Recording Musical Theatre Recital

C

Chris_Mueller

Active member
For the past few months or so, I've been shooting college level Musical Theatre recitals at my school with the DVX and then putting them on DVDs. The student's weren't expecting much to begin with, so I didn't really stress out about getting the optimal sound; I just went with the internal mic with a difference in channel volume of about 25% (to compensate for blown levels). Then I mixed it together in post.

For the next series of recitals coming up in a few months, I'm planning on maybe trying to better the sound quality by throwing in some kind of external mic.

Here's a rough diagram of how the recital hall looks. The stage is pretty small (stage about 25-35 ft. in length) and the acutal space itself is small. The stars represent where I think I should place the mics. The big pink squares represent the audience, the smaller gray square being the stage. There's a piano on the stage that needs to be picked up, as well as the actor (or actors), who will be singing and speaking.

I'm not too sure about placement or the types of mics needed, but I was wondering if anyone could give me some suggestions. I don't have the budget for anything too expensive (~300-400$) so I'm left with the option of two lesser mics or one better mic (no mixer).

http://www.geocities.com/talksometime123/Untitled-1.txt


Thanks for the help!

Chris
 
Oh dude. Thats a rough question to ask on that budget! Isnt there a stage mixer or something you can take a feed from? Or is the venue un-miked?

You could get two studio-style big diaphragm condensers and put one at the piano, and one at the front of the stage for the actors. tricky.

Problem is, you arent going to be buying a mic thats an investment, and you'll probably hate the things after a while.

Or, hang on, maybe get a matched pair of Oktava MK012 mics, and stereo mount (spaced pair) them on the stage. At least then you're buying a good mic.

Hope this helps - thats a tough question with your budget!
Tim
 
Thanks Tom!

Thats the thing! Its a small recital hall with absolutely no stage mixer or anything. It is always unmiked because a.) the school has little money and b.) it's often used by the vocal performance/opera department, and in opera they never use microphones.

I was definitely thinking of the Oktava MK012. I wasn't too sure as to the "pickup" design, though. If it is a shotgun, will it have a wide enough coverage to pick up the piano at the same time as the actors? Would one be enough (with the other channel switched to the internal for ambient resonance)? I wanted to go this route because then I could eventually just use the MK012 as a boom for audio in dramatic projects.
 
I'd check out TapersSection.com...

That place has a WEALTH of information on recording music with setups ranging from low budget guerilla stealth to super high end audience taping gear. Trust me on this, go to that site, sign up for an account and you'll find so much stuff about recording music you won't believe it. But, "on a budget" prolly ain't going to happen if you want decent sound.
 
the Oktava is modular, but the cap you want is hypercardioid. the oktava cant be a shotgun. yes it'll work. BUT one mike wont pull it off - you would need to have a spaced pair or something to cover the stage. The ambient mike wont help much: everything just softer and more echoey.

As tainted said, on a budget doesnt help you much with sound. My main advice would be dont buy mikes you'll regret in a few years or months.
 
See if you can rent a Shure VP88 and just stick it in the middle near the stage. Its a mid side, one mic stereo solution and will sound great. MS mics are great for this kind of thing, broadcast use them all the time because if you record stereo with 2 mics and the dvd is watched on an old TV with only one speaker, half of the content will be phased out when the left and right are combined, with a MS setup this does not happen the stereo collapses in to a perfect mono signal. I have one for videoing live music if you want to buy one there about $800. Sony make a cheap MS mic for about 75 bucks but for that money I bet its crap.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...506&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...434&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation
 
The idea of a mixer is best.
Over the years, I've always placed one mike in the rear of the hall. This would always give me a "hint" of room noise, or a "reverbish" sound. Not always, but sometimes it could help the mix sound even more realistic.

Good Luck...
 
I agree. You have to have what it sounded like to BE there compared to what the board was hearing. You lose a lot of the feel if you don't pick up some room noise. I just used a shotgun mic to film Beauy and the Beast here in Fresno from the back of the auditorium and the sound rocked. I have been complimented several times about it.
 
Wow you guys, thanks for all the help!

The more I read on this, the more I'm liking the Oktava MK012's. They've gotten good reviews--apparently they test well in music recording applications--and they're relatively inexpensive. Plus I could perhaps use them in recording music later on, too.

Two Oktava MK012a's (only including one cap) would run $360 or so from SoundRoom, and I'm guessing they can match the caps for me. Which caps would I need? (Someone suggested the hypercardioid. Does this sound like the best over cardioid and omni?) Would these two work in the pattern I've described above? Does anyone here have experience with the MK012's?
 
Ah. I didn't even see the last two responses as I had the reply box open for so long.

