ospam (WillStG) wrote in message ...
(Sidhu)
Yes, but u have the choice of ordering with just one kinda capsule.
and thats what ill be going in for right now. I think the Cardiod
(unless there are reasons for the other types).

The hypercardiod capsules will help you when you need to get less bleed
from other instruments in the room. And if you need to get really close to a
source, omni capsules (or omni mics like the ECM8000) won't give you a huge low
end bump when you don't want it (the proximity effect). So you can stick an
omni in the soundhole of an instrument for example, and omnis also often have
fewer phase problems in my experience when combined with a cardiod than
cardiods can with each other. I'd say pick up a pair of the ECM8000 (they are
$40 USD each or less here) and use them for close micing bassy or metalic
sounding instruments. But when you want omnis for stereo spaced pair use in a
room, get the Oktava omni capsules as they are quieter.


But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a
situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar
(both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like
to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a
scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if
i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each
other, then it might work. Also what kind of sound difference can i
expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up
reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred.

Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

and with the 012's which capsule to order ?


Thanks for the help.



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Sidhu wrote:

But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a
situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar
(both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like
to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a
scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if
i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each
other, then it might work. Also what kind of sound difference can i
expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up
reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred.

The side effect of the rear lobe is that you now have very tight nulls
around 120'. This means that if you can place one instrument so that
the other is in the null of the first's microphone, you get much better
rejection than with a cardioid.

BUT, let me say that the hypercardioid Oktava is pretty wide, and does not
have much of a rear lobe. The cardioid is wider than most cardioids too.

Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them
to be less metallic than they really are?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Sidhu" wrote in message
om...

But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a
situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar
(both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like
to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a
scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if
i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each
other, then it might work. Also what kind of sound difference can i
expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up
reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred.

Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

and with the 012's which capsule to order ?

I'd go for the hypercardioids. You'd get better rejection at the sides, and
on my mics at least, the hypercardioids are a little gentler on top, useful
for instruments that tend toward the metallic. Although frankly my
inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer ribbon such as an M260 or
M160.

Peace,
Paul

(Sidhu)

But i am a bit concerned about the rear lobe on the hyper. in a
situation say where i need to record a Tabla and a Dholak, or sitar
(both indian percussion instruments) together, The players might like
to sit facing each other. Now my understanding says that in such a
scenario hyper might not be a good choice. I rather go cardiod. But if
i cud get them to sit at an angle of say around 60 degrees to each
other, then it might work.

Well even if the players are facing each other you can still place the
*mics* at angles to each other. Sometimes as spot mics I have just stuck a 414
in figure 8 between two instrumentalists in a similar trio setting, with a
cardiod on the third instrument which was the softest one (harp or zither or
something).

Also what kind of sound difference can i
expect within these patterns ? but then the rear lobe might pik up
reflection off the facing wall, which ofcourse is not treatred.

What you do is try to place the null of the mic facing whatever you wish to
reject the most. You can always hang a packing blanket over a short mic stand
with the boom crossways forming a "T", and place that to kill rear reflections
if they are a problem. Usually they are low enough relative to the insturment
that it is no problem. And one thing I like about omnis close up is that they
capture the intrument in the context of the room, which is nice if you want a
more open sound.

Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

Sound like keys jangling or metal plates really test a microphone, many
just get brittle and harsh when confronted with that kind of a sonic challenge.
But omni microphones are easier to make sound good, and you can get close
without tons of proximity effect (which increases as the pattern progressively
narrows.) The down side of the ECM8000 is they are bit noisy, but if you can
get close enough they have a decent output level so that might not be a problem
for you. They definitely work for drums IMO.

and with the 012's which capsule to order ?
Thanks for the help.

Well depends how much money you have. If I were on a budget and needed a
lot of mics, I might consider buying a matched pair from Soundroom with all 3
capsules (about $640 USD) and then picking up a couple or more of them cheap
for $100 a piece (cardiod only) at Guitar Center. Then you would have a well
matched pair for stereo micing X/Y or AB, and whatever you weren't using for
that you could mix and match for another usable couple of spot mics, or maybe
for flank mics if the mic bodies on the single mics weren't too different in
response from each other.

