Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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
Chapter 4: Findings ............................................................................................. 11 4.1 Research Findings 11 4.2 Intervention Findings 12
Chapter 5: Discussion .......................................................................................... 13
Chapter 6: Conclusion ......................................................................................... 14
Appendices .......................................................................................................... 15
Bibliography, Discography and Web Resources ................................................. 29
List of Figures
ii
List of Figures
Figure 1. Early mechanical recording (Huffman, Victor Acoustic…)…………….…………... 3
Figure 2. ‘True’ condenser mic diaphragm (Nave, 2000)…………….……………………… 6
Figure 3. Omnidirectional polar pattern (Shure, 2015)……………..………………………… 6
Figure 4. (Nave, 2000) Electret condenser mic diaphragm……...…………………………… 7
Figure 5. (Nave, 2000) Dynamic mic diaphragm…………………………………………...…7
Figure 6. (Nave, 2000) Ribbon mic diaphragm……………………….……………………… 7
Figure 7. Figure-of-eight polar pattern (Shure, 2015)……………..…………………………. 7
Figure 8. Combination of pressure-sensitive and pressure-gradient polar patterns (Vocal
Technologies, 2015)……………………………………………………………………………8
Figure 9. Supercardioid polar pattern (Shure, 2015)…………………………………………. 8
Figure 10. Variations of the cardioid polar pattern (PA for Music, 2015)…………………. 8
Figure 11. Experimenting for effective capture of the source and its environment (Source:
Author’s own photograph, April 2015)………………………………………………………...9
Figure 12. Recording, managing and analysing captured audio in Pro Tools (Source: Author’s
own photograph, April 2015)……………………………………………………………..…..10
Figure 13. STC 4021 ‘ball and biscuit’ mic (Coutant, STC…)……………………………….11
Figure 14. The 4038, as originally manufactured by STC (Coutant, Coles…)…………….....11
Figure 15. Dynamic, SDC and LDC cardioid mic analysis (Source: Author’s own photograph,
March 2015)………………..………………………………………...……………………….12
Figure 16. Minute differences in positioning can yield distinct results (Source: Author’s own
photograph, March 2015)……………………………………………..……………………....12
E Figure 17. Evolution of the AKG C 12 to the modern C414. One of many that has stood the
test of time (Colletti, 2015)……………………………..……..………………..…………….13
Chapter 1
1
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 Background Overview
When capturing an acoustic or amplified soundsource, how it behaves or radiates sound may
vary greatly. However, the sole instruments of capture, and the operation of these
microphones remains unaffected. As a result of this, it is imperative that engineers and
producers possess an intrinsic knowledge of microphone fundamentals.
“The microphone is the first stage in the complex and extended technical chain between live
performance and sound reproduction”. (Rayburn, 2004, p. 7)
The motivation behind the investigation and exploration on this topic stems form both
academic, and personal criteria. As both a musician and music producer, this aspired me to
gain an in-depth understanding of the physical and technical phenomena at play when
recording a soundsource. Also, the topic of this research has been seldom approached from an
academic standpoint. Hence, it is necessary to give credence to the considered and precise
practices in this manner. Amplified guitar recording has long been established as a core
element when producing contemporary music. However, academic research into the
technology, approaches, and their resulting sonic characteristics, has often been overlooked.
This is a result of the vast influx of technological advances over recent years to the relatively
new art form of recorded music.
Chapter 1
2
1.2 Action Research Overview
This research in ways, will feature the music producer’s variety of the microphone
‘driver theory test’. Great understanding and consideration towards the subject is required in
order to make efficient and effective use of microphones. This research paper will also carry
out investigations using a set of constant and control factors where necessary, in order to
accurately measure a desired contributing factor or quality. For example, the sonic
characteristics of a performance can vary widely due to many factors - the guitarist, the guitar
and its setup, the amplifier and its configuration. In order to reduce or eliminate these
contributing factors, pre-recorded passages will be reproduced using a consistent amplifier
setup. A control recording will be observed for each investigation also. It is important to,
allowing a ‘default’ frame of reference for comparison in each investigation. The selection of
microphones employed will feature a series of industry-standard microphones found in both
professional and home recording studios worldwide. The recordings captured from the
investigations carried out will be examined and reviewed for formative feedback by various
groups in order to determine the perception of various practices, construct a consensus of their
effective qualities and retain objectivity throughout. These groups will feature musicians,
engineers, producers, academic peers and supervisors, as well as laypeople. This paper and
the collated findings of my research will aid others who wish to study the field and provide
the reader with a greater understanding of the contributing factors and techniques involved in
capturing a desired sound, through effective microphone choice and placement.
Chapter 2
3
Chapter 2: Background
2.1 Early Recorded Music and Microphone Development
In order to appropriately study the effective capture of musical instruments such as the
electric guitar, it is first necessary to examine the historical perspective on the advent of the
microphone in the recording studio. Predecessors of the modern microphone operated on
acoustical and mechanical principals alone. The earliest recording and playback technologies,
such as Thomas Edison’s 1877 phonograph and Emile Berliner’s gramophone, required
performers to be strategically positioned around the device’s large recording horn. At the apex
of this conical device, sound vibrations from the performers would excite a diaphragm
connected to a cutting needle, which would indent a wax cylinder or disc for later playback
(Huffman, Victor Acoustic…). Early electrical microphones, pioneered by the likes of
Alexander Graham Bell, David Edward Hughes and Francis Blake in the late 19th century,
were forerunners of the carbon microphone for use in telephony and early radio systems. The
‘carbon button transmitter’ microphone, attributed to the work of David Edward Hughes,
Emile Berliner and Thomas Edison (Worall, 2007, p. 3, Rubin, 2013) “has dominated
telephony almost to the present—quite a testimony to the inventiveness and resourcefulness
of engineers working nearly 130 years ago.” (Rayburn, 2004, p. 3) However, such
microphones were unsuitable for audio recording, as electrical signals could not yet be stored
on a medium for later playback.
Figure 1. Early mechanical recording
Chapter 2
4
In 1924, a new technology developed by Western Electric, the manufacturing branch
of the Bell Telephone system, marked the beginning of electrical recording on disc, or record.
