UTILISING REFINED MICROPHONE CHOICE AND PLACEMENT TO ACHIEVE OPTIMUM TONAL, TEXTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS by Seán Mc Keown Submitted to Department of Music, Media and Creative Arts in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in Production of Music and Audio Dundalk Institute of Technology May 2015
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
UTILISING REFINED MICROPHONE CHOICE AND PLACEMENT TO ACHIEVE OPTIMUM
TONAL, TEXTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS
by
Seán Mc Keown
Submitted to
Department of Music, Media and Creative Arts
in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the
Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in Production of Music and Audio
Dundalk Institute of Technology
May 2015
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dundalk Institute of Technology and its entire
academic, technical and administrative staff, but in particular to the lecturers and supervisors
that facilitated and supported my academic journey from the very beginning. Their guidance
was always encouraging, and this research paper in particular, would not have been possible
without them. I would also like to thank my peers, family and friends for their constant
support throughout the year.
Abstract
The average listener does not appreciate the technical and aesthetical art of microphone
choice and placement employed by audio engineers and music producers, in order to
effectively capture tonal and textural characteristics within an environment. This research
paper will examine a series of resources and focused interventions to examine the pickup and
rejection characteristics of various industry standard mics1 and their relationship to placement
within an environment, with regards to both the soundsource and the recording space itself.
Effective capture of a soundsource at the recording stage is the first and arguably the most
important step in the production process, which will likely have most affect on the finished
product. The research detailed in this paper will allow a more active and considered approach
to achieving the tailored tonal and textural characteristics, which musicians, producers and
engineers envision for each of their recordings; while the average listener has come to take
this for granted, and expect from a commercial recording.
1 Throughout this paper, the word “mic” is a shortening of the word “microphone”.
Table of Contents
i
Table of Contents
List of Figures ...................................................................................................... ii Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background Overview 1 1.2 Action Research Overview 2
Chapter 2: Background/Literature Review ........................................................... 3 2.1 Early Recorded Music and Microphone Development 3 2.2 Understanding Microphone Charateristics 5
Chapter 3: Methodology ........................................................................................ 6 3.1 Pressure-Operated and Pressure-Gradient Microphones 6 3.2 First and Second Order Microphones 8 3.3 Interventions 9
To view the full survey, and responses, please visit: http://goo.gl/forms/kKZXD6mFFG
Focus Group Transcription: [Wednesday, 18th March 2015. 09:10]
Neil O'Connor: Okay, so this is Sean's Action Research focus group presentation, so I'm just going to ask him to introduce the topic briefly, then we'll discuss topics related to the questions here. Okay, so if you just wanna go ahead and give a small -- Sean Mc Keown: Sure, okay so my question was -- I'm paraphrasing here, "How can refunded microphone choice and placement help to achieve optimum tonal and textural qualities and characteristics?". I'm looking at four, well three main things really. How the recording environment can affect takes for -- It's basically for recorded instrumentation, but particularly amplified electric guitars. And then, how does the microphone choice and placement, on the actual amp itself, affect that? And then, I'm looking at, but not so much because I want look at the source rather than post, a little bit about how it's mixed. And obviously, that will have a big effect on what you've captured as well, and how you're utilising that. And basically, at the moment just working through, trying to narrow down which variables I want to try and examine first. And just build it up form there, getting slightly more advanced as I progress through the interventions. Michael Pender: Are you sticking with one particular instrument? You said guitars, is that -- Sean: Guitar, yeah. I'm going to have one recorded passage, say 30 second in length, and it's actually a passage from one of my tunes from my production project, and it has some rhythm elements and some more lead elements, so I can capture a balance of both. As opposed to just doing it for chords, or just doing it for a lead line, or just doing it for a solo or whatever. Michael: And are you going to change your mic setup in between -- Sean: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, yeah. Neil: Are you happy with the route you've taken so far in the initial part of the research, not the actually caring out of the research? Sean: Yeah, I found that the thing that was hardest for me was narrowing it down really, because obviously there's a million different ways you could record one guitar amp in one room with one mic, never mind twelve
Conclusion
16