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

Paul Stamler wrote:

Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer
ribbon such as an M260 or M160.

Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things,
but not for an M160.

--
ha

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...

The side effect of the rear lobe is that you now have very tight nulls
around 120'. This means that if you can place one instrument so that
the other is in the null of the first's microphone, you get much better
rejection than with a cardioid.

BUT, let me say that the hypercardioid Oktava is pretty wide, and does not
have much of a rear lobe. The cardioid is wider than most cardioids too.

OK. So what would you suggest to be a good choice of the two ?


Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them
to be less metallic than they really are?

Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK)
SDC, U87,
Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i
wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im
better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked
well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar).

I once tried stereo micing the Sitar. Using two 451's (one was an EB).
One on the bridge and another a little up the neck. The neck mic was a
bad idea. I removed it during the mix.

Also stereo miced a SWhankar Veena that time (New Indian Varient of
the Six string Spanish guitar, played with a slide, single peice
construction, hollow body, But no sound hole). Again one near the
bridge an another near the 12th fret. Spaced AB. One of the most
beautifull recordings ive done so far. I gave the mix to the client as
is. No Eq, No compression. Nothing.

I think there is a difference between sweet metallic and ear cringing
metallic. It's the former that im after.

Sidhu

(Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:znr1097846692k@trad...
In article writes:

So i also have the option of now picking up the Shure PGDMK6 drum mic
kit. It fits nicely in budget, but i doubt it would really be anything
to write home about.

You're probably correct, but if you don't already have a good drum mic
setup, having really great mics alone won't assure that you get a good
recorded drum sound. A kit is a good way to start, and you can
supplemente it later as you grow experience. If it's convenient and
will get your recording project started (the really important thing)
I'd say go for it.

Noted.

Sidhu wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...

The side effect of the rear lobe is that you now have very tight nulls
around 120'. This means that if you can place one instrument so that
the other is in the null of the first's microphone, you get much better
rejection than with a cardioid.

BUT, let me say that the hypercardioid Oktava is pretty wide, and does not
have much of a rear lobe. The cardioid is wider than most cardioids too.

OK. So what would you suggest to be a good choice of the two ?

Personally, I would pick the hypercardioid by a long shot, but that is just
me. I've got a review of the Josephson e22 microphone that ought to be out
in Recording magazine soon, which has some discussion about this. The e22
was built to be as directional as possible without creating a rear lobe. I
would have personally picked more directionality and the rear lobe, but the
original guy who commissioned the microphone design didn't like rear lobes
and wanted to be able to put a mike up anywhere in a drum kit without worrying
about that. It's entirely a judgement call.

Instruments like Sitar and the Sarod are very metallic in sound, yet
play soft. So it is important to close mic them. I usually have an
issue with the metallic sound of these instruments. Would using any
good mic in Omni help, or is the Behringer particualrly good at
tackling this issue ? We get the Behringer ECM8000 at bout 90 USD
here.

What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them
to be less metallic than they really are?

Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK)
SDC, U87,
Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i
wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im
better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked
well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar).

The one thing to avoid is mikes with a presence peak, which will really
bring that out. The SM57 or SM58 will really emphasize that.

I once tried stereo micing the Sitar. Using two 451's (one was an EB).
One on the bridge and another a little up the neck. The neck mic was a
bad idea. I removed it during the mix.

Also stereo miced a SWhankar Veena that time (New Indian Varient of
the Six string Spanish guitar, played with a slide, single peice
construction, hollow body, But no sound hole). Again one near the
bridge an another near the 12th fret. Spaced AB. One of the most
beautifull recordings ive done so far. I gave the mix to the client as
is. No Eq, No compression. Nothing.