I played around with the idea of having a shotgun mounted to the camera from the back of the hall. My writer friend is also pushing me to get a shotgun for narrative dramatic work. I suppose I could go with the Sennheiser ME66 or so (at a little more cost) if it would give me a vastly better sound than would the internal mic. It certainly would be simpler than setting up the two Oktava's. Would the sound compare to an XY pair as per described in the picture? The Oktava route seems more inexpensive, though, and there are two of them!

Steward: I could only dream of being able to mic and mix a theatrical performance via a bunch of mics and a multi-track recorder. Maybe some day :) I definitely agree though. That's why I kind of like the sound of the external mic; its sounds more realistic as opposed to, say, putting a wireless lav on the actor.

msconce (or anyone): Does the shotgun mounted on the camera provide a drastic quality improvement over the internal mic? Do you have any samples you could perhaps provide?

Thanks again everyone.
 
timapter said:
the Oktava is modular, but the cap you want is hypercardioid. the oktava cant be a shotgun. yes it'll work. BUT one mike wont pull it off - you would need to have a spaced pair or something to cover the stage. .
Click to expand...

No! For the configuration you've indicated, you want omnis. Widely spaced hypercardioids will give you very disjointed sound, and not much of a stereo image.

Further, placement for mics in a situation like this should be on the borders of the middle 1/3rd of the stage, not close to the edges as you've shown in your diagram.

Finally, most theatrical productions are sensitive to visible mics on the stage; and most mics don't sound good if placed close to the stage surface to minimize their visual impact. If you really want to do a lot of theatrical recording, either get some boundary mics (aka PZM mics) or hang a pair of Omnis or wide cardioids over the stage...

-Barry
 
Further, for any decent musical sound, you want to use a true stereo technique rather than "one mic for the piano, one for the singers" or "one for direct sound, one for ambient". Any reasonable stereo setup for your app will pick up enough of the room sound.

For your budget, I'd suggest a pair of MC-012's (see if you can get omni and cardioid caps for the price, but if you need just one, go omni), and a Presonus BlueTube preamp. Or, as I say, if visible stands is a problem, go for some AT boundaries. Hypers are not really good for stereo recording... but you can get 'em later if you need for the dramatic work.

Are you planning on recording opera, too? Talk to me first! Opera is a trickier proposition indeed...
 
hey man, I told him hypers because he doesnt have a lot of cash, and he'll use the hyper the most in situations other than theatre, so its a better buy. I think the guy is looking more for decent coverage than a pro theatre rig.

At his level, and with his budget, I dont think "a true stereo" recording is possible. He's thinking guerilla, you're thinking pro.

Plus, you dont have to use stands, if you get inventive its not hard to mount mics in clever places where placement is good, and visibility isnt high impact (you already mentioned one - ceiling hanging).
 
Dude! He asked specifically about recitals, nothing about general use. And "true stereo" isn't really limited by budget; he can easily cover most techniques with the proposed set of Oktavas. Unfortunately, "guerrilla" is usually a no-go when the folks staging the performance have worked their butts off on a one-time event - the recording is NOT the priority, so you've got to be professional, effective, unobtrusive, and unsurprising.

Sorry, I come primarily from the world of audio recording, primarily live events, and it's a different world in terms of both sound quality and the role of the recordist/videographer.
 
Hey Ullanta,

In his first reply to me he told me he wanted the Oktava because he could use it as a boom in other projects, so yes, he did ask about general use.

And guerilla doesnt mean ugly, in your face, obtrusive mikes - it just means thinking differently and sometimes compromising if you have a budget and also want to do other things with the gear you buy.

I too come from the world of audio recording, or I wouldnt post in this section. Yes, your advice is good, and true. Mine is just a more general purpose alternative. I know alot of new users struggle for cash - so multipurpose gear is a great thing to have.

I dunno, maybe get the Oktava's full cap set...

Cheers! :)
 
Sorry... I guess he did suggest "shotgun" for future use as you say. But, still, he's talking about a year of definite projects vs. potential future projects - and I'd say, in such a case, plan for what you know you need.

I've had fair success using a cardioid MC012 (even an XY pair) as a boom (my "guerrilla" side often involves sound-for-film, since I'm mainly equipped for music recording). I do plenty of "guerrilla" work, and understand the need for it, but it does tend to be sloppier and more prone to little glitches. And shooting serious productions (esp. full-scale operas!), any glitch that interferes at all with the show will be the end of your relationship with anyone doing similar work in (at least) your city. Video/audio recording is NOT at all a priority, and people will often say "just forget the whole recording" at the last moment if it causes any discomfort.

Anyway, Chris knows if this is the case for him or not, but he seems to have moved on to something more productive than bantering around here.