mics and a live space and a few amps or something. The research I found is really good, it's just trying to implement that well into what I'm trying to do, as opposed to just doing something because it sounds like a cool technique. I'm trying to fit everything into the context of me, trying to highlight my skills and highlight to the reader, or whoever's going to be looking at my work, the work that goes in and the differences that the small things can make, like a few centimetres on a microphone here and there. Daragh: Have you looked at recording the guitar with more than one amplifier? Sean: I've thought about it but, I'm sort-of thinking, because I'm trying to -- Like I was saying, the thing I've found hardest is being focused on a certain thing. I'm going to stick to one soundsource and sort-of examine that very well, before I would move on to, or even think of moving on to having more than one sound source in the room. Daragh: Get the basics right, yeah? Sean: Exactly. I was thinking of doing -- we don't have any amps with stereo cabs or anything, do we? 4x12's or anything we could rob? Neil: [No.] Sean: Alright. Because I'd like to try stereo techniques with one [mic] on each speaker and that sort of stuff, because I'm just used to doing that with a mono cab. Neil: So, do you feel that because of those limitations there are things that you can't carry out? Sean: Yeah, and they're definitely techniques I could see myself using, if I had them available to me. So, it's definitely things I'd like to investigate, because from seeing other producers do similar things, and the sounds they've got on their records, I thought it was really good, and it would really suit what I'm trying to go for in my production. But, at the same time, because being limited I could possibly... Neil: You could be a little more focused on one single idea. Sean: Yeah, yeah. Or even, get better sounds of trying to emulate that with a "one speaker cab", and that sort of stuff. Neil: Does the tone of the cab -- how are you going to A/B differences between the tone of cab, the polarity of the microphones -- So you've got the tone of cab, the polarity of the microphones and the modes of rooms. You got three different conditions that can alter the sounds. Have you thought about that categorically, in terms of -- What are the variants of amp tone? What are the variants of a polar pattern, within a room? Sean: Well, I have a few experiments lined up where I keep everything fixed, or as much as I can fixed, apart from one variable. So say, if I want to examine the polar pattern, I was going to get four [AKG C414 XLSs], cardioid, hypercardioid, omni and figure of eight, or whatever, put them all six inches or a foot in front of the grille. Or even try it at different distances and then just playback the one passage of the recordings simultaneously [in Pro Tools] and be able to compare. I've looked less actually at the comparison between either tones on one amp or different amps, because I plan on working more so with one amp and sticking with that. That should be something that I should look into that, then. Maybe examine that as well. Neil: I think -- yeah, I think having a difference between maybe a low end amp, and maybe something a little better. A tube amp, perhaps. Michael: You could, potentially -- I know you have to get your recording project done and all but, if you wanted to push it and do some extreme examples. Just to have, even if you knew something wouldn't work out, or be a sound that you wanted. One day here, we were doing guitar for one of my tracks and we threw out a mic out into the [studio complex] hallway, and it was like, really washy, and the notes were blurring together, and it was a mess. But, it sort of was the sound I was looking for, but like you could do something more left-field like that, even if you knew before you stared, that it wasn't going to be your sound. You would have something in there that you could say, "I did this, it isn't what I wanted, but it is this sound'. Sean: And why it did, or didn't work.
Conclusion
17
Michael: Exactly, yeah, compared to the closer miking that you did, and the better sounds that you got. Sean: Yeah, I was thinking for each intervention, maybe doing -- well, obviously, time constraints is a big thing. But, one experiment with microphone placement, one with the room. Then, the ones with the mix, like I was saying, they can be done after obviously. But then, maybe trying one technique, like the drum tunnel thing, or one technique that's a little more left-field or something. Although, I'm wondering "Would that leave a gap somewhere in between?". Because obviously, you'd have to go in depth to explain these more complicated techniques, whereas the first half of the report or whatever might be very basic, then it could jump to these much more complex techniques. For the reader, that might be -- Michael: It might help if you had a basis for them, as in, if you heard a guitar sound in [a commercial] recording, and tried to reverse engineer it, or heard some weird techniques that other producers do, you'd have less explaining to do, to contextualise it. Neil: Yeah, if you had a source of reference that you could link it to. Sean: Yeah, yeah. I get you. That's good, yeah. Neil: Like you know, Albini records in stairwells. That Led Zeppelin story, Where the -- Sean: Levee Breaks? Neil: Levee Breaks story, where the new drum kit was delivered. They set it up in the hallway, but it was