The technology utilized new vacuum-tube electronic amplifiers to drive an electromagnetic
cutting head and record sound from a microphone (Smith, 2011). Around this time, with the
advent of electrical disc recording and radio broadcasting, there was a clear requirement for
better quality microphones (Robjohns, 2010). The foundations of the technology had recently
become a reality, with Lee DeForest’s invention of the vacuum tube, an electronic signal
amplifier, in 1906 (AES, 2015). This allowed engineers of the time to then amplify the
voltages output from a mic, allowing the signal to then be amplified, broadcast or recorded,
and later, processed with equalisation, compression and so on.
Chapter 2
5
2.2 Understanding Microphone Characteristics
Before proceeding further into the 20th century, it is worthy to note that a great insight into the
operation of mics can be obtained through an understanding of the underlying physics. The
element that reinforced the motivation behind this research was feedback that I received from
a survey I had initially carried out during preliminary investigations into the topic. Many
practitioners of sound engineering and music production, both hobbyists and professionals,
have almost unanimously expressed sentiments that; effective use of the microphone by the
engineer or producer is almost as important as the performance itself, directly impacting the
final outcome; and that no amount of processing during mixing may remedy unconsidered
microphone positioning at the recording stage (See survey in appendix). Paul White, editor-
in-chief of industry publication, Sound on Sound, comments that
“with 90 percent of microphone placement, it's about what you want the microphone not to
hear, rather than what it does hear”. (Robjohns, White, 2007)
Due to the distinct variety of microphone pickup patterns, I feel that it is imperative that one
appreciates both the fundamental operating principals and the development of their
technologies, in order to truly appreciate and understand these characteristics. Through my
research, I have found this knowledge intrinsic to allowing the sound engineer or music
producer a far greater visualisation of the physics and acoustics and at play, as sound waves
propagating around an environment are picked up or rejected by a microphone.
Chapter 3
6
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.1 Pressure-Operated and Pressure-Gradient Microphones
Companies such as the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Radio Corporation of
America (RCA) and Western Electric, were pivotal in the development of the electrostatic
(condenser) microphone and later developing electrodynamic (dynamic, or moving coil)
microphones (Rayburn, 2004, p. 6, Webb, 2002). Condenser mics, also called ‘capacitor’
mics, are ‘pressure-operated’ and consist of the two plates of a capacitor, with a fixed charge
electrical charge applied across them. The back plate is static, while the front plate, or
diaphragm, is open to the atmosphere and becomes excited by sound waves. The enclosed
volume of air between the two plates effectively contains a fixed air pressure. The front plate
then moves in response to the difference between the passing sound wave and the fixed,
‘reference’, air pressure. This enables the microphone to act omnidirectionally, taking in
sound from all velocities, as the mic simply detects ‘pressure’. This pressure results in a
change in capacitance across the two plates, which in turn is translated into a variation in the
voltage across them (Rayburn, p. 5). One notable mic was the Western Electric 47-A
condenser in 1928 (Coutant, Western Electric…), relying on vacuum tube, or valve, circuitry
to amplify the signal. The 47-A, one of the first mics with truly ‘musical’ characteristics, it
had a near flat frequency response up to about 15,000 Hz, at a time when until recently, the
acoustic recording process was unable to capture much above 2,400 Hz (Huffman,
Development of…).
In the following years, many more significant advances such as the electret condenser would
come about (Klapholz, 1986). This new technology used a permanently polarized electret
material for their diaphragms, and only required a small battery or external ‘phantom power’
to operate; thus eliminating the necessity for a biasing DC voltage and in turn the large valve
transformers.
Figure 2. ‘True’ condenser mic diaphragm Figure 3. Omnidirectional polar pattern
Chapter 3
7
Other notable milestones include the development of the PB-31 ribbon mic, by Harry
Olson at RCA (Coutant, The RCA…). Ribbon microphones operate under the same principals
as dynamic mics. The diaphragm, or ribbon, and hence it’s name, acts as (or is attached to -
dynamic) an electrical conducting element. This element is placed in a transverse magnetic
field, where magnetic lines of force are cut by the element as it is moved due to sound
pressure in the air. This induces a voltage across the element, proportional to its velocity
(Rayburn, p. 6; Bartlett, 2015). Ribbon microphones are ‘pressure-gradient’, unlike ‘pressure-
operated’, omnidirectional, microphones. The diaphragm of a ‘pressure-gradient’ microphone
is exposed to the atmosphere on all sides. However, ribbon mics are only ‘pressure-gradient’
when sound approaches from the front and rear of the microphone, as sound waves
approaching from the side will result in identical pressures on both the front and the back of
the diaphragm, resulting in no net movement. As the mic is only pressure-gradient on axis,
there is a high sensitivity to sound arriving form the front or back, with little or no sensitivity
to the sides. This results in the microphone possessing a ‘figure-of-eight’, or bi-directional,
polar or pickup pattern, (Robjohns, 2000).
Unfortunately, I, like many engineers, both amateur and professional, have no access
to a ribbon microphone, as purchasing and maintaining delicate ribbon mics is neither a viable
or practical scenario. However, their typical ‘figure-of-eight’ characteristic is featured on
many other mics of widespread use, and should be heavily considered for effective
application in many mono, stereo and multi-mic’d recording and sound reinforcement
scenarios (Bartlett, 2015).
Figure 4. Electret condenser mic diaphragm Figure 5. Dynamic mic diaphragm
Figure 6. Ribbon mic diaphragm Figure 7. Figure-of-eight polar pattern
Chapter 3
8
3.2 First and Second Order Microphones
In the 1930’s, engineers were able to construct a microphone that was directional in nature, by
combining both pressure-operated and pressure-gradient cartridges in the same enclosure. Due
to a reinforced positive polarity in front, and a destructive negative polarity to the rear, the
resultant pickup pattern is that of a directional microphone. If both cartridges electrical
outputs were mixed together in equal proportions, the result was a cardioid polar pattern,
while modifying the proportions of the combined pressure-operated and pressure-gradient
components would also allow for other variations of the cardioid polar pattern, such as sub-
cardioid (wider), supercardioid, (narrower) and hypercardioid (narrowest), via a switch or
knob (Robjohns, 2000).
However, these ‘first-order’ microphones were cumbersome and lacked in
performance, due to the combined omnidirectional and bidirectional elements, their resulting
combined frequency response and polar pickup characteristics were somewhat unbalanced
(DeTogne, 1996). In 1938, Benjamin B. Bauer of Shure Bros. engineered the Shure Unidyne
Model 55, a single, ‘second order’, microphone capsule, with time delay networks on sounds
arriving at openings at the back of the mic, in order to achieve a controlled cancellation and
produce a cardioid pickup pattern (Webb, 2002). This would also combat problems associated
with omnidirectional and directional microphone use, such as feedback, background noise,
and reverberation. (DeTogne, 1996).