My personal feeling is that sitar sounds much better if you just put it into
a very live room and pull way back and mike the room rather than the
instrument. This is a great sound for Indian classical music, but it is
very different than the modern Bhollywood soundtrack sound and a lot of
people don't like the more distant (and even hollow) approach. Never
dealt with the Shankar Veena.

I think there is a difference between sweet metallic and ear cringing
metallic. It's the former that im after.

My tendency is to urge you to pull back more and avoid anything with a
4KHz-6KHz peak to it.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
Paul Stamler wrote:

Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer
ribbon such as an M260 or M160.

Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things,
but not for an M160.

True. Well, he's mostly looking for drum overheads, which will then do
double-duty on other things.

Pity about the mixer, since M160s actually can make nice drum overheads. But
they're kind of out of the price range he mentioned anyway.

Peace,
Paul

Paul Stamler wrote:

"hank alrich" wrote...
Paul Stamler wrote:

Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer
ribbon such as an M260 or M160.

Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things,
but not for an M160.

True. Well, he's mostly looking for drum overheads, which will then do
double-duty on other things.

I like them as OH mics, too, and for lots of things. (I'm whispering so
Ty won't hear me say this stuff.) But they do need some preamp ooompf.

Pity about the mixer, since M160s actually can make nice drum overheads. But
they're kind of out of the price range he mentioned anyway.

Wonder if he'd be better off wth a fistful of 57's and a couple of
RNP's? g

--
ha

(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...

What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them
to be less metallic than they really are?

Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK)
SDC, U87,
Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i
wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im
better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked
well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar).

The one thing to avoid is mikes with a presence peak, which will really
bring that out. The SM57 or SM58 will really emphasize that.

I mentioned the mics above. Of these, could u kindly tell me ure pik
for such recording, and well stick to spot micing for now. Also
irrespective of the above mentioned mics, which would be your pik ?
Also throw in a word for the 012 for uch applications.

thanks

(hank alrich) wrote in message ...
Paul Stamler wrote:

Although frankly my inclination for those instruments would be a Beyer
ribbon such as an M260 or M160.

Except he has a little behringer mixer, which is okay for some things,
but not for an M160.


I think I am ok with this mixer for now. Thank you.

Sidhu wrote:
(Scott Dorsey) wrote in message ...

What are you using right now that is so metallic? And why do you want them
to be less metallic than they really are?

Well, Ive tried the 414 B ULS, 451 (the non EB), a cheap Generis (ADK)
SDC, U87,
Rode NT1, the 58 and Beta 58. But most of these mics i tried when i
wasnt good enough to know the diffrence. And now that i think im
better, i dont have access to these mics. I think the Beta 58 worked
well (used it recently). So did the Rode. (all references to Sitar).

The one thing to avoid is mikes with a presence peak, which will really
bring that out. The SM57 or SM58 will really emphasize that.

I mentioned the mics above. Of these, could u kindly tell me ure pik
for such recording, and well stick to spot micing for now. Also
irrespective of the above mentioned mics, which would be your pik ?
Also throw in a word for the 012 for uch applications.

If I absolutely had to spot mike, I would probably use a good dynamic mike
without a presence peak. Even the EV 635A, which in the US can often be
found used for under fifty dollars. I don't think I would use most of the
condensers because I would want somthing to tone the top end down a bit.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Ive been trying to get in touch with the sound room ppl. but there not
replying. I wanted to know how do they ship. (if it's a door to door
service, so I wont need to go the customs office). And if they can
make a cheaper invoice. There not getting back.

Sidhu

(Sidhu) wrote in message . com...
Ive been trying to get in touch with the sound room ppl. but there not
replying. I wanted to know how do they ship. (if it's a door to door
service, so I wont need to go the customs office). And if they can
make a cheaper invoice. There not getting back.

Sidhu


they replied.. mustve read this thread! ill order now

Sidhu

Just taken delivery of the Oktava MC012 stereo pair from the sound
room. Looking forward to using it. Thank you all for all the help.

Regards,
Sidhu