in a giant country mansion, three floor, kind of tiered. John Bonham went out and started [playing] it, but the recording was in a -- I think it was like a mobile recording truck. Sean: That was the Stones' one, wasn't it? Neil: Yeah. So they were like, "What! This is an amazing drum sound!" And the engineers were like, "What? There's nothing playing." "Well, where's it coming from?" It was John Bonham, playing in the giant, kind of promenade, entrance to the house. So, there's two references you could directly take from. "This is reference to XY and Z." You can contextualise the idea with a research background. Sean: Cool. Neil: Any other questions? Michael: It's hard to talk about something so specific. It's almost like, you've such a straight path that you can only go off in certain directions, really. It's good, because you can be focused. Sean: Can I ask you some questions then? Neil: Of course. Sean: If anyone wants to step forward and give themselves as an example, how have you found you approach your guitar recording? Would you say you put a lot of thought into it, or is it techniques you would have seen someone else use? Or, is it a signature technique? Scott McLaughlin: I think it's important to experiment with it. And experiment with different polarities in microphones, that's personally me. Sean: And in studio? Through the monitors? Scott: I kind-of have a set template when I go in like, for a starting place -- "414, right here". You know the exact position you're going to place it, and start getting your sound. Then I develop the sound, and say, "Right, what would happen if I put this mic into the mix?" But all my thinking is methodical, because we're so limited on time in studio. I'll set an hour or two hours to record guitars. Sean: And would you find that you need to fine tune much once you're in the studio, or would you generally be happy with what you've got?
Conclusion
18
Scott: Is this for the editing process? Sean: No, for when you're in the studio, capturing takes. Scott: Em. I find, I do put a -- like, can you rephrase that one more time, sorry I think I was thinking of something else. Sean: Would you need to -- would you find that, once you go in, if you have your amp, and your [AKG C414 XLS] and your [Shure SM57], or whatever -- em, would you find you'd need to do much fine tuning, to be satisfied with the sound you're looking for? Scott: Ah, of course. Yeah, you couldn't -- you have to mess around with the amp first of all, to get the kind of timbre of the sound that you're looking for, for me personally. Sean: Mhm, yeah. Scott: But em, sometimes the guitarist comes in with his own -- kinda goin' back to Daragh's subject a bit, but sometimes the guitarist has a set kind of sound they want. And it might not necessarily fit in with you production vision, so you could find ways around that. Sean: Yeah, find a way to fit it in. Michael: If you wanted another -- sorry, I know you were about to ask another question, but -- If you wanted another comparison, you could D I a guitar sound, and process it to sound maybe near what you need. Because then you'd be removing two of your variables, the microphones and the room, and it could give you -- again, it could just be something for the sake of, "you know it's not going to sound what you like", and it would be interesting just to remove those elements, because it will emphasise the importance of ambiance to your paper as well. And -- Ashling Grufferty: Mhm, yeah. James Nolan: You could always come back and use a convolution reverb afterwards, and simulate a room. Michael: I'm not, yeah -- the more I'm recording, the more I like D I 'd sounds sometimes. Yeah, obviously -- Sean: Yeah. Michael: They don't suit every ((production, but)) -- Neil: Yeah, stick it straight in to the desk. Sean: Well, I think I'm going to reamp -- Scott: Sans-Amp plugins -- (inaudible) 12:51 Sean: ... all my stuff anyway, but I hope to have a D I 'd {CG} passage to work off, but em -- I didn't really think of getting a sound I like, in here, or even off a record, and then trying to emulate it in Guitar Rig or something like that, so that's -- yeah, that's something I'll look into. Neil: Or the amp sim- eh, emulation thing, the Sans-Amp thing is another recreation -- Scott: Sans-Amp is the business, man. Especially for a plugin, and it's a stock Pro Tools -- Neil: It's great. It's great on bass, I find. Sean: Yeah. Scott: Looks deadly in {NS} (inaudible) 13:20 . Neil: It's pretty good. But even in terms of -- like when I record at -- in our studio wee have, eh -- it's an Epiphone -- it's an 1966 Epiphone amp, which is really old, really dirty, and really noisy. But the context of the sound is great, so we try using combinations of mics on that. Anywhere form an SM57, hanging over -- and then
Conclusion
19