Figure 8. Combination of pressure-sensitive and pressure-gradient polar patterns
Figure 9. Supercardioid polar pattern Figure 10. Variations of the cardioid polar pattern
Chapter 3
9
3.3 Interventions
Armed with my microphone licence, the interventions on the practical portion of my research
began, and were done in three stages. The first of which, investigated the effects of
microphone positioning in relation to a guitar amplifier, while the second stage investigated
the effects of microphone choice on a guitar amplifier and the environment. The stages were
carried out, reviewed and are presented in this order, as the number of factors affecting
microphone placement is considerably less than the number of microphone varieties available.
It is important to bear in mind that these investigations are intended solely to explore the
range of applications and sounds that can be obtained from individual microphones, as the
sonic outcome itself is largely production specific and subjective to the listener. The third and
final stage was a creative investigation, where the previous interventions were highly
considered in order to allow effective application of appropriate theory and practices in
practical studio and live applications. Although these tests were conducted using a guitar
amplifier as a soundsource, the principals at play here will remain unchanged regardless of the
application, soundsource or positioning.
In order to investigate the effects of microphone choice and placement, it was
necessary to establish a standard model for carrying out experiments. This would eliminate
the influence of various other contributing factors that may affect the captured sound. The
recordings captured explored microphone positioning within an environment, under the
following headings; transducer principle, capsule size, polar pattern, room position, axis, cone
position and distance from soundsource. With regards to microphone “choice”, this refers to a
microphone and in particular, its configuration. For example, for the purposes of this report
Figure 11. Experimenting for effective capture of the source and its environment.
Chapter 3
10
two AKG C414 XLS‘s with distinctly set polar patterns would be regarded as independent
microphones. The recordings were presented to various groups such as stakeholders directly
involved in the process, peers, academic supervisors and laypeople for evaluation. It is
important to ensure that an amplifier, for example, is positioned and configured to sound
satisfactory at the source, before approaching with a microphone. However, it should also be
noted that any observations or evaluations should always be made or referenced via the audio
being recorded or reproduced in the control room. This eliminates the possibility of
unexpected factors, such an undesired proximity effect; a phenomena that results in a low
frequency boost in the response of directional microphones at very close distances, although
its effects can be beneficial in many scenarios. The practices used and their resulting sonic
characteristics were reviewed and discussed through formal listening tests and a short
questionnaire. Again, various precautions were also taken to eliminate variable and external
influences. These included using reference monitors or headphones in an isolated
environment, playing pink noise to the participants in between examples, and ensuring that
the examples consistently had equal power audio throughout.
Figure 12. Recording, managing and analysing captured audio in Pro Tools.
Chapter 3
11
Chapter 4: Findings
4.1 Research Findings
From the theoretical research carried out, a philosophy was conceived that microphone
technologies have largely unchanged in recent history. Rayburn comments that,
“the microphone per se is so highly developed that it is often difficult to see where specific
improvements in the basic mechanisms are needed” (2004, p. 8).
However, in the intervening time, many producers and engineers such as Eddie Kramer, Glyn
Johns and Alan Parsons have been able to obtain wonderfully creative sonic timbres and
textures. (The Jimi Hendrix Experience, 1968; Led Zeppelin, 1969; Pink Floyd, 1973 - see
discography). A prime example of this would be “Ball and Biscuit”, a highly popular and
commercially successful contemporary track (Rolling Stone, 2012), taken from The White
Stripes third studio album, Elephant. Recorded in 2003 at London’s Toe Rag Studios, an STC
4021, or ‘ball and biscuit’, omnidirectional dynamic mic developed for the BBC circa. 1935
(Taylor, 2002), was used on the recording. Even today, the 4021 is another mic that continues
to set standards.
“At Abbey Road Studios, in London, they own three of the STC 4021s. They typically use
them for overheads on the drums, and have been used on many albums. As they own three of
them, they are still considered as ‘industry standard’ and so, because of this, they can be seen
as effective as modern day microphones, because they are still in use in professional studios.”
(Hodgetts, 2014)
Figure 13. STC 4021 ‘ball and biscuit’ mic Figure 14. The 4038, as originally manufactured by STC
Chapter 3
12
4.2 Intervention Findings
The findings had been arrived at through various single and multi-mic setups, utilizing a
combination of various microphones and their interactive characteristics. These interventions
featured dynamic microphones, due to their affordability and widespread use, and condenser
microphones, which offer “the widest range of realizations, for the most diverse and including
the highest-quality applications” (Schneider 2010). The results confirmed that in any
recording scenario, great attention should be paid to the pickup and rejection of both each
individual microphone, and the microphone(s) together as a cohesive entity (Senior, 2007).
The practical research, done through listening tests and surveys, provided quantative and
qualative feedback that collectively highlighted not only the effectiveness of individual
alterations to mic choice and positioning, but also the wide array of perceived sonic outcomes
due to the combination of factors at play. This reinforced the fact that attempting to elect a
‘perfect’ or ‘ideal’ microphone, for any single or all applications, may be counter intuitive as
any mic selection is production specific, and that microphone selection which is
complimentary to a soundsource may be made redundant by inefficient placement of the
microphone (Hoffman, Multi-mic…). Again, this further emphasises the value of an in-depth
knowledge of a microphone’s inner workings, in order to properly use a mic and obtain a
desirable sound through effective sound pickup and rejection principals.
Figure 15. Dynamic, SDC and LDC cardioid mic analysis
Figure 16. Minute differences in positioning can yield distinct results
Chapter 5
13
Chapter 5: Discussion
Due to the relatively young age of recorded music, its practices and technologies, a huge
number of ground-breaking technologies and advancements such as; stereophonic sound,
magnetic tape recording, analogue signal processing, multitrack recording, sound synthesis,
digital signal processing, digital tape recording and the modern Digital Audio Workstation
would all appear before the end of the century. A plethora of consumer playback mediums
would also come and go, including the 12” LP, 7” 45s, reel-to-reel, 8-track and cassette right
up to modern digital audio including CDs, MP3s and streaming. However, microphones have
largely reached a plateau through this time, apart from refinement in the already established
technologies. Microphones already exceed the thresholds of human sensitivity, into both the
subsonic and supersonic audio ranges. The Shure Unidyne Model 55 would father the Shure
SM57 and SM58, in 1965 and 1966 respectively. Even today, these are still industry standard
microphones, first choice for many live and studio applications, and are often regarded as the
best selling mics in the world (Stamler, 2014). The Coles 4038 ribbon mic is still in
production today, while its prototype was originally developed for the BBC in 1951 (Shorter,
1955, p. 5). Vintage ribbon mics such as the RCA PB-31 ribbon and its offspring, the RCA
44, are highly sought by engineers and producers, resulting in many ‘clones’ and ‘replicas’.
