> We know the source material, we know what a Steinway Grand should
> sound like, we know a good room when we hear it. The more recitals
> we have been to, the more we form our own idealised sonic result and
> the easier this task of discrimination gets.
Robin,
I like the analogy of a Steinway. We know what it sounds like to our
ears, but you don't get this sound by pointing a stereo mic at it any
more than you get an orchestra with a mic in the "perfect place" just
behind the conductor's head as was taught many years ago. The result
is just not acceptable. I'm a regular listener to the BBC Prom
Concerts and the sound mix acceptable to modern ears sounds nothing
like the Albert Hall which has an acoustic all of its own. You have to
be there to enjoy it even though you often can't hear the harp.
Interestingly, the Proms Radio mix is done separately from the TV
sound mix and is distinctly different using separate control rooms. No
headphones there. :-)
My minimum rig for a solo Steinway was five mics, necessarily mixed on
headphones. My current rig for wildlife is only a stereo pair, but the
placing is important. I record "long" then listen back and select
using various mic positions I have found satisfactory for birds,
ambience and reverb.
I tweak my recordings without apology, with special attention given to
the second dimension of distance, and the end result is better
than can be heard by my ears if only because my ears are often in bed
when my best stuff has come in. :-)
The end result is my interpretation, as it was with Steinways, folk
groups and best of all, marching brass bands. I usually took these to
match the camers image, bearing in mind that they would be edited to
bits later by someone else. Tubas going past in stereo is great fun.
David
David Brinicombe
North Devon, UK
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
|