In any case, I think we'd both agree, an Oktava multi-cap pair is a good, pretty cheap, multi-purpose set of mics!

Re: the boundary mics and the article posted by GenJerDan: those are indeed commonly used boundary mics, and a common technique. However, I'd look for a wider pattern than the PCC160... either a wide half-cardioid or half-omni. Using narrow patterns like the PCC160, you tend to get a lot of variation between on-axis and off-axis coloration as singers move around the stage, or even turn their heads.
 
Hey guys, sorry for the lack of an update. I've been in rehersal all last night and all day today.

The purchase of these mics will be primarily for the purposes of recording these recitals, as well as other productions (musicals, and perhaps operas) in the same space for a good amount of time. I understand that I should invest a lot more into this, but again, to my dismay, the budget is not avaliable, nor can the buying students afford to pay for it. This is why I'd want to purchase something such as the MK012 seeing as it can be modulated to perform narrative work outside of the live recording work.

It looks like I want to go with a matched pair of the Oktava MK012's. This means I need to choose one of the caps to go with it. Here's the catch: I need to have something that will work in this environment but still provide for other recording opportunities. Which cap would work well for the recital environment? Which for narrative work? Finally, could this setup work in a studio environment to record vocals or piano or guitar, and if so, which cap would be ideal?

Thank you guys so much! There's such a wealth of information avalible here.
 
bloodyjack said:
See if you can rent a Shure VP88 and just stick it in the middle near the stage. Its a mid side, one mic stereo solution and will sound great. MS mics are great for this kind of thing, broadcast use them all the time because if you record stereo with 2 mics and the dvd is watched on an old TV with only one speaker, half of the content will be phased out when the left and right are combined, with a MS setup this does not happen the stereo collapses in to a perfect mono signal. I have one for videoing live music if you want to buy one there about $800. Sony make a cheap MS mic for about 75 bucks but for that money I bet its crap.
Click to expand...
Alright, you've inspired me to make one of my first value-added posts ever to DVXUser (I stumbled on the site a few weeks back because I think I'm going to be upgrading to a DVX real soon)...

For starters, there is no doubt in my mind that a set of external mics setup for stereo recording will sound ten times better than pretty much ANY internal mic. That said, if you only record in mono, I'm not as sure. Even with a good mono recording with a good mic, if the internal mic is stereo, it might sound better. Maybe, maybe not. Kind of depends. I think a single shotgun would sound like crap, but I won't even waste any more time on that topic.

Some of what was written (in the quote above) isn't quite right. Mid-Side is not really a type of mic, it is a type of stereo micing configuration that uses two mics: typically one figure-eight and one cardioid. One mic is recorded to one channel, and the other mic recorded to the second channel, and then you must "decode" the two mics into a stereo image (this requires adding and subtracting the channels to/with each other, but I'll skip the technicalities). Now sometimes, in the case of the mics that were linked to, the manufacturer crams both mics into a single body and includes chips to do the MS decoding on-the-fly for you som you don't even know all of that is happening, but suffice it to say it is exactly how I described it. This technique is not usually a good one for newbs to start out with because of the decoding step required (unless of course you buy one of the single-point stereo mics with it all built in, but they tend to be low-end mics IMHO). It's also worth noting that one of the awesome things about MS is that in the decoding step, you can completely control the stereo image (how wide or narrow it is).

Now, it is correct that MS stereo has good "mono compatibility," but it is NOT correct that all stereo-micing configs that use two mics have mono problems. I can think of three different stereo configs that use two mics right now just off the top of my head that are all mono compatible: MS, XY, and Blumlein. The key ingrediant to "mono compatibility" has nothing to do with having two mics, it's in the SPACING of the elements of the mics. In the case of "coincident" stereo techniques, the elements are always at the same spot in physical space. MS has both the figure-eight mic (pointing left-right) and the card (pointing straight ahead) are in the same spot. In the case of XY, two cards are positioned 90 degrees from each other and the caps/elements are in EXACTLY the same spot (which to an untrained eye actually looks kind of weird/unintuitive to the lay person), and Blumlein uses two figure-eights at 90 degrees to each other with the patterns 45 degrees to the sound source in the same location. By having both mics in the same spot, you remove the phase problems associated with sound delay because all sound arrives at both mics at the EXACT SAME time. In these configs, you get the stereo "image" from the directionality of the mic's pattern. HOWEVER, Blumlein can introduce phase issues because of a different reason: the back side of the figure eight pattern is picking up sound from behind as opposed from the front side of the figure eight picking up sound from the front -- picking up the sound from in front and behind can introduce sound that is out of phase with each other. MS doesn't suffer from that because the figure eight is pointing to the left and right.

