Signal chain for recording live events

AlmaVideo

AlmaVideo

Active member
I would appreciate advice on how to go about OPTIMIZING THE SIGNAL CHAIN for recording live performances in our space. We have a dance studio where we teach and do live performances and have visiting orchestras (2-8 piece). I shoot video of the performances, and I am learning about recording the orchestras and occasional vocals. We also make educational videos in this space.

My main problem is setting up to record the orchestras. I don't have the ability to get the orchestra in to test and optimize my setup. I barely get a sound check just before the event (sometimes not even that) so I need to have a reliable stock setup.


I have these tools available:


Mackie ProFx 12
Steinberg UR 824
SD 302
Tascam P2 HD
Laptop w software (Reaper or Audition).


The Mackie ProFx 16 (house mixer) USB out is only 2 channels.
Steinberg UR 824 USB out has 8 channels.
Both have >= 8 analog ins and outs.


1. For a 2 track, I have 2 Nt5 microphones mounted vertically over the orchestra as close as I can get them but still capture 2-3 instruments per microphone. I pick up crowd sound with this but it is low level and sounds OK for video of the event. I run the signals to the Mackie board, then out as subs to the Tascam P2 HD. I set the recorder at mic level with a -20 pad, gain at 7, and I get a good recording levels. Sometimes I send send a little bit of the house main outs to the house speakers for small ensembles. This is simple for me to operate, but my concern is that I don't know how to assess whether the preamps in the Mackie sound board are better worse or same as if I put the P2 first.


Is there a better way using my gear? Is it better and worth doing one of these ALTERNATIVES: (a) use the Tascam first, then signal out to the house board (that will step down the signal by -12 db). Not sure if there are better preamps in the P2, and if so whether it's worth the -12 attenuation going back to the house. (b) If I put the SD 302 first, I use its preamps and limiter and the signal goes out (at +4 db I think) to either recorder then house (-12 Db loss) OR 302 to house Mackie then PFL to Tascam recorder. I might suspect that the SD 302 preamps are better. Is it worth the complexity? How can I assess the relative quality of the 3 different setups?


2. At other times, I would like to record 3 to 8 channels, using a variety of mics that come with the orchestra generally. For this I need the Steinberg in the chain, and the computer. (a) If I run the signal to the Mackie first and take a PFL signal to the Steinberg, then Steinberg USB out to laptop that works. OR (b) Go first to the Steinberg, patch to the Mackie for the house and use the Steinberg USB out to the laptop. Does it matter which is first?


Does it really come down to how can I assess the relative quality of the preamps Mackie vs Steinberg P2 HD vs SD 302? I can tell which ones are noisier, but are there any other qualities of the preamps that I can measure? Given the limitations of space and event, are any possible differences in these preamps really of significance?

Thank you for any help.
 
WOW a lot of question there...
Let's see if I can offer something to help.
First you have two classes of preamp. The Steinberg and Sound Devices definitely better than the the Mackie and Tascam. A heads up on the 302. The 302 is designed for dialogue, and a wonderful piece of gear for it. The limiter in the 302 is shaped for dialogue , not music. I would test it carefully or take a pass on it. Second, for dialogue you want a roll off to deal with wind and handling noise. All dialogue (field) mixers have this, even if they don't mention it. a great feature for field recording. But sometimes music has stuff down there you want. So be aware and again test. There is normally no way to switch this out. Record a test signal and play it back. see what happened to it.

I think your biggest variable is mic placement rather than your signal chain. I would start looking into that with our friend Google, first, before putting too much time into the signal chain. Try borrowing a second set of mics and record alternative placements as a test. You might be very surprised, hopefully good surprise.

This would also give you a chance to try some alternative signal chains by having two setups. If something goes wrong you have two separate setups. then there's always the mic on the video camera...

Best of luck, hope something in here was of some use.
 
Yes, as @Blit said, it is not at all clear that the quality of the mic preamps is a limiting factor, or even plays any part in the issues you are working on.

Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see any discussion of what you perceive as the deficiencies or room for improvement in your current setups?

You have lots of mic preamp/mixer/interface options, but it seems pretty thin on mic choices and placement.
And, frankly, that is probably the area that offers the best opportunity for improvement.

I missed any sort of disclosure of what kind of "orchestra" you are talking about? instrumentation?
Are you satisfied with the tracks that come from the "mics that come with the orchestra"?