a kind of close, off-axis on the speaker. A Neumann TLM103. Sean: Mhm. Neil: And, a combination of those, and maybe an ambient mic also. So, anywhere from three to four mics, if not more. Sean: Mhm. Neil: On a single amp. Sean: Yeah, I plan to do some -- It'll all be one mic setups in order to listen to them individually, but I want to be able to -- Say I have like an [Steve] Albini, light and dark, approach -- If I have a [AKG D112] and a [Neumann KM184] or something, and then I was thinking of -- for my listening tests, I was going to start a take with one microphone and then fade in the second mic, and then maybe fade out the first, so you can get a balance of -- James: An evolving sound. Sean: Yeah, exactly. And dynamically, as opposed to "Here's one, here's the other, or here's none", whatever. But, again, that's -- the thing I've found is, there's so many things, and so many ways that I can do things. I've found it hard to focus on a select few, because every technique, or every producer I read about has some great idea. I'm like, "That's brilliant", and write it down, and I've just got sheets and sheets of brilliant ideas. [Laughs]. Neil: Right. Sean: That I can't use. Daragh: Can I ask you, is your goal to find to find a signature sound, through guitar? Or is it to find the right sound for you, or the production, or what exactly is the goal? Sean: Essentially, I'd like to give myself, and anyone else who is reading my research, a better idea of how to approach guitar recording with more methodical and informed way. As opposed to going in, putting up a mic -- You might be able to get a great sound using your ears, and that, for a lot of producers, that might be fantastic, but I'd like to know, really know why, and be able to take advantage -- Daragh: Why it is, or is not a good sound. Sean: Exactly, yeah. Be able to take advantage of why, maybe if you're using mics, and you get a phase EQ going, and you start playing around with stuff like that. I almost want to be able to look at a [mic] setup, and see -- Daragh: Yeah, to get the right sound, is it? Sean: ... what I need to do, before I do it. Not necessarily a "good" sound for all my productions. Daragh: It's the right sound. You wanna be able to get -- Sean: Get the desired sound. Daragh: Visualise the right sound. Sean: Yeah. Daragh: In a setup sense. Sean: Yeah. Daragh: 'Cause I know, as a producer, we all have these sounds in our heads that we all try and obtain through recording. And, personally myself, you always fall short of. Ashling: Mhm. Daragh: You know, you have these sounds in your head.
Conclusion
20
Sean: It's a compromise. Daragh: It's not recording a synthesizer or something like that. It's like, you know -- There's more of a human element to it. And I was just wondering if you were looking for this perfect kind of sound, because you kept saying, a lot of producers have this signature sound -- Sean: Mhm. Well, a lot of them might have signature techniques , but-- Daragh: Techniques. Sean: ... it mightn't necessarily be called for every time you're recording a guitar. Daragh: Mhm, yeah. Neil: Mhm, yeah. Sean: I think, because it's something that's fixed, it's not really something that will vary, the amp isn't going to move around the room -- Neil: Mhm. Sean: ... as the guitarist's playing it. So, I'd like to go in, and obviously you're on a time constraint in studio, and just go, "Right!". Walk around the room, set it up, "Yep, there. That's it". And just eliminate a lot of messing around, a lot of fine-tuning. So I really want to just hammer home the knowledge of -- Daragh: Perfect the craft of -- Sean: Yeah, exactly. Of getting a good guitar sound. Daragh: Mhm. Sean: Like you were saying, other times, it's not where I want to be. It's good, it's a nice guitar, it's a nice amp, it's a nice mic, but it's not the sound I'm looking for. Neil: Mhm. Sean: Especially since I think the environment can have, and the mics and all, can have such a massive difference, and much more so than in the mix, doing everything in post. So I want to get it at the source, and then obviously that'll help me hopefully when I'm doing {NS} (inaudible) 17:45 , or if I'm doing some acoustics and that sort of stuff. Maybe a little less, but -- Daragh: I've never really found a guitar sound, that I've been really happy with in that sense, but I've found that the imperfection of recordings as well, is what gives them a human element and stuff. Sean: Well, the human element will be less, obviously the microphone choice and the placement within the room and stuff. Daragh: Well, a sound sounds more natural, if it's existing in a room. Sean: But that wouldn't necessarily be a human element, there's only a human element in the playing. Human element in the choice --
Conclusion
21
Daragh: Human element to the sound, is it not? Sean: No, it'd be in the playing, I suppose really. Daragh: Really? I just kind of thought a natural environment, that you're recording in -- You can hear that. Sean: You can, but I wouldn't say that's a human element. Daragh: Mhm. [Pause] Sean: Well, no I think that'd be more so down to the player, and obviously, again you could go in depth to the playing style, and how they're picking, hitting the strings, and how their string gauge is gonna affect all this as well. It's say that would be more the human element. But I wanna be able to go in and hammer down things, that aren't a human element, that aren't going to change. Daragh: They're constant. Sean: Yeah. Neil: Any more questions? OK, thank you. Sean: Cheers. [Applause]
Intervention / Listening Test Specifics:
Guitar: Fender American Stratocaster 1962 Vintage Re-Issue Amplifier: Fender Super Champ x2 Head & SC112 1x12” Cab
Microphones, positioned in an acoustically treated studio live room, were run through an Audient ASP 8024 console, and recorded into a Mac Pro running Pro Tools 8 HD via a Digidesign 192 I/O. All audio was recorded as 24-bit, 44.1kHz, WAV. Apart from some essential truncating, no corrective or creative processing took place, in order to maintain the natural characteristics of any recorded audio.
