[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] How not to mike an orchestra



Mike Richter makes the most important and pertinent point about how a musician views recorded sound. Just take the most present Mercury Living Presence and knock up the presence about times 10 and that's what it's like sitting inside an ensemble. You can hear all kinds of detail that not even the conductor can hear. The conductor usually is getting a good dose of winds projected at his head, so he can't hear some of what a Bass player or Tuba player would hear. There are times when things are so loud, all you can hear are the six-ten players immediately around you, especially if you are a brass/percussion guy. SO, for them to hear 100 microphones all mixed down to two channels isn't going to be objectionable. They hear the guy wheezing next to them and why would it sound out of place on a CD?

One thing that the couple could be talking about is the marked improvement in background noise levels since the '60s. From the microphones, to the cables, to boards and electronics, everything is much quieter than in the '60s. They might be comparing multi-microphoned Columbia recordings from the '60s to something similar from the '90s. Because everything has a much lower noise floor, they perceive this as an improvement in recording technique, when the improvement has been in equipment and storage. All the microphone techniques used today have been with us for a long time. Because of modern materials, we can hear more detail (detail that an audience member can't hear).

Also, don't discount the fact that many players suffer from some amount of hearing damage (it's very prevalent in brass and percussion players). I know trombone players who played in jazz bands that have tinnitus.

Another thing about musicians is that they tend to project what they expect to hear over what they are actually hearing. It's like our spouse hearing a "yes" when we clearly said "no". That happens. If they've heard a particular piece hundreds of times, and they've played it too, they stop listening to details because they're intimately familiar with it. The recording is taken for granted. They just hear things that are "out of the ordinary", like a note that's changed due to errata, or some extreme of tempo, or a dramatic change in interpretation, etc... This is like our daily commute to work. How many can say they actually pay close attention to their surroundings on their daily drive?

Another thing: Maybe musicians are their own worst customers. I can draw an analogy to a home contractor that has unfinished jobs at his house (holes that need repaired, carpet that needs replacing). The musician plays music all day and doesn't really put that much effort into reproducing music.

Most musicians don't listen mid hall when they're listening to a rehearsal. I've noticed they get as close to the ensemble as possible. The mid-hall perspective is foreign to them.

Phillip Holmes

Mike Richter wrote:
Bob Olhsson wrote:

I got hired around ten years ago to record a woman who turned out to have
played flute in both the NBC Symphony and the New York Philharmonic where
she met her husband who played clarinet. Before leaving, we sat down with
the couple and had a conversation about the recording and broadcasting of
those orchestras. After some wonderful anecdotes about Toscanini and
Stokowski, I was shocked to hear them say they believed "recordings improved
so much after the modern technique of using lots of microphones instead of
only one started to be used."

What else would a flautist say? That is, she would probably have been unable to hear herself in the ensemble with only one or two mikes. When she has one all to herself - or to the winds as a group - she would perceive her contribution more easily. Whether that microscopic view and the resulting clarity of inner voices aids the overall effect is up to producer, conductor and engineers (in no particular order).


Note, too, that musicians may be poor judges of recorded sound; in general, they are not looking for the same things that make a recording effective to the home listener. In addition, they do not know what the orchestra sounds like when they hear it from within the group.

I have had very good results with limited experience recording with a pair of cardioid electrets crossed and mounted somewhat above the stage, one-third back and horizontally centered in a small hall. But whether that would satisfy the performers I cannot guess; it may have sounded too 'realistic'.

Mike


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]