Sanken COS11D and AKG CK93 samples for scene transition and intro music

I

IanB

Active member
So, after failing miserably with my audio in my last video I have decided to take some of the advice given.

1. Create an intro to your magazine/series so that it appears to the viewer like a chapter in a compilation of work.

2. Get better audio with mic position and focusing on where and how I am capturing the sound.
The quality of the video should be the same quality as the wine I produce.

3. Stay away from any post production work, until you I have good quality audio to work with.

Given the above three things I captured some sound from a friend of mine who plays guitar. I got him setup with (brand new mic for me!) the COS11D clipped to a portion of the guitar below the bridge. About 4 to 5 inches from the bridge. And my current hyper cardoid mic the AKG300se with the CK93 capsule. The AKG was about 8 inches away from the bridge mounted on a tripod/mic stand. Both were run using phantom power into the H4N.

These are my findings/comments without any input from DVX.

1. COS11d is a much brighter mic, and so levels were adjusted to make it the same volume as the AKG. Besides this point, the highs on the COS11D were much clearer, brighter, and had more atittude and 'twang' which I liked on the first song. However, the second song with open strings, I felt the bright clear sound didn't compliment the music as well as the AKG did.

2. AKG300se b with CK93 is a warmer mic? It picked up more echo/resonance of the room than the COS11d, on the first song, and dulled the picking. I didn't like this mic on that song. On the second song though, played with the full 7 strings or 'open' (as the guitar player put it) I felt the mic complimented that style of playing. Given the two options, I would take the AKG on the second track.

Questions to everyone here:
1. Am I headed in the right direction here?
2. Did I execute the recording technically correct?
2. Which mic do you feel went best with which song?

*The slide-show was just to get visuals to upload the audio and is made of all kinds of content not pertinent to the music/audio at this time*

 
The COS11D has a significant boost in the high frequencies and makes the guitar sound much too thin and bright IMO, it almost makes it sound like an electric guitar. If it's the type of sound that you're after then by all means stick with it but if you're trying to have a natural acoustic guitar sound I'd go with the AKG.

There isn't one way that works best for recording an acoustic guitar, it all depends on the type of guitar, the material, the way it's played and the room's acoustics.
First I'd try to find the room with the best possible acoustics. Have the guitar play in different rooms and listen carefully. If there's a room in which it sounds particularly good to your ears, that's the room you should record in.
Then I'd experiment with mic placement until it sounds right in the headphones. Sometimes it means having the mic face the hole (this will generally result in a fuller sound with more low-end), sometimes it sounds better facing the neck (usually brighter sound), either close to the hole or as far as the 12th fret, again depending on the material and the player.
Distance matters also: if your room sounds nice don't hesitate to take advantage of the acoustics by placing the mic farther away. That way you'll have a smoother sound and the most natural-sounding reverb (and if the room is very absorbant you can add a bit of reverb in the mix later on). Alternatively, if you have to record in a very bright/reflective space you might want to stay closer to the instrument. That way you'll also have sharper attacks which you can always even out afterwards with a little bit of compression.
And besides adding sompression and/or reverb in the mix you can always try to apply some EQ to compensate for a bright/dull sound, but that's more of a last-resort situation as you can quickly make the guitar sound un-natural and you shouldn't need to apply any EQ if you followed what I described above.
 
First, guitar was an interesting choice for this test. What drove that decision? The game will change drastically when you start working with dialog on-camera. It also may have been helpful to see video (wide shot) of the guitarist, and how the mics were set up.

My first thought between the two mics is that the Sanken is simply not the right choice for guitar. It's thin, tinny... lacking body. This goes for both samples, but lavs are typically not the right tool for this job. The AKG sounds decent on the first, not as great on the second, but that can be impacted by mic placement and playing style. I wasn't put off by the slight bit of room resonance picked up by the AKG, as it made it sound a little more live. Ideally, you'd record in a pretty dead room and add a little reverb back in.

Google it: there are several great tutorials out there for how to mic a guitar, and rotating the capsule to favor the neck or the bridge can help balance the low end. Usually, you want to place the mic about 10" in front, and start with it aimed straight on right about where the fret board ends on the body. Every guitar has a different sweet spot, so you just have to play around until you find it.

Again, this won't do you much good for judging the mics for dialog. For that, you'll notice a huge difference between the hypercardioid and the lav, just because the hyper will pull in some room resonance and the lav, being closer to the source, will be fairly dry. There will also be two distinct sound characteristics.

By the way...

IanB said:
On the second song though, played with the full 7 strings or 'open'...
Click to expand...

7 strings? Does he have some sort of custom-modded guitar, or was this a typo?
 
Just as an aside: In the recording studio we used to use a Sony ECM 50 on a special clip and we would mount it inside the sound hole of acoustic guitars. It would end up facing up into the strings from inside the guitar. In addition we would use a small diaphragm cardioid condenser. The mics were then blended to taste in the final mix.
Bernie
 
berniebeaudry said:
Just as an aside: In the recording studio we used to use a Sony ECM 50 on a special clip and we would mount it inside the sound hole of acoustic guitars. It would end up facing up into the strings from inside the guitar. In addition we would use a small diaphragm cardioid condenser. The mics were then blended to taste in the final mix.
Bernie
Click to expand...

There are several techniques for recording guitar, using one mic or multiple mics. The small-diaphragm condenser picks up the action and the higher frequencies that the lav inside the body doesn't hear. In Ian's case, I'm not sure I'd venture into that realm just yet.
 
Some great feedback here guys. the thing that is most helpful to me, is training my ears. My innocence/ignorance hurts my ability to capture sound. When I hear the recordings, I don't know what is a 'good' sound to my ears. With your feedback here I am learning more about what I SHOULD be hearing/looking for when I place mics and monitor the sound. Then I can adjust the mics and placement to get that sound.

Yes the lav was not my first choice when setting up for guitar, but it was brand new, and I just 'had' to try it out. And when I listen to the guitar recordings, the mic 'stands out' for me, but as C2V is pointing out, it is 'standing out' in a bad way (bright and thin). I would not have made this connection without your help.

Also, I am not judging the mics for dialogue on this test, only for this guitar work. (but I just had to try out the new mic, I mean, who doesn't want to use a brand new toy as soon as you get it?? (Sanken in my case))

The 7 strings, that was just what the guitarist said to me as he played different jams for me to record. I don't know what he meant by it, maybe there were 7 strings or maybe there weren't ?? If it matters the guitar had F holes, (like a violin I guess) rather than the standard single hole just above the bridge. That is why I had a hard time 'pionting' the mic, I wasn't sure where to point. In the future I will take this advice, and point higher up the neck of the guitar to reduce some of the low end.
 
One question: what are you using to monitor the sound during the recording and once you play it back on your computer?

If you don't already have one, a quality pair of headphones would help a lot to find the right sound during recording. An excellent pair to start with is the Sony MDR-7506. You can find them for less than $100 and they're used by many (if not most) sound mixers here in the US. You can also use them to listen to your recordings but I wouldn't recommend them for making adjustments since it'll end up sounding completely different on speakers.

A good quality playback system would be a worthy investment if you want to adjust/mix the audio but it's more expensive ($400~500 for a decent audio interface and pair of studio monitors).
 
IanB,
You need something to compare to otherwise you wouldn't know what is good or bad. Many audio recordists have a sound in their head so they can determine what sounds right to them. The benchmark is that remembered sound. Experience and lots of listening builds your internal library of sounds. Compare your guitar track to one you've heard before that you really like. Note the differences and similarities. You may not always hit the mark but at least you have something to shoot for. Everyone's tastes are different and that's fine, how boring if everything sounded the same.
Best,
Bernie


IanB said:
Some great feedback here guys. the thing that is most helpful to me, is training my ears. My innocence/ignorance hurts my ability to capture sound. When I hear the recordings, I don't know what is a 'good' sound to my ears. With your feedback here I am learning more about what I SHOULD be hearing/looking for when I place mics and monitor the sound. Then I can adjust the mics and placement to get that sound.

Yes the lav was not my first choice when setting up for guitar, but it was brand new, and I just 'had' to try it out. And when I listen to the guitar recordings, the mic 'stands out' for me, but as C2V is pointing out, it is 'standing out' in a bad way (bright and thin). I would not have made this connection without your help.

Also, I am not judging the mics for dialogue on this test, only for this guitar work. (but I just had to try out the new mic, I mean, who doesn't want to use a brand new toy as soon as you get it?? (Sanken in my case))

The 7 strings, that was just what the guitarist said to me as he played different jams for me to record. I don't know what he meant by it, maybe there were 7 strings or maybe there weren't ?? If it matters the guitar had F holes, (like a violin I guess) rather than the standard single hole just above the bridge. That is why I had a hard time 'pionting' the mic, I wasn't sure where to point. In the future I will take this advice, and point higher up the neck of the guitar to reduce some of the low end.
Click to expand...
 
Comments and follow up

Comments and follow up

This 'reference library of sound in your head' is what I am trying to build. However, it is difficult and will only come with experience. (however I am making big progress in just the few days I have been using the mic).

1. I realized the other day, that even though I followed all the directions for taping a mic up inside a jacket, after hearing the audio, the jacket had muffled the sound so it was un-usable. Like listening to someone talking behind a blanket. Now i am modified the jacket so it will 'hide the mic in plain site'. Paying attention to audio, (and not having enough experience) has me going back to the same location and same scene 3 times now. I would never have done this if the video looked good (and it does). So at least I am trying to get my audio correct.

2. For the guitar stuff, I think it is a steep learning curve (no background in music) so I hear a simon and garfunkel track, and think 'wow' how come my recordings suck compared to that stuff. Then I remember there is 100k worth of equipment to make it sound like that, I get discouraged (however, at least I know what it 'should' sound like). Mostly making the right choices in location, mic placement, and type of mic should get me to improve (and this approach is working).

3. For monitoring audio in the field and during editing I do have a decent pair of DJ (folding style) AKG headphones (80 bucks?). They are what I use in the field and they do sound great, however pin-pointing problems in the field is something I am learning (see example 1 above). These are not closed headphones, but it isn't there fault I am not identifying the problems. It's my own experience I need to improve.

4. In my home, I have a good Marantz 8000 amp, and a good pair of Monitor Audio BR2 speakers to listen too my audio, the problem, is that it isn't hooked up to my editing computer, so I need to listen to my 'mastered' audio through those before up-loading to vimeo I think. Need to figure out a way to do this.

Thanks for the help once again, and I hope I answered everyone's questions.
Ian
 
IanB said:
In my home, I have a good Marantz 8000 amp, and a good pair of Monitor Audio BR2 speakers to listen too my audio, the problem, is that it isn't hooked up to my editing computer, so I need to listen to my 'mastered' audio through those before up-loading to vimeo I think. Need to figure out a way to do this.
Click to expand...

Just FYI, that setup may be flippin' sweet for a home stereo but it is not going to be anywhere close to accurate for production audio. Home theater systems are designed for end-user listening so they modify the signal to be really "in your face" instead of flat and neutral. So a signal mixed to that system is going to sound drastically different (and not in a good way) on another system. Short of investing in some decent mix monitors and sound treatment for the room, you may find that you'll need to proof your audio mix on several different systems just to learn how each one affects the listening experience.

There are some low-cost monitoring solutions for computers, such as the M-Audio AV40 or the Roland MA-15D. These still are not ideal solutions and are not the flat, neutral monitoring that you really want for critical audio. Honestly, they're glorified home theater speakers that are sold as professional monitors. However, they're a place to start and at least give you some way to listen while you edit. Just don't expect audio miracles.
 
Ok...

Ok...

C2V, thank you for pointing out my problem. Your recommendations have been very helpful, I just wish my 'wallet' didn't have to assist so much after you post!

For now, I will work on capturing my audio correctly, then when it gets close to being 'good' I will pick up some monitors you referenced above to improve on the mix side of things.
 
My take.

Use drop shadow on your text so it pops more! OK not audio related, but useful.

Being that I record instruments often, I'll tell you a tried and true placement for a mic on the guitar. Aim the mic at the place where the neck meets the body, at about 12" or so. Closer will give you "proximity effect" which intensifies the bass. Pul back if you want less bass, or more room sound. Also the more you turn the mic toward the sound hole, the more bass you get. The placement you described doesn't suit recording guitar.

The AKG may get an OK sound if you got a different cap, say the "cardioid" cap rather than the "hyper" cap. The lav just ain't the right tool for the job. Maybe if your player was to sing too, place the lav on their left chest pointing up at the mouth. That's their left, not yours. That way when they look at their hand to make chords they are facing the mic.

I know these are the only mics you have, but if you were in a studio planning on recording guitar you can go a couple of ways with mic choice. For a solo performance a more bassy mic would suit it better, like a large diaphragm condenser for VO. If your guitar will be mixed in with a full band, then a small diaphragm condenser would be good, as there would be less bass to muddy up the mix. The Bass guitar and kick drum need room! But as it is, a cardioid cap on your AKG would open up the sound a bit, and the neck placement would give you a more natural sound, that you can adjust for more/less bass by aiming it more toward the sound hole.

Here's a test I did with 2 pencil mics on voice and guitar. The cap was cardioid. Ignore the Sony D-50 in the shot. I was testing that out, but it's audio is not in this video.

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