Vintage condensers such as the AKG C-12, originally developed in 1953, would foreshadow
the design of the infamous C414 Series and “go on to become one of the most sought-after
microphones of all time” (AKG, 2009); while valve mics such as the U47 multi-pattern tube
microphone, introduced by George Neumann in 1949, has achieved iconic status (AKG,
2009; Webb, 2002). The Neumann U47 is treasured by many, and has often been used
exclusively by producers and artists such as George Martin, Bill Porter and Frank Sinatra,
(Recording Microphones, 2009). Looking back upon my preliminary research surveys and
producer interviews, this was reinforced by the fact that many producers and engineers have
favoured or ‘signature’ techniques or sounds that have often unchanged throughout careers
spanning decades (Senior, 2007).
Figure 17. Evolution of the AKG C 12 to the modern C414. One of many that has stood the test of time.
Conclusion
14
Chapter 6: Conclusion
In summary, it is clear that microphones have evolved greatly from their humble beginnings
as a ‘carbon button transmitter’, “the direct prototype of most microphones in use today”
(Worall, 2007, p. 3), to become fundamental and iconic elements of sound engineering and
music production, that are still as relevant today as they were upon their initial release.
Rayburn remarks, “little wonder that so much attention has been paid to the quality and
technical performance of these fine instruments” (2004, p. 7). It has been noted that,
individual microphone positioning can affect the sonic outcome of a recording just as much, if
not more than the microphone selection itself. Due to the vast array of microphones available
today, this research explored the various sound pickup and rejection characteristics of various
industry standard mics, which many other microphone manufacturers draw inspiration from.
While their operating principals and characteristics have remained fundamentally unchanged,
their utilisation in many applications has evolved significantly through simple
experimentation and the ‘mixing and matching’ of various complimentary and contrasting
microphones, particularly through the use of multi-mic setups (Senior, 2014; Senior, 2007).
Please note that when employing multi-mic setups, other factors come in to play, and great
consideration must be given to phase coherence. Phase cancellation can be typically be
remedied by abiding to the 3:1 ratio rule. This rule simply states that the distance between any
two microphones should be at least three times the distance from the source to the closest
microphone.
The interventions carried out using these mics coincided with the philosophy that
achieving desired sounds can be primarily attributed to considered and effective employment
of standard microphone technologies, due to the extent of individual changes denoted by
listening test participants. The foremost sentiment to take from this overall experience would
be that the best practice an engineer or producer can employ is to effectively consider
microphone placement, and use their ears in order to the fine-tune for the desired blend of
captured, and of course rejected, timbre and ambience. Hopefully this research and the
conclusions drawn form the findings will serve many engineers and producers alike as a
valuable and comprehensive resource on microphone development, operating principals and
real-world applications.
Conclusion
15
Appendices:
Refined Amp Recording Survey:
7LPHVWDPS
:KDW�JHQUHV�RU�VW\OHV�RIPXVLF�GR�\RX�PRVW�OLVWHQWR"
:KDW�EHVW�GHVFULEHVZKDW�\RX�GR"
'R�\RX�RZQ�DQ\PLFURSKRQHV��UHFRUGLQJHTXLSPHQW"
