A couple of months ago I posted a thread here asking advice on the best technique to use with a borrowed pair of Rode NT5s for recording a small chamber orchestra (to accompany video). I received some wonderful advice from you guys and now the same orchestra wants me to record the audio at their next concert (obviously they must be deaf to want me again) ;-).

I'm in the position to purchase a matched pair of microphones such as the Rode NT5s. But would like to buy something with a little more flexibility (being a videographer) and better suited for chamber orchestra recordings. After scanning this and other forums, I can't seem to find a definite answer. Some are recommending Oktavas, some AKGs, and others say the NT55s. My budget is $500 for the pair, and they can be used as long as they fit into the budget.

What would you guys recommend?

I use a Mackie 802-VLZ3 mixer and a Macbook Pro with Soundtrack Pro to record (using the rca outputs on the mixer to connect the two).

A pair of small-diaphram condenser mics in a cardoid pattern are arguably the most useful and versatile tool for recording small ensembles of acoustic musicians.

Properly set up in X/Y or ORTF configurations, they do very well.

In my opinion:
Oktava MK012 with cardoid capsule are good, though the cap is almost a sub-cardoid.
Rode NT5 are very good.
AKG modular series with cardoid caps are very good.

No bad choices. Were it me, I'd go NT5.

If you need the modularity to stick on a supercardoid cap, AKG.

If you really need a stereo mic for field video use (where dealing with two mics on a stand would be difficult), some sort of M/S mic.

Thanks Seth! I really appreciate your input.

I've used the NT5s in an ORTF config before and they performed quite well that way. I do own a Rode NTG3 shotgun mic and use it a good bit with video already.

The fact that the Oktavas are in the budget and can be upgraded with different capsules is intriguing.

What about SE Electronics? Some folks on other forums mention them.

Okay, so one for the NT5! Anyone else?

For the price the NT5 are a good choice - and you can also use the omni heads from he NT55 in them (just buy them as spares).

Really?! I didn't know you could change the capsules on the NT5. That's wonderful!

Thanks John!

Okay, so two for the NT5!

I use the Rode NT4 stereo mic, and really like it for it's simplicity. Yes it's fixed to XY, but that's what I need. The NT4 has the same capsules as the NT5, and of course they are matched. For more coverage I put the NT4 in the center, and an NT3 on either side pointing in.

I don't know of anyone specifically offering matched pairs, but I prefer my AT4021 ($249 each) to my NT5 mics generally speaking.
There isn't much variance in AT mics. I'd bet you could be fine in stereo with two mics ordered together from any large vendor.

To add to that, Rode mics (and most likely many mics) are produced with such precision, that they are close to matched no matter what two you put together.

Thanks Chad for the advice on the NT4. However, versatility would be a problem for me if I were to purchase one, as I couldn't separate them for other uses.

Hmm. You have a very interesting suggestion, Jay. Especially since you have both the NT5s and the AT4021. What would you say renders the AT4021 superior to the NT5?

I've been selling Chinese microphones here in the UK - and I'm having really good results from
DWH-502 (http://www.limelight.org.uk/dwh-502.html)

I'm not touting for business as I only sell to the UK, not US - but if you could find someone in the States who sells these, you'd be very happy. M/S or various other techniques are quite possible. I really like them
and they're really very cheap.

Thanks Paul, that certainly is an interesting alternative! But going with M/S would mess me up a little as it tends to pick up the audience more. Definitely something to remember though.

Robert, a little tip to make your mikes a little more versatile, is that if you're using cardioids, you can lift the LF response by turning them into omnis simply by wrapping tape around the side vents. If you get a little bit closer to the orchestra to compensate for more audience noise, you may then find an overall improvement to the general balance, but you would need to experiment with placement etc.

The difference between an omni & a cardioid pattern is approx 1.4 times the distance as far as side pick-up is concerned. In other words an omni needs to be about 1.4 times closer for the same amount of audience sound. However, you will achieve improved bass response with the omni configuration. I use AKG C451's for classical groups but these are probably out of your price range.

RonC.

So Ron, you're saying that if I bought a pair of Rode NT5 mics and put some gaffers tape over the sound vents on the sides, it would turn the mics from cardioids into omnis?