Note: Positioning of the amplifier within the treated live room is kept constant throughout, apart from where stated. The guitar and amplifier settings were either of two configurations which differ slightly along with the alternating audio phrases used throughout (Setting / Phrase A: Examples 1,3,4,5,8 / Setting / Phrase B: Examples 2,6,7 ). Microphone positions are stated in [distance from amplifier x height from ground]. Also, [LDC] refers to a large-diaphragm condenser mic, [SDC] refers to a small-diaphragm condenser mic, and [Dyn] refers to a dynamic mic.
The variants stated below are faded into each other throughout the examples, at equal power. For instance, an audio example investigating the effects of on/off axis microphone positioning would be as follows:
Constant: Sure Beta 57 [1”] / Cone centre / Cone height Variant: Axis On / Off
The audio clip starts with only the On Axis mic audible, but then fades in the Off Axis mic until, by the middle of the example, both mics are at equal level. Then the On Axis mic fades out during the remainder of the audio example, leaving only the Off Axis mic audible by the end of the example.
Annotated Bibliography: [1] Sound On Sound. (1998). Mic Types and Characteristics, [online], available: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr98/articles/mic_types.html [accessed 03 November, 2014]. Paul White provides an introduction to general microphone types and characteristics in
this Sound on Sound article, which would provide me with a solid foundation for my initial
action research investigations. While the publication is aimed primarily at intermediate and
professional engineers, producers and mixers; the author does not alienate his audience
through the use of superfluous and over-complicated terminology, specifications or analogies.
The article somewhat takes on the format of a “buyer’s guide”, as the cost and accessibility of
the various microphone technologies are principal issues for the average producer and
engineer.
Microphones varieties found most commonly in professional and project studios, such
as dynamic, condenser and back-electret, and are discussed, as contrasts and similarities are
highlighted between the various types. The range and depth of this piece could have been
greater, however this article serves its purpose well as a background on the subject. Also, any
cases presented use vocal recording as an example, although these instances are just as easily
applied to my chosen area of research, guitar amplifier recording.
[2] Sound On Sound (2007). Using Microphone Polar Patterns Effectively, [online], available: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/mar07/articles/micpatterns.htm [accessed 14 November 2014].
In this Sound On Sound article, Paul White provides a detailed and rational guide to
microphone polarity patterns for engineers and producers. Whereas many articles simply skim
the tip of the iceberg that is this subject, including only brief descriptions of polar patterns
basic characteristics, White delves into the application of these patterns and clarifies the
physical principals behind their operation. The article provides adequate groundwork for
research on my chosen topic as it concentrates on “single microphone” applications.
The article is thorough in that it also remarks on many challenges faced when dealing
with the practical application of microphones with various polar patterns, such as the
proximity effect, small versus large diaphragm condensers, frequency directionality,
reflections and isolation. In order to achieve a musically pleasing result, we must maintain
that captured audio will be greatly affected by the combination of a microphone’s polar
Conclusion
25
pattern with many external sources. The significance of attention to the recording
environment itself, and the possible need for considered acoustic treatment are stressed here.
For example, choosing a particular polar pattern will not simply ‘colour’ the soundsource in
the same way that, for example, employing EQ would as many other factors come into effect.
