the coincident microphone techniques, especially the MS (mid-side) three mike arrangement? From looking at the drawings and reading the description one might assume that this technique would excell at centering a soloist.

I never said there was a problem. I think your assumptions are correct. Some of the greatest recordings of all time were done with three mikes and no panning or processing whatsoever. I refer to the "living presence" recordings. Recording in this manner requires that the musicians play everything in a live manner with no re or overdubbing or sweetening in the studio.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I never said there was a problem. I think your assumptions are correct. Some of the greatest recordings of all time were done with three mikes and no panning or processing whatsoever. I refer to the "living presence" recordings. Recording in this manner requires that the musicians play everything in a live manner with no re or overdubbing or sweetening in the studio.

Your are not correct, all of Mercury Living presence albums and three track tape where mixed with a mixer using pan pots to position a left/center/ and right perspective. The albums had their center channel split equally between the left and right speakers to create a solid center image. All done with pan pots.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

After reading some of the precending discussions, I found this web site which helps illustrate some of the techniques in a way that at least I can understand.

http://www.tape.com/Bartlett_Article...echniques.html

Sir Terence; in an earlier post you said that centering a sole vocalist using conventional miking (by which I assume to be A and B miking using two microphones seperated by around 6-12 feet) would be most difficult. I think I see how that could lead to trouble.

Can you or JoeE SP9 explain (assuming it can be done in a format (short) compatible with a forum) why this problem also exists for the coincident microphone techniques, especially the MS (mid-side) three mike arrangement? From looking at the drawings and reading the description one might assume that this technique would excell at centering a soloist.

M/S mircophone arraingments are highly dependent on correct phase. If there is a wrong polarity in one channel, the M signal becomes 0 and the mono component of the signal is nulled out. If the S side is out of polarity, then you get nothing more than a L-R signal which is what ambient components are made up of(L-R is what achieves that rear channel in Dolby pro logic) This means that everything in the recording chain has to be of absolute correct phase from the microphones to the mixer or processors. A phase difference as little as 90 degrees will cause, after conversion to L/R position, a reduction of cross talk attenuation which narrows the sound stage, and displaces the sound sources in the middle of the mix. I have had this happen to me during a recording, and had to rely on a difference set of microphones to get my mix correct.