$UH�WKH�SUDFWLFHV�RIPLFURSKRQH�FKRLFH�SODFHPHQW�DQG�VHWXS�DUHDV�WKDW�\RX�ZRXOGFRQGLVHU�LPSRUWDQW�LQPXVLF�SURGXFWLRQ"
+RZ�IDPLOLDU�DUH�\RXZLWK�WKH�SUDFWLFHV�RIPLFURSKRQH�FKRLFH�SODFHPHQW�DQG�VHWXS"
:KDW�ZRXOG�EH�\RXU�ILUVW�FKRLFH�RIPLF�V���WKHLU�SRVLWLRQLQJ�DQG�VHWXS��IRUUHFRUGLQJ�JXLWDU�DPSV" :K\�GR�\RX�IDYRXU�WKLV�FRQILJXUDWLRQ"
$UH�WKHUH�DQ\�DVSHFWV�RIJXLWDU�DPSOLILHU�UHFRUGLQJPLJKW�\RX�OLNH�WR�LPSURYHXSRQ��RU�JDLQ�D�GHHSHUNQRZOHGJH�RI" &RPPHQWV�
�����������������
5RFN���0HWDO���%OXHV�+LS�+RS���5DS�(OHFWURQLF
0XVLF�(QWKXVLDVW�*XLWDULVW��+REE\LVW��0XVLFLDQ��+REE\LVW��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�3URIHVVLRQDO�
<HS��&RQGHQVHUV��$.*3����ODUJH�GLDSKUDJP�$XGL[�$';���VPDOOGLDSKUDJP��6XSHUOX[H����'�6WHUHR�0LF�6XSHUOX[�35$����0N,,DPS�PLF�'\QDPLFV�$XGL[�'���$XGL[�L��6DPVRQ�4���60����-767;����-6+�*6��6,QWHUIDFHV��0DFNLH�2Q\[%ODFNMDFN��0RWX����+'�0RWX��3UH
9HU\�LPSRUWDQW��*RRGUHFRUGLQJV�DUH�WKH�EDVLVIRU�UHDOO\�JRRG�PL[HV�0L[LQJ�ZRQW�ZRUN�DVHIIHFWLYHO\�ZLWK�EDGUHFRUGLQJV��$�ZLGH�UDQJHRI�IUHTXHQFLHV�EHWZHHQLQVWUXPHQWV�LVQHFHVVDU\��(J��'UXPVQHHG�D�JRRG�EDODQFH�RIORZV��PLGV�DQG�KLJKV�%DVV�QHHGV�D�JRRG�PL[RI�ORZV�DQG�PLGV��ZKHUHD�OHDG�JXLWDU�QHHGV�PRUHPLGV�DQG�KLJKV�0LFURSKRQH�FKRLFH�DQGSODFHPHQWV�QHHG�WR�VXLWWKH�WKH�LQVWUXPHQWVZLWKLQ�D�PL[�
4XLWH�IDPLOLDU��,�FRXOGVWLOO�GR�ZLWK�PRUHH[SHULPHQWDWLRQ�DQGH[SHULHQFH�ZLWK�D�EURDGUDQJH�RI�LQVWUXPHQWV�(YHU\�PXVLFLDQ�SOD\VGLIIHUHQWO\��HYHU\�JXLWDUDQG�DPS�VRXQGVGLIIHUHQW��VR�WKHVH�QHHGVXLWDEOH�PLF�FKRLFHV�DQGSODFHPHQWV
$�QLFH�FRPELQDWLRQ�RI�FORVH�G\QDPLF�OLNHD�H�����ZLWK�D�7/0�����RU�VLPLODU�D�IRRWRU�VR�EDFN��3HUKDSV�VRPHWKLQJ�OLNH�D5RGH�.��LQ�RPQL�WR�FDSWXUH�WKH�URRP
3URYLGH�D�JRRG�EDODQFH�EHWZHHQ�GU\��PLGV��IURP�FORVHG\QDPLF��IXOOHU��RUJDQLF�VRXQG�IURP�7/0�ZLWK�D�QLFH�PL[�RIDPELHQFH�IURP�URRP�PLF
<HV��$�QLFH�EOHQGEHWZHHQ�D�FORVH�PLF�FODULW\��DQG�DURRP�GLVWDQW�PLF�DPELHQFH���,W�LV�TXLWHGLIILFXOW�WR�DFKLHYH�D�QLFHEDODQFH�EHWZHHQ�VXFKPLFV
�����������������3RS��5RFN���0HWDO��%OXHV��+LS�+RS���5DS
0XVLF�(QWKXVLDVW�*XLWDULVW��+REE\LVW��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�3URIHVVLRQDO���6WXGHQW
0DFNLH�����9/=�3UR$.*�&����V�SDLU�$.*'�V�3UR7RROV���
<HV��DV�HDFKPLFURSKRQH�FDQ�EULQJRXW�FHUWDLQFKDUDFWHULVWLFV�LQ�YDULRXVPXVLFDO�LQVWUXPHQWV�ZKLFK�FDQ�DOVR�EHVWUHQJWKHQHG��RUKLQGHUHG��WKURXJKVSHFLILF�SODFHPHQW�
1RW�YHU\��,�WHQG�WR�QRWH[SHULPHQW�WR�PXFK�DQGJR�ZLWK�ZKDW�,�KDYH�IHOWFRPIRUWDEOH�ZLWK�LQ�WKHSDVW
,�ZRXOG�XVH�D�FORVH�G\QDPLF�PLFURSKRQHDV�P\�ILUVW�FKRLFH�
7KH\�XVXDOO\�KDYH�D�VSHFLILF�IUHTXHQF\�UHVSRQVH�DQGG\QDPLF�UHVSRQVH�WKDW�VXLWV�JXLWDU�DPSV�
<HV��PXOWL�PLFURSKRQHVHW�XSV�DQG�PRUHHIILFLHQW�XVH�RI�PLFV�LQUHFRUGLQJ�VSDFHV
�����������������
5RFN���0HWDO���%OXHV�+LS�+RS���5DS�(OHFWURQLF
0XVLF�(QWKXVLDVW�*XLWDULVW��+REE\LVW��0XVLFLDQ��+REE\LVW��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�3URIHVVLRQDO�
<HS��&RQGHQVHUV��$.*3����ODUJH�GLDSKUDJP�$XGL[�$';���VPDOOGLDSKUDJP��6XSHUOX[H����'�6WHUHR�0LF�6XSHUOX[�35$����0N,,DPS�PLF�'\QDPLFV�$XGL[�'���$XGL[�L��6DPVRQ�4���60����-767;����-6+�*6��6,QWHUIDFHV��0DFNLH�2Q\[%ODFNMDFN��0RWX����+'�0RWX��3UH
9HU\�LPSRUWDQW��*RRGUHFRUGLQJV�DUH�WKH�EDVLVIRU�UHDOO\�JRRG�PL[HV�0L[LQJ�ZRQW�ZRUN�DVHIIHFWLYHO\�ZLWK�EDGUHFRUGLQJV��$�ZLGH�UDQJHRI�IUHTXHQFLHV�EHWZHHQLQVWUXPHQWV�LVQHFHVVDU\��(J��'UXPVQHHG�D�JRRG�EDODQFH�RIORZV��PLGV�DQG�KLJKV�%DVV�QHHGV�D�JRRG�PL[RI�ORZV�DQG�PLGV��ZKHUHD�OHDG�JXLWDU�QHHGV�PRUHPLGV�DQG�KLJKV�0LFURSKRQH�FKRLFH�DQGSODFHPHQWV�QHHG�WR�VXLWWKH�WKH�LQVWUXPHQWVZLWKLQ�D�PL[�
4XLWH�IDPLOLDU��,�FRXOGVWLOO�GR�ZLWK�PRUHH[SHULPHQWDWLRQ�DQGH[SHULHQFH�ZLWK�D�EURDGUDQJH�RI�LQVWUXPHQWV�(YHU\�PXVLFLDQ�SOD\VGLIIHUHQWO\��HYHU\�JXLWDUDQG�DPS�VRXQGVGLIIHUHQW��VR�WKHVH�QHHGVXLWDEOH�PLF�FKRLFHV�DQGSODFHPHQWV