Ideally, White would like to broaden the horizons of engineers and producers of all levels;
calling for greater deliberation over polarity patterns, rather than simply reverting to the use of
cardioid microphones for ‘dry’ and ’direct’ sounds, with the rationale to uphold this stating
that a “musically pleasing result is of more importance than absolute fidelity”.
[3] Shure Blog. (2013). Microphone Choice and Placement Secrets for Recording, [online], available: http://blog.shure.com/microphone-choice-and-placement-secrets-for-recording [accessed 03 November, 2014]. This contribution from published music production author Bobby Owsinski, examines the
range and combination of factors that can affect even the simplest of recording setups.
Surprisingly, unlike many other sources listed in this bibliography, the article encourages the
reader to be inquisitive in their recording processes, refraining from scientific or over-
analytical data charts and tables in the article content. Owsinski also reinforces the notion of
the reader (investigator and stakeholders) to rely on their ears and also refer to the recorded
tonal qualities in relation to a mix of instruments, where the accompanying instrumentation
may skew perceptions of the soundsource to be captured.
While this source is from reputable microphone manufacturer Shure, it is aimed
toward a prosumer, home studio market, and of a more fundamental level than I had sought
for the level of refinement I anticipate. However, this was a valuable resource for carrying out
general and preliminary research, troubleshooting various recording scenarios and
investigating both tried-and-tested and less conventional microphone selection and placement
combinations. Again, several considerations I had not anticipated were brought to my
attention and this is a definitive resource for establishing the fundamentals of this subject.
This article helped me to narrow focus and define my own action research objectives, giving
me an overview of the various disciplines of microphone recording and highlighting any areas
that I wish to refine or implement in my productions.
This article, written by Mike Senior, published author and regular contributor to
industry magazine Sound on Sound, compiles and examines a range of microphone choice
and placement situations. The article is based on techniques discussed by many leading
engineers and producers, during interviews taken from both the magazine’s archive and also
Howard Massey’s “Behind the Glass” (2000). This may be a fundamental resource in my
action research plan, as it discusses both commonplace mic selection and placement
techniques alongside more unfamiliar and ‘signature’ style practices utilized by accomplished
and respected industry professionals. Great reverence is shown to the process and Senior
examines topics such as; the soundsource, and its positioning within an environment; dynamic
and condenser microphones; single and multiple microphone setups; and employing ambient
microphones.
An array of audio clips accompany the article, allowing the reader to experience and
judge for themselves the perceived results of the investigations carried out by the author.
While the vast majority of “Sound On Sound” readers would predominantly be of a rock
background, the focus of a “desirable” sound reflects this here. Although this may or may not
be directly applicable to an intervention or production of mine, the article provides a succinct
and insightful breakdown of the acoustic and technical factors behind the subject matter. Also
discussed is the reasoning behind the employment of microphones and/or techniques and the
required mindset to obtain a considered, nuanced and desired sound.
[5] Bartlett, B. A. (1981). Tonal Effects of Close Microphone Placement. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, 29(10), p. 726–738, 01 October 1981.
Written by Bruce Bartlett, this paper studies the effect of microphone placement on the
reproduced timbres of an electric guitar amplifier alongside piano, voice and acoustic guitar.
Its focus is largely on helping sound engineers acquire “natural” and “balanced” sonic timbres
more effectively, via mic choice, placement and equalisation; although this report intends not
to define the ideal microphone placement for a particular instrument or situation, but to
indicate the range of tonal characteristics that may be affected by microphone placement.
Bartlett provides clarity through “scientific insight into a matter of subjective opinion”.
For the investigation of the electric guitar amplifier, objective A/B comparison listening
tests were carried out on peer stakeholders of the author. However, my concern is that during
Conclusion
27
these tests, pink noise was output from the amplifier, as opposed to a pre-recorded guitar
passage for example. This would have provided a more valuable reference point with regards
to the musicality of the recorded audio. Nevertheless, the report was well written and
provided me with great insight into the technical aspects and required mindset of this
investigative process. It is exceptionally coherent in that Bartlett promptly deals with any
questions that the reader may arise in the reader’s mind. Unlike other sources in this
bibliography, this report focuses less on the use of specific single and/or combined
microphone models being implemented, with the emphasis being placed on the acoustic
considerations of capturing a soundsource within an environment. Again, several
considerations I had not anticipated were brought to my attention and this is a definitive
resource for becoming acquainted with the complexities of this subject.