Now, there are other very-popular stereo micing techniques that sperate the mics a small amount, they are called "near-coincident" techniques: DIN, NOS, ORTF are the most common. In near-coincident techniques, you shouldn't have too much of a problem with phase because the mics typically remain very close to each other still and you space them using very precise distances designed to limit phase cancelation. In DIN, you use two cards at 90 degrees seperated by 20 cm. In NOS, you use two cards at 90 degrees seperated by 30 cm. In ORTF, you space two cards at 17 cm with a 120 degree angle. And THE SPACING REALLY MATTERS in all of these, bring a RULER! The spacing is designed to limit phase problems by taking into consideration the speed of sound (among other reasons) and the distance and time the sound will take to make it from the one mic to the other.

The config with the greatest potential for phase issues are split omnis (aka "AB stereo"). AB Stereo creates its image from the delay of sound arriving at one mic as opposed to the other. This is different from coincident techniques which create the image from the directionality of the mics only. Near-coincident creates the image using a little bit of both: time delay and directionality. Which is why it is often the preferred method -- it often sounds the best, although that is of course subjective.

Problems can occur when people split the omnis over much greater distances, like 8' or more. With that setup, you've completely lost your mono compatibility (split omnis), with the near-coincident you'll have only minor issues (DIN, NOS, ORTF), but it can depend. With coincident configs (XY, Blumlein, Mid-Side) you'll never have a problem. Now, split omnis can sound awesome, but you've got to watch out for phase problems and extreme time delays between sound reaching one mic or the other. You can actually get stereo seperation with split omnis at as little as 30 cm, but there are times when wider may be better.

Now, of course, there are other methods for creating stereo sound. The most obvious is to mic every instrument or sections of performers, then using a soundboard, you simply pan each mic into it's proper left or right location in the stereo image. But that of course requires more mics, more setup, and a soundboard, so two-mic setups are a little more practical if you don't already have access to a SBD.

A few other things worth noting is that wherever you saw me use the word cardioid or card, you could substitute a hypercard instead (or maybe even a shotgun god forbid, but I'd avoid that at all costs). You will sacrifice some sound quality (hypers may be great for recording dialog, but cards and omnis are by far the standard for music) because of the off-axis coloration of sound from the tighter pattern. But you will also gain something... And that is rejection of off-axis sound. That can be good for not only the same reason we all use hypers for dialog (rejecting the drunks at the bar when a band is playing in a bar), but also it can help reject some of the reverb/slop bouncing off the back walls or in an expansive space that has bad acoustics. So, typically in music, omnis sound best, cards next (which can also help if you're having feedback issues), then hypers, then shottys. If you're in a room with good acoustics, no ambient noise, and you can get close, I'd seriously consider split omnis. But if you like the sound, coincident or near-coincident configs would also be good. If you have a lot of ambient noise, bad acoustics, or are a little further back, I'd probably stay away from AB omnis and go near-coincident or conincident with cards. If things are really bad, probably go with coincident cards or possibly hypers.

And finally, if I didn't mention it before, near-coincident (as well as split omnis, the more split the more this is true) are a tad more boomy/bassy when compared to coincident. You can use this to your advantage. If the room is real boomy with a lot of verb or your mics are really warm, go with XY just to cut it back a hair. If the room is dead/flat, or if your mics are more brittle on the high end, then go with DIN or NOS to warm it up a bit.

Anyway, bottom line is, a stereo pair of cardioid condenser mics allow you to try a bunch of different stereo mic'ing techniques. And if you splurge a bit, you could buy a matched pair that have omni, card, and hyper caps so you'd have the most flexibility. A different approach would be to buy a single-point stereo mic that has two elements built right in so you don't have to mess with it. There are some MS and XY-based single-point mics that are out there, but they tend not to be the best mics and they don't permit much tweaking when compared to what you can do with a stereo pair. On the other hand, they are a lot easier to set up, and they'll produce much better sound than an onboard mic that's for sure.

And one last thing... You can always plug this stuff right into your cam, but when it comes to music, the sad truth is the pres and a/d in pretty much all prosumer cams are total crap. So, if you can afford it, you'll gain a lot of quality by running your mics into a good external preamp and then run line-in to your DVX (and thus bypassing the DVX's pre). And if you really want to do it right, you'd use an external recorder and analog/digital converter (a/d) and just skip the cam's audio section altogether. But hey, you've got to start somewhere, so mics are definately the place to start, and knowing the configs are the next place to go, and then pre's and a/d's probably last.


And don't forget, when it comes to mic'ing, it's always: LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION. Mic all the way in the back of the room, and it's bound to sound like total crap.

Well, that's it for my first real substantial DVXUser post! Phew!!!

-- Taint
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top