Don't be overly influenced by the constant discussion of mic preamps in this forum.
IMHO, this concentration is significantly overblown and distracts from the selection and deployment of the mics, etc.

I'm just not convinced you have the right questions here.
But I could be wrong, depending on what aspects of your current process need improvement?
 
Thank you both. I agree 100% that mic choice and placement are a bigger issue than preamps.

I asked about the signal chain first so I can set up a solid base for the microphone work I need to do.

I have short work samples of:
1. A woman playing piano and singing. Two NT 5 mics behind the upright piano, right and left, and a Heil PR 35 close to the player / singer, slightly above her mouth and angled down and away from the piano.
2. A tango sextet: two bandoneons, two violins, piano, bass. Two Rode NT 5 mics on the presidium mostly above and slightly in front of the stage, angled toward the mid depth of the stage, right and left.
3. A Tango quartet: bandoneon, piano, violin, bass. Mic placement lower by 2 feet than before (about 8 feet above the stage floor), boomed over mid-stage.
Here is a link to my public dropbox folder:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wjjxm1kkps5yt9e/AAB3VoTcnqirAALhQXS8Bj0fa?dl=0
 
Yes I really will in the end need to address 2 issues: signal chain and mic type and placement. If you listen to the recording samples I put up, for me the main problems with 2 mics are pollution from the people in attendance, and getting the right mix of the instruments. Both are potentially solvable by close-micing the instruments, although then I will have #3 a post-recording task of making those dry channels sound sweet! My plan for now is to mix them with a mic out in the room to make the audio "real" on the videos I produce.

Regarding the signal chain, thank you for the education on the SD 302 and less robust preamp on the Tascam P2 HD. That reduces my options which is good) so I can address

Problem #1: Blit

steinberg first, out to house Mackie analog and USB To laptop recorder seems like the easy answer.


Problem #2: Crowley

For actual recording when there are dancers in the hall, to get cleaner sound I think need to close mic the instruments and also make a more ambient recording track in our hall to mix. For a sextet, the bandoneons each need 2 mics (dynamic or cardioid on each side of each instrument), the violins can probably share a close overhead cardioid, one for the bass and piano 2 cardioid condenser mics. If they ever get a vocalist, I could mix the bandoneons down from 4 to 2 tracks to free up another channel.

The quartet would get a scaled back version of that setup.

I liked how the piano / voice turned out, but I was surprised how much the piano got on the vocal mic. The piano mics were well isolated.

Rent more mics when I need or use the musicians' mics before buying!

Am I on the right track?
 
Last edited:
There is a BIG difference between doing this for an audio recording designed to create a natural acoustic, and no audience, and a a TV audio recording. Two totally different techniques. You seem to have a bit of both. The room is full of problems, the people, so worrying about noise floor in the preamps is probably not even audible. The broadcasters would not use distant miking apart from if this sounded wonderful, like in a cathedral. Studio sound rarely sounds good at a distance, so close miking of all sources is standard, using suitable mics for he job, artificial reverb, and audience mics. If a PA feed was required then for low level, and aux mix would be fine, but if it needed constant adjustment and balancing, then a mic split and separate mixer. For a piano and vocalist then two for the piano close in and one for the singer works fine. As soon as you are faced with a small ensemble then again, close miking for separation is the only way. You don't have the time, or the room to do a stereo direct mix, and trying to add spit mics to a stereo mic setup is fraught with issues. They also look horrible for the video. If setup time is short, then close mics, gain set, multitrack enabled and you are off, and worry about the mix later. Needing to do a PA complicates it. My first broadcast jobs were sound assistant for religious OBs for Sunday evening programmes, and people were often a big problem. We often prerecorded difficult sections, and often had people miming! A proper orchestra where we could get stereo mics in, we did x/y , with a spot mic for the singer if needed, but smaller ensembles especially if electric instruments are involved were individually miked with whatever we had. Best mics for delicate sources, and anything left for the louder stuff. With a bit of reverb, this balanced out perfectly well in the truck, or often without one, in the vestry with a small mixer and a small pair if speakers.
 
Thank you, Paulears!
This is practical advice, and really complements what the others said. I mix these to mono since I am ignorant about phase and whatever other issues happen w home made stereo mix.