$�QLFH�FRPELQDWLRQ�RI�FORVH�G\QDPLF�OLNHD�H�����ZLWK�D�7/0�����RU�VLPLODU�D�IRRWRU�VR�EDFN��3HUKDSV�VRPHWKLQJ�OLNH�D5RGH�.��LQ�RPQL�WR�FDSWXUH�WKH�URRP
3URYLGH�D�JRRG�EDODQFH�EHWZHHQ�GU\��PLGV��IURP�FORVHG\QDPLF��IXOOHU��RUJDQLF�VRXQG�IURP�7/0�ZLWK�D�QLFH�PL[�RIDPELHQFH�IURP�URRP�PLF
<HV��$�QLFH�EOHQGEHWZHHQ�D�FORVH�PLF�FODULW\��DQG�DURRP�GLVWDQW�PLF�DPELHQFH���,W�LV�TXLWHGLIILFXOW�WR�DFKLHYH�D�QLFHEDODQFH�EHWZHHQ�VXFKPLFV
�����������������3RS��5RFN���0HWDO��%OXHV��+LS�+RS���5DS
(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�+REE\LVW�
$7������6RXQG�'HYLFHV0L[3UH�'��7&�(OHFWURQLF6WXGLR�.RQQHNW����
$SDUW�IURP�SHUIRUPDQFHDQG�URRP��WKH\UH�WKHELJJHVW�IDFWRU�LQ�WKH�HQGUHVXOW�
9HU\��&ROOHJH�DQG�UHDOOLIH�H[SHULHQFH�
5����RII�D[LV��8��DL�RII�D[LV�RQ�RWKHUVLGH��([SHULPHQW�ZLWK�SKDVH�FRUUHODWLRQ�
5LEERQ�SURYLGHV�DZHVRPH�VPRRWK�ORZHV��&RQGHQVHUSURYLGHV�QLFH�KLJK�HQG���GHWDLO� &RPSUHVVLRQ�WR�WDSH�
�����������������
5RFN���0HWDO���%OXHV�+LS�+RS���5DS�(OHFWURQLF�$PELHQW�3RVW�5RFN�6KRHJD]H�'UHDP3RS
0XVLF�(QWKXVLDVW�*XLWDULVW��+REE\LVW��0XVLFLDQ��+REE\LVW��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�+REE\LVW���6WXGHQW
1R�PLFURSKRQHV��EXW�,RZQ�DQ�DXGLR�LQWHUIDFHIRU�UHFRUGLQJ�
,�EHOLHYH�PLF�FKRLFH�DQGSODFHPHQW�DUH�LPSRUWDQWEHFDXVH�GHSHQGLQJ�RQWKH�PLF�DQG�ZKHUH�LW�LVSODFHG��WKH�UHFRUGHGVRXQG�FDQ�FKDQJH�
,�DP�QRW�YHU\�IDPLOLDUZLWK�PLF�FKRLFH�DQGSODFHPHQW�
,�DP�QRW�IDPLOLDU�ZLWK�PLFV�DQG�WKHLUSRVLWLRQLQJ��EXW�,�ZDV�UHFHQWO\�DW�D�VWXGLRZKHUH�WKH�HQJLQHHU�PLFHG�XS�D�5RODQG-&�����ZLWK�DQ�$XGLR�7HFKQLFD�$70���DQG�D�6KXUH�60�����-XGJLQJ�E\�WKHUHVXOWV��,�ZRXOG�VD\�WKDW�WKLV�ZRXOG�EH�P\ILUVW�FKRLFH�
,�OLNHG�WKH�VRXQG�,�JRW�IURP�WKDW�FRQILJXUDWLRQ��7KH�$70���FDSWXUHG�WKH�ORZ�PLGV��DQG�KDG�D�JHQHUDOO\�GDUNHU�WRQH�WKDWJDYH�WKH�JXLWDU�VRXQG��ZDUPWK��DQG��IXOOQHVV���2Q�WKH�RWKHUKDQG��WKH�60����FDSWXUHG�WKH�KLJK�PLGV��DQG�KDG�D�EULJKW�WUHEO\�VRXQG�ZLWK�PRUH�QRWH�GHILQLWLRQ�WKDQ�WKH�$70�����:LWKWKHVH�WZR�FRPELQHG��,�ZDV�DEOH�WR�JHW�D�YHU\�JRRG�UHFRUGHGVRXQG�
,�ZRXOG�OLNH�WR�OHDUQPRUH�DERXW�PLF�FKRLFHDQG�SODFHPHQW�ZLWKUHJDUGV�WR�GLIIHUHQW�W\SHVRI�DPSOLILHUV�
����������������� 5RFN���0HWDO���%OXHV
0XVLFLDQ��3URIHVVLRQDO��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�3URIHVVLRQDO�
\HV��DOPRVW�DV�LPSRUWDQWDV�WKH�SHUIRUPDQFH� YHU\
(LWKHU�D�VHQQKHLVHU�PG����RU�H����SOXVD�ODUJH�GLDSKUDJP�WXEH�RU�IHW�FRQGHQVRUSRVLWLRQHG�RII�D[LV�XS�FORVH�WR�WKH�DPS�OLNH�;<�EXW�ZLWK�GLIIHUHQW�PLFV��DQG�DULEERQ�QHDU�D�FRUQHU�IRU�URRP�DPELHQFHSRVLWLRQHG�VR�WKDW�WKH�SRLQW�RI�UHMHFWLRQ�LVGLUHFWHG�DW�WKH�DPS�
LW�SURGXFHV�WKH�FORVHVW�VRXQG�WR�WKH�VRXQG�RI�WKH�DPS�LQ�WKHURRP�WKDW�,�FDQ�FRPH�XS�ZLWK�
\HV��,�ZRXOG�OLNH�WR�JHW�DEHWWHU�URRP�VRXQG�WKDWVERWK�FOHDUHU�DQG�GRHVQWLPSRVH�SKDVH�LVVXHVZLWK�WKH�FORVH�PLFV
�����������������
3RS��5RFN���0HWDO��%OXHV��)XQN���6RXO��)RON��&RXQWU\��&ODVVLFDO
*XLWDULVW��3URIHVVLRQDO��0XVLFLDQ��3URIHVVLRQDO��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�3URIHVVLRQDO�
5RGH�17�$5RGH�17.$.*�F���$.*�'���6DPVRQ���SLHFH�GUXPPLF�NLW6KXUH�60�%6KXUH���6KXUH�%HWD���
<HV��LWV�DQ�DUW��7KHUHDUH�IXQGDPHQWDOV�WKDWZH�DOO�VKRXOG�IROORZ�EXWH[SHULPHQWDWLRQ�DQGFULWLFDO�OLVWHQLQJ�DUH�WKHPRVW�LPSRUWDQW�SDUW� 9HU\�
'HSHQGV�RQ�WKH�JHQUH�RI�PXVLF��%XW�OHWVVD\�IRU�D�URFN�EDQG������,�ZRXOG�ILQG�RXWZKHUH�LQ�P\�URRP�WKH�DPS�VRXQGV�EHVW����,�ZRXOG�GHWHUPLQH�ZKDW�NLQG�RI�WRQH�LVSOD\HG�DQG�ZKHUH�WKLV�JXLWDU�ZRXOG�VLW�LQWKH�RYHUDOO�PL[��%\�WKHVH�WZR�IDFWRUV�,ZRXOG�FKRRVH�WKH�PLF�DQG�SRVLWLRQ�,ZRXOG�XVH��7KHQ�,�ZRXOG�WU\�VHYHUDOGLIIHUHQW�PLFV�DV�ZHOO��%HFDXVH�QRJ�DOO�WULHG�DQG�WUXH��WHFKQLTXHV�UHDOO\�FDSWXUHWKH�DUW�RI�DQ\�JLYHQ�VRQJ� 5HDG�DERYH��,�GR�QRW�IDYRU�DQG�SRVLWLRQ�
