|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.74.62.170
In Reply to: RE: Channel Classics Recording Session Mics posted by oldmkvi on February 13, 2016 at 07:49:10
Twelve actually. Did you like the sound of the Apasionado recording? It really is quite stunning.Five omnidirectional DPA 4006's were used as an ITU spaced array ala Bishop, and two for stereo. The remaining that you see within the orchestra are there for upstage instrument definition, and are incorporated in the mix at very low levels. There is also some microphone redundancy due to the fact that both a stereo and surround recording were simultaneously being made.
The entire mix was done in an analog desk prior to DSD A/D conversion. Very little post production, other than editing was performed on the resulting analog mix.
Should the 58,000 Euro cost of the van to transport the kit to Spain be sited? All this stuff is frightfully expensive.
Edits: 02/21/16Follow Ups:
In 1965 a friend and I were going to build a new studio in Chicago. It would have 2 music rooms and 3 voice over rooms. We went out to Westlake Audio to price out the equipment we would need. It came to, just for equipment alone, $1,500,000. We did not go forward because we could not get funding
Alan
How did RCA and Mercury make wonderful sounding recordings with only 2 or 3 mics in the 1950s? Many of the best sounding recordings in my collection are those recordings.
Not terribly different. RCA/Mercury used 2 or 3 mics for 2 channels, iirc. So here, we have 2 mics for 2 channels and 5 mics for the 5 channels. The occasional use of a "spot" mic is more subtle than the solo mic that was used for Heifetz.
Mercury did not use spot mikes. RCA and Decca did. Also all the equipment was tubes including the mikes. It was also all analog. I have never liked the sound of Channel Records. Maybe it is Ivan Fisher I don't like
Alan
RCA used spot mikes but Mercury used only the three spaced omnis. If they couldn't hear an instrument they had the player play louder or repositioned him further towards the front. Don't want to start an argument here but a big difference was all vacuum tube recording vs modern digital recording. I am not saying that modern digital can't sound great. The recent Reference Recordings of the Pittsburg Symphony are wonderful but there is something unique sounding with the 50's, 60's Mercury, RCA and Decca recordings
Alan
"there is something unique sounding with the 50's, 60's Mercury, RCA and Decca recordings"
That's really my point, the number of mics not withstanding.
On the Firebird, the English horn kept coming from different locations, depending on the passage.
And the Webern Celeste sounded like it was in the room with me.
Both had a very close perspective, seemed to blow-up the size of the groups.
No recent recordings of Orchs are anywhere near that close.
The Mercury's didn't seem at all natural to me.
The LA Phil Rite on DG is Very distant, with obvious Spotlighting of Woodwinds.
That's not Natural either.
Maybe the Mercs sounded good as as LPs.
The new Reference Recordings with the Pittsburg symphony, most noticeably the Beethoven 5th and 7th are super close up. You feel like you are sitting in the orchestra. Love it
Alan
The remastered cds sound very similar to the lps. It is very much an up front sound. I love it. The best current classical recording I have heard is Reference Recordings Beethoven 5 and 7 with the Pittsburgh Symphony. It is also a very close recording. Quite spectacular and great performances
Alan
Sure. I just wanted to point out that counting mics is making a simplistic analysis.
Many here claim that only 2 Mics are needed for Orch Recordings.
I'm only pointing out that NO major recordings are done that way.
Channel Classics, Reference Recordings and Blue Coast are considered to be Audiophile Quality.
They ALL use Multi-Mic Set-ups.
Blue Coast uses added Reverb, RR used Electronic Digital-Delay on SF. Ballet Recordings
I had an older Pitts Sym Single-Point Stereo Mic Recording.
It was thin, distant and generally NO Fun to listen to!
Audiophile Sound is a Result, Not a Method.
Edits: 02/25/16
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: