|
Post by louishuddle on Feb 3, 2017 20:23:10 GMT
I am reading about SRA (Stereophonc Recording Angle). I am not understanding what it means by the Orchestra Angle when determining the desired set up. This page shows an example www.sengpielaudio.com/HejiaE.htm but does the angle of the orchestra mean the curve they are sat in, or the angle in relation to the microphones as if it were a triangle. If you are able to help explain this to me I'd really appreciate it. Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Hexspa on Feb 4, 2017 8:20:41 GMT
Hi lou. I know virtually nothing about recording.
However I put in some numbers into that calculator. What happens is when you set the orchestra angle to 0.1 (min value) then essentially you are micing a solo instrument effectively center panned. If you set the value to 180 then the instruments are surrounding your mic array in a semicircle.
What I briefly gathered from this SRA technique is that, based on polar pattern, distance and angle between mics, you find a distance from the source which is a blend of room and direct sound. That distance will be from a point in front of the mics (let's call that 0 degrees) and will become the foundation of your stereo image. The musicians can be situated in a circular arc emanating from that point up to 180 degrees.
Instead of thinking of it like a triangle, you should think of it more like a radius. The zero point between the two mics is the center of your circle. Orchestra angle =0.1 is the point on the circumference directly ahead. Greater values up to 180 spread the instruments out like a fan along that circumference to include surrounding the mic'ing position.
Or I could just be hallucinating.
-m
|
|
|
Post by rock on Feb 4, 2017 14:55:48 GMT
I found this page for you on the same site: www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-orchestraextension.htm which explains orchestra angle. Thanks for sharing the very cool mic setup calculator! I hope you realize that it's interactive and you can play "what if" with all the parameters including "microphone system". Thanks! Cheers, Rock
|
|
|
Post by Ethan Winer on Feb 4, 2017 15:28:58 GMT
Thanks Rock for finding that page that explains more. Maybe Arny will have something to offer too. I've recorded a fair number of orchestra performances, but I don't consider myself an expert. I've used an X/Y pair of small diaphragm cardioid condensers, and that always worked well enough. I'll add that the Decca Tree setup is very popular. That's what was used to record my performance of the Tchaikovsky Rococo Variations with the local symphony two years ago, and I think the sound quality was great.
|
|
|
Post by arnyk on Feb 4, 2017 16:23:20 GMT
Thanks Rock for finding that page that explains more. Maybe Arny will have something to offer too. I've recorded a fair number of orchestra performances, but I don't consider myself an expert. I've used an X/Y pair of small diaphragm cardioid condensers, and that always worked well enough. I'll add that the Decca Tree setup is very popular. That's what was used to record my performance of the Tchaikovsky Rococo Variations with the local symphony two years ago, and I think the sound quality was great. My experiences were with: (1) Choirs, large (ca. 100) to medium (ca. 20). (2) Bands, large to medium, same range (3) Something like the instrumental groups that one sees used with touring Broadway-style musicals. An interesting range of instruments, strings, wind, percussion and brass, but just a few or even just one of each. A few of the strings were electronic, e.g. electric guitars and bass guitars. On the order of 20 total musicians. Name of the game - make them as much as possible sound like a full orchestra or band if needed, or back it down to just the classic 4 man guitar and drums dominated group. IOW, a modern church musical ensemble, with maybe a small choir (more like a Madrigal) with vocal trio on the side. Or just the worship leader's voice plus orchestra. The one thing that stands out is that the pictures suggest what seems to me to be way too much theory and precision. Reason why is probably that the pictures seem to ignore room acoustics, especially that of the stage or orchestra pit. the beauty of micing is in the on-the-spot experimentation. Rehearsals are your friend! The first two types of recording I did used a predefined minimalist mic setup, which for me was almost always a single Rode NT4 fixed 90-degree angle X/Y stereo mic with no added eq. Of course, floor plan and height were up to me and that provided infinite opportunities for tuning. Distance and height are highly influential knobs to turn. For example, distance can be varied in ways that kinda simulate changing the included angle between the mics. Item 3 was done with close micing, some highly equalized mics even placed inside of (piano) or in the throat of the wood/brass wind, or inches from the strings or percussive element. The room was very reverberant, so one of the goals was to back the room out of the sound as much as possible. In SR if you don't do this to some degree, you get a double dose of the room (ugh). It was SR'd and recorded concurrently. The best situation was when the SR mixing and the recording mixing were independent and separate. However, pretty fair recordings could be made when the SR mostly defined the operating orders for the day.
|
|