2I�FRXUVH��%XW�WKDWV�WKHIXQ�SDUW�RI�WKLV��$OZD\VOHDUQLQJ�
�����������������
3RS��5RFN���0HWDO��%OXHV��)XQN���6RXO�&ODVVLFDO
*XLWDULVW��3URIHVVLRQDO��0XVLFLDQ��+REE\LVW��(QJLQHHU���3URGXFHU�+REE\LVW�
��60��V��RQH�PRGGHG�RQH�UHJXODU���6HQQKHLVHU(������$.*�3����6FDUOHWW���L���LQWHUIDFH�
<HV��PLF�SODFHPHQW�LV�����FUXFLDO�WR�WKHSHUIHFW�UHFRUGLQJ��&UDSLQ� �FUDS�RXW� 9HU\�IDPLOLDU�
,W�GHSHQGV�RQ�WKH�DPSOLILHU�VSHDNHUFKRLFH��7\SLFDOO\�DQ�60���ULJKW�RQ�WKHJULOO�FORWK��FHQWHU�RI�WKH�FDS� ,WV�D�VROLG�VWDSOH��DQG�KDV�EHHQ�IRU�GHFDGHV� 1RW�UHDOO\�
y������Gh��Gy��������GOy��������P
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.
Conclusion
22
Example 1:
Constant: On Axis / Cone edge / Cone height Variant: Shure Beta 57 [Dyn 1”] / Neumann TLM103 [LDC 1’] / Neumann U87ai [LDC 5’]
Example 2: Constant: AKG C414 XLS [Cardioid 1’ x 1’] / AKG C414 XLS [Omni 5’ x 5’] Variant: Room Position A / B / C
Example 3: Constant: Sure Beta 57 [1”] / Cone centre / Cone height Variant: Axis On / Off Example 4: Constant: Sure Beta 57 [1”] / Cone height / On axis Variant: Cone Centre / Mid / Edge
Example 5: Constant: AKG C414 XLS [Cardioid] / Cone height / On axis / Cone Centre Variant: Distance 1” / 1’ / 3’ / 5’
Example 6: Constant: AKG C414 XLS [1’] / Cone height / On axis/ Dust cap edge
Variant: Omni/ Wide Cardioid / Cardioid / Hypercardioid / Figure-Eight
Example 7: Constant: Cone height / On axis / Dust cap edge / Distance 1’ / Cardioid Variant: AKG C414 XLS [LDC] / Neumann KM184 [SDC] / Shure Beta 57 [Dyn]
Example 8: Constant: Shure Beta 57 [Dyn 1”] / Neumann TLM103 [LDC 1’] / Neumann U87ai [LDC 5’] On Axis / Cone edge / Cone height Variant: None (All microphones are equally audible throughout).
Listening Test Results:
(Page 1 of 6) To view the full survey, and responses, please visit:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/142gOlyt7UFvIHEEme1clcbujwgaAPRKbEeibQ8EaAvw/viewform?usp=send_form
Conclusion
23
Concept Map:
How
does
Refi
ned
Micr
opho
ne C
hoice
and
Pla
cem
ent H
elp
to A
chie
ve O
ptim
um T
onal
and
Tex
tura
l Cha
ract
erist
ics in
Am
plifi
ed G
uita
r Rec
ordi
ngs?
Sean
Mc
Keow
n
Pre/
Post
- Pr
oduc
tion
Desir
ed Q
ualit
ies
Natu
ral
Colo
ured
Obje
ctivi
ty
Prod
uctio
n In
fluen
ces
Pre-
reco
rded
Mat
eria
l
Prod
uctio
n Te
chni
ques
Feed
back Di
rect
/ In
dire
ct P
artic
ipan
ts Stak
ehol
ders
/ Di
rect
Peer
s
Engi
neer
Mus
ician
sLa
yper
son
/ In
dire
ct
Acad
emic
Supe
rviso
rs
Indu
stry
Ass
ocia
tes
Layp
eopl
e
Met
hods
A/B
Com
paris
ons
List
enin
g Te
sts
Surv
eys
Fact
ors
afte
r rec
ordi
ng
Fact
ors
at R
ecor
ding
Reco
rdin
g En
viron
men
t
Chal
leng
es
Refle
ctio
ns
Stan
ding
Wav
es
Room
Mod
es
Com
b Fi
lterin
g
Micr
opho
ne S
elec
tion
Prin
ciple
s of
Ope
ratio
n
Cond
enso
rDy
nam
ic
Micr
opho
ne P
ositi
onin
g
Sing
le /
Mul
ti M
ic Se
tups
Sing
leM
ultip
lefa
ctor
s
Axis
On A
xis
Off A
xis
Dist
ance
Clos
e /
Spot
Prox
imity
Effe
ct
Room
/ A
mbi
ent
enco
unte
rs
Phas
e Pr
oble
ms
Freq
uenc
y Ca
ncel
ling
Freq
uenc
y Ad
ditio
nai
ded
by
Phas
e In
vers
ion
in re
latio
n to So
unds
ourc
e
Oute
r Con
e
Inne
r Con
e
Dust
cap
Behi
nd A
mp
Reco
rdin
g Sp
ace
com
batte
d by
Deco
uplin
g
Isola
tion
Sepa
ratio
n
from
Wal
ls
Ceili
ngs
Floo
r
char
acte
rised
by
Room
Siz
e
Abso
rbtio
n
Acou
stics
Diap
hrag
m
Smal
l Dia
phra
gm
Larg
e Di
aphr
agm
Pola
r Pat
tern
Card
ioid
Omni
dire
ctio
nal
Figu
re o
f 8
Hype
rcar
dioi
d
char
acte
rised
by
"Cle
an-u
p" P
roce
ssin
gHP
F
Com
pres
sion
Equa
lisat
ion
Room
Nod
es
Conclusion
24
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.