Here are some microphone ideas I might try:
I have a Schoeps cardioid for the violins (to share?) on a stage boom. My 2x NT 5 seem to work for behind the upright piano. I need to find options for the bandoneons (the NT5 seem ok for them too), one on each side of the 2 if there are two bandoneons. Would the Heil PR 35 be good for the bass? Bandoneons? Vocals I would use the Heil.
 
For a number of years I regularly recorded music events for a number of groups. Only once the size of an orchestra, usually more in the range of four to ten musicians.

What I did is not mono compatible and not particularly "standard" but it worked very well.

I think I posted a description with the logic on here some where but I can't remember what I called the arrangement. Something like "speaker oriented stereo recording".

The gist is to get a stereo pair on the lip of the stage quite wide (~10 wider than the group or more). I used cardioid mics as high as my stands would go ( ~7ft). The mics were aimed to cross at the center of the group at the instrument position (varies a bit if everyone is standing as opposed to sitting).

THe mics went to a MixPre and then to a two track recorder.

I didn't get a lot of audience, but this was a proscenium stage, but enough so you would get applause etc. There was no intention to get a studio sound, it was a concert recording.

THe stereo image is very wide, which makes it play back very "realistically" on speakers. It's pretty wide for headphones which is either a plus or a minus depending on taste, though you can of course tame that in post if you want. The limiter on the MixPre let me set levels hot during rehearsal and not have to worry during the show if an erant performance note went wild. I aimed at keeping peaks at just below -3dB. I would sometimes use iZotope's Rx to cut back on the room noise if the building had a steady air conditioning hum or something but not always. Also because the mics were directional and pointed down and they were not under the fly loft I didn't get that echoey sound that can come if you fly mics. I also got much better and more even coverage than I expected and certainly better than hanging mics.
 
Noiz2, thank you for the stereo idea. Our space is a bit cramped on the sides, but I'll keep this idea in mind.

This is what I am getting from everyone's generous feedback:

1. What is the goal? A CD quality orchestral recording is a COMPLETELY different project from recording an effective sound track for a video (whether for internet or TV). I want to make video sound track.

2. Any of the preamps I have at my disposal are fine for a video sound track given that the ambient environment is far noisier than any of the preamps or microphones. My choice on connecting them will be driven by the need to keep the house sound reinforcement separately controlled from the recording signals, and the interface needed to get multitrack into my computer.

3. Microphone placement will have maximum impact on my recordings of all the issues I face.

4. Close microphone placement is really the only way I can hope to get a proper mix of levels of the ensembles. I will need to practice / test to improve the skills necessary for each instrument. Using a more remote microphone to let the room mix the music carries so much ambient conversation noise and unwanted mush that it is ineffective. A simple close-as feasible overhead dual mic system while it gives acceptable levels of orchestra (small ensemble) vs audience sounds results in a sub-optimal recorded levels of individual instruments vs each other.

5. I need to inventory the microphones the musicians might have available to complement my mic selection in order to cost-effectively record these performances.

Am I missing anything?
 
Last edited:
For an orchestra you shouldn't get a lot of audience noise while the music is playing. A band in a bar will have constant background noise but a concert by an orchestra should be pretty quiet.
 
Noiz2 said:
For an orchestra you shouldn't get a lot of audience noise while the music is playing. A band in a bar will have constant background noise but a concert by an orchestra should be pretty quiet.
Click to expand...

Let me give you a better idea of my specific situation. Here is a video I did last week showing the environment and sound recording result. The mix of levels isn't bad, the piano is a bit soft.
I had my 2 NT 5 mics mounted over the middle of the orchestra (a quartet in this case) at about 9 feet high, angled out toward the middle of either side of the quartet.
The signal went into my Mackie board, and out the sub 3,4 to my Tascam P2 HD. The house got a slight boost of this mix over the main out. The hall is about 30x50 with a very high peaked roof, wood plank with no treatment. There are theater curtains on hte sides and back of the stage, and a low valance 10 feet above and at the front of the stage. There are about 80 people in the room.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYEagW_UsmE

For the sextet I record sometimes, the musicians are more spread out and I don't get a good mix on the levels of the different musicians. If I pull the microphones any further away, the people chatter is too loud.
 
Just noticed your (my old) Local. The group I was recording was Earplay. They were working out of Herbst, so a LOT bigger space, but I also did a small opera at Live Oak THeatre, which is small and all hard walls, and two "Sonic Harvest" concerts in a "Julia Morgan" building, so technically challenging.

I'll take a listen to the link when I get a second.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top