Well here is where there is unfortunately no answer except the one you
come up with yourself. All the known stereo methods have the ability
to produce very good results, and all of them at some times probably
won't. A lot of people are down on M/S because they feel that it's
somehow a 'false' stereo image, concocted with voodoo and math tricks.
I've used mainly M/S for years for a couple of reasons, mainly the
convenience of size, the ability to adjust the stereo image later, and
since I do mostly film work, I still have to be concerned with mono
compatibility.
ORTF can produce nice stereo, sometimes people tend to feel that it
can produce a 'hole in the middle', depending on how wide the mics are
set. A forward facing center mic would help. I think you'd have to be
careful about how far apart the mics are, three mics 'spaced' but very
close could have phase issues. You could also arrange the mics so
their capsules are aligned, in a sort of X/Y plus Center
configuration. This would allow you to adjust the width with the X/Y
cardiods, add a center, and not really worry about phase issues. You
don't get the benefit of the 'spaced' part of ORTF, but it would still
do a nice job. One more nice thing about an M/S mic is that it's
really recording that center channel for you, once the stereo image is
decoded, you can simply mix in some of the mid mic again. I almost
always master my M/S recordings as LCR now, to preserve the forward
facing mic as a center channel. It produces a very nice even stereo
image. This is best done by recording the two channel separate, and
then mastering through an M/S matrix later, when you master the sounds.
Blumlein, spaced omnis, Jecklin arrangements, all can produce very
nice smooth images as well, but aren't as directional, they pick up
360 degrees of sound, which is sometimes beneficial, sometimes, not. I
like using spaced onmis, but find often they pick up 'everything'
where as my M/S rig can be steered to avoid or downplay the highway
nearby, etc. If conditions are ideal, spaced omni is probably my
favorite stereo, somehow the 'depth' of it just seems nicer.
But experimenting is key,
Tim
On Mar 7, 2008, at 2:13 AM, ozrall wrote:
> My thinking (and questioning) was that the two L an R cardiods say at
> 90-110=B0 might record stereo ambiance better than M/S ?
|