Conclusion
26
[4] Senior, M. (2007). Guitar Amp Recording, [online], available: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug07/articles/guitaramprecording.htm http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug07/articles/guitaramprecordingaudio.htm [accessed 10 December, 2014].
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-
1924%20Stokowski%20-%20Philadelphia%20Acoustic%20Recordings.htm
[accessed 27 April, 2015].
Worrall, D. M. (2007) David Edward Hughes: Concertinist and Inventor, [online], available:
http://www.angloconcertina.org/files/HughesforWebsite.pdf
[accessed 23 April, 2015].
Rubin, J.T. (2013) History of Sound Engineering, [online], available:
http://newlisbonstem.pbworks.com/w/page/31097374/History%20Of%20Sound%20Engineering
[accessed 18 March, 2015].
Robjohns, H. (2010) A Brief History of Microphones, [online], available: http://microphone-
data.com/media/filestore/articles/History-10.pdf [accessed 24 April, 2015].
Coutant, S. O. (unknown) The RCA Photophone Type PB-31, [online], available http://www.coutant.org/pb31/
[accessed 3 May, 2015].
Coutant, S. O. (unknown) Western Electric No. 47-A Amplifier, [online], available http://www.coutant.org/we47/
[accessed 3 May, 2015].
Robjohns, H. (2000) Understanding & Using Directional Microphones, [online], available:
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep00/articles/direction.htm
[accessed 11 February, 2015].
DeTogne, G. (1996) The Shure 55 Series Microphones: Setting the Standard of Performance, [online],
available: http://cdn.shure.com/publication/upload/538/us_pro_unidyne_ea.pdf
[accessed 17 April, 2015].
Webb, J. (2002) Twelve Microphones That Made History, [online], available:
http://www.aes.org/aeshc/docs/mtgschedules/113conv2002/webb_12-microphones.pdf
[accessed 18 April, 2015].
Stamler, P. J. (2014) Shure SM57 Impedance Modification, [online], available:
http://www.recordingmag.com/resources/resourceDetail/330.html
[accessed 14 April, 2015].
Bibliography, Discography and Web Resources
30
AKG. (2009) C414 Range & History, [online], available: http://www.akgc414.com/akg/c-414-range-history/
[accessed 14 April, 2015].
Recording Microphones. (2009). David Edward Hughes: Concertinist and Inventor, [online], available:
http://www.recording-microphones.co.uk/Neumann-U47-tube.shtml [accessed 24 April, 2015].
Senior, M. (2014) Mike Senior - Multi-miking Drums & Guitars With The Audient ASP008, [online], available:
http://blog.audient.com/post/53832691211/mike-senior-multi-miking-drums-guitars-with [accessed 27 April,
2015].
Robjohns, H. White, P. (2007) Q. How can I make the most of my multi-pattern mic?, [online], available:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/dec07/articles/qa1207_4.htm [accessed 29 April, 2015].
Klapholz, J. (1986) Microphones: History & Development, [online], available:
http://www.lloydmicrophoneclassics.com/mic_history.html [accessed 11 March, 2015].
Shorter, D.E. (1955) The Design of a Ribbon Type Pressure-Gradient Microphone for Broadcast Transmission,
[online], available: http://recordinghacks.com/pdf/coles/bbc_monograph_04.pdf
[accessed 15 April, 2015].
Hoffman, M. (unknown) Multi-mic mixing technique, [online], available:
http://www.amptone.com/g197.htm [accessed 06 May, 2015].
Bartlett, B. (2015) Ribbon Mics for Live: Adding Another Dimension, [online], available:
http://www.prosoundweb.com/article/print/ribbons_for_live_sound_adding_another_dimension [accessed 15
April, 2015].
Pink Floyd. (1972). Comfortably Numb, Track 6 of The Wall [Disc 2], EMI.
The Jimi Hendrix Experience (1968). Voodoo Chile (Slight Return), Track 16 of Electric Ladyland, Polydor.
Led Zeppelin. (1969). Communication Breakdown, Track 7 of Led Zeppelin, Atlantic.
The White Stripes. (2003). Ball and Biscuit, Track 8 of Elephant, V2.
Rolling Stone. (2012) Reader’s Poll: The Best Jack White Songs of All Time, [online], available:
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/readers-poll-the-best-jack-white-songs-of-all-time-20120411/1-ball-
and-biscuit-0210616 [accessed 3 May, 2015].
Hodgetts, L. (2014) STC 4021 & RODE NT4 – Drum Overhead/s, [online], available:
https://microphonecomparisons.wordpress.com/2014/04/26/stc-4021-rode-nt4-drum-overheads/ [accessed 3
May, 2015].
Taylor, B. (2002) STC 4021 (c.1935), [online], available: http://www.orbem.co.uk/mics/4021.htm [accessed 3
May, 2015].
Bibliography, Discography and Web Resources
31
Nave, R. (2000). Microphones, [online], available: http://hyperphysics.phy-
astr.gsu.edu/hbase/audio/mic.html#c1 [accessed 7 May, 2015].
PA for Music. (2015). Glossary of PA Terms. [online], available: http://www.paformusic.info/gl_r.htm [accessed
8 May, 2015].
Colletti, R. (2011.) Curing Condenser Confusion: An Audio History of the AKG C 414 [online], available:
http://www.trustmeimascientist.com/2011/09/05/curing-condenser-confusion-an-audio-history-of-the-akg-c-414/
[accessed 8 May, 2015].
Coutant. (unknown) STC 4021 omnidirectional dynamic mic. [online], available:
http://www.coutant.org/4021/index.html [accessed 8 May, 2015].
Shure. (2015). Polar Pattern / Directionality Vocal Technologies [online], available:
http://www.shure.co.uk/support_download/educational_content/microphones-basics/microphone_polar_patterns
[accessed 8 May, 2015].
Coutant. (unknown) Coles Electroacoustics Ltd. [online], available: http://www.coutant.org/coles/index.html
[accessed 8 May, 2015].
Vocal Technologies. (2015) Microphone Array Beamforming. [online], available:
http://www.vocal.com/beamforming/microphone-array/ [accessed 8 May, 2015].