[6] Schneider, M. (2010). Microphone Choice: Large or Small, Single or Double? Audio Engineering Society Convention (AES 128), 8124, 01 May, 2010.
In this paper, Schneider gives insight into the behaviour of different microphone
constructions, giving guidelines for practical recording applications. This entails single
diaphragm, double diaphragm and omnidirectional microphones in both the near field and far
field. Large diaphragm condenser microphones are often misjudged as becoming less
directional at lower frequencies whereas Schneider demonstrates that it is rather a question of
diaphragm construction. The paper may be targeted at an advanced audience of sound
engineers and microphone manufacturers, but it is helpful in its hypotheses, which often relate
back to real-world conditions in a studio environment. Whereas other papers in my
bibliography largely focus on situations where technically specific equipment is employed, or
the sonic and acoustic challenges of appropriately capturing a soundsource, this paper
specifically examines how an array of microphone designs capture frequencies across the
audio range. Schneider also investigates the issues of omnidirectional directivity and queries
common conceptions of the proximity effect with multi-pattern microphones.
The data presented in this paper is quite meticulous in its detail and experiments take
place with precise elements in controlled environments. While this approach may be more
characteristic of a scientific, as opposed to a creative methodology, the findings presented still
provide the sound engineer with a terse breakdown of the varying behaviours observed in
microphones. The conclusions drawn, when properly applied in a studio environment, can
positively impact the sound engineers ability to appropriately choose and place a microphone
relative to a soundsource.
Conclusion
28
[7] Rayburn, A. R. (2004). The Microphone Book: From Mono to Stereo to Surround - A Guide to Microphone Design and Application. 3rd ed., Massachusetts: Focal Press.
In this update to John Eargle’s definitive work, Rayburn provides a comprehensive
guide to and analysis of; the history of microphones; sound transmission; the various
microphones kinds available; and microphone specifications, measurements and charts. This
can be particularly helpful for disregarding unsuitable microphones and determining an
appropriate mic choice on paper, in order to achieve a desired sonic outcome before entering
the studio. Also reflected upon is the positioning of performers and how to best determine a
suitable microphone array in a practical studio situation. Problematic issues such as, acoustic
reflections, sound bleed and isolation, are also addressed and investigated from practical
standpoints.
The book serves as a vast reference for employing microphones in many disciplines
of audio engineering including, but not limited to; single, multiple, stereo and surround
microphones; their associated technologies, techniques and practices; and their use in the
studio, broadcast and live sound reinforcement fields. However, this plethora of information
can often obscure the reader if searching for a specific sonic character or technique for
example. This book is a vital resource for understanding, not only how to choose a
microphone for any situation, but the reasoning behind this.
[8] Zagorski-Thomas, S. (2005). Shouting Quietly: Changing Musical Meaning by Changing Timbre with Recording Technology. Proceedings on the Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology (CIM05), 8124, 10 March, 2005.
While the title of this paper gives the impression that this may be a topic relating more
to cognition and perception, than real-world studio applications, Zagorski-Thomas
comprehensively addresses the combination of many physical and technical aspects required
to achieve a desired sonic character when recording. Such topics include; microphone
selection, placement, and polarity; the acoustic environment; separation; and equalisation.
Information on various other aspects of capturing an acoustic soundsource are also examined
in this article, including; tonal perceptions; dynamic timbral effects; and dynamic processing.
There are useful sentiments and practices that can be extracted from this paper for my
own research and investigations, even though the paper’s focus is slightly detached from any
one discipline and lacks any electric guitar amplifier scenarios, it serves well as a stimulating
piece that helps me retain objectivity over my research project as a whole. This viewpoint
assists me in envisioning, tailoring and capturing a desired timbre, and will allow me to more
readily integrate learnt practices and techniques into my studio arsenal and workflow.
Bibliography, Discography and Web Resources
29
Bibliography, Discography and Web Resources:
Massey, H. (2000) Behind the Glass: Top Record Producers Tell How they Craft the Hits, Milwaukee: Backbeat
Books.
Huffman, L. (unknown) 1917 - 1924 Victor Acoustic Recordings of
Leopold Stokowski and the Philadelphia Orchestra, [online], available: http://www.stokowski.org/1917-