If that's correct, then I should place the mics 6 feet behind the conductor instead of 10 feet? This would not only increase the quality of the sound as it would be closer (therefore capturing more detail) and it would increase the bass response?

That's it, but I use electrical pvc tape as it is easier to handle and you can stretch it as you wind it on to make a neat fit with several layers. The AKG's are very detailed and I would try to get even closer than 6 feet with omni's, but I'm sure a bit of experimenting will produce very good results, particularly if the audience is quiet.

AKG C451B - Pencil Condenser Mic 2895 Z 00010 - B&H Photo Video (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/246637-REG/AKG_2895_Z_00010_C451B_Pencil_Condenser.html#reviews)

RonC.

If that's correct, then I should place the mics 6 feet behind the conductor instead of 10 feet? This would not only increase the quality of the sound as it would be closer (therefore capturing more detail) and it would increase the bass response?
The position of the microphones should be "tuned" to the performing group, the acoustics of the room, the nature of the audience (if live), and even the type of music. There are many variables, primarily the ratio of direct to reflected sound that should be considered. Ideally we arrive at the venue before the dress rehearsal so we can experiment with microphone position to get the best recording.

Well Ron, I think you just opened up a new world to me with taping the mics (with electrical pvc tape). Thank you!

The AKGs really are too much (monetarily) for me right now as video/photo equipment is more of a priority.

Yes, you are absolutely right, Richard. I always try arrive early to make sure everything is technically sound before the performance. There will be a full rehearsal the day before and a touch-up right before the concert, so that will give me plenty of time to experiment. I like to have the input of the pros on placement, just for insurance.

What would you guys recommend on reading material? I was recently recommended "Mastering Audio" by Bob Katz. But what about recording books? (yeah, I've read Home Recording for Dummies already)

Getting back to my comment regarding the AT4021 versus the Rode NT5. To be most accurate I should say I prefer my AT3031 mics to my Rode NT5 pair, and I prefer my AT4021 to my AT3031 mics.
Technically I haven't compared my 4021 directly to my NT5's, but the AT mics do have lower self-noise and higher sensitivity.
Generally speaking all these mics have a pretty similar character that would be sufficient for successful recording no matter which you picked, but the higher signal to noise ratio of the AT mics, along with a little better bass response, and the switches for roll-off and attenuation make them the mics I usually pick when I'm packing to record.
Plus the AT4021 fit your mentioned price point and I've been very pleased with mine.

After looking at the AT4021 mics, they do seem to be better than the NT5's. But one guy (see link) says that using the AT4021's as a stereo pair brings about unusual off-axis imaging characteristics. Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Audio-Technica AT4021 Cardioid Condenser Mic

I'm almost sold on the AT4021's, but the off-axis imaging is the only thing I'm concerned with.

What do you think, Jay?

At taperssection.com it seems that the AT4051b mics get some love. They are cool because with the modular caps you can buy the hyper caps too and use them for production audio in film. I have the AT4053b hyper, and I was thinking about getting one AT4051b, and a second 51b cap to use for live music recording. They are great mics, but are underrated, or just not known about.

Interesting comments. Since I only own one of the AT4021, I can neither agree nor dispute that review for stereo techniques.
Generally speaking it is true that as the frequency gets lower a directional mic does behave in a more "omni" fashion. The same is true that as the frequency goes up, omni mics become more directional. Apparantly he feels this mic doesn't have this characteristic? I can only say that I know of nothing unusual in the mic's construction or marketing that would point to it being out of the ordinary.
I haven't noticed anything unusual in the off-axis response of the AT4021, but I've mostly used it in spaces and with subjects where there is very little off-axis response to begin with.
The polar plot doesn't look unusual.
This mic has only been available a couple of years, so it doesn't have the wide user base and reviews that many other small-diaphragm condensers have. I can only say I like the sound of mine.

It seems that if there are any disadvantages to a pair of AT4021's, they still outweigh the NT5's advantages. And since I would most likely end up using them as individual mics for the majority of the time (instead of stereo), they will be a good bit better than the NT5's.

Thanks guys for the spectacular advice on these microphones! I really appreciate it! Hope you all have a great weekend!

Anyone else want to comment on the AT4021?

So Ron, you're saying that if I bought a pair of Rode NT5 mics and put some gaffers tape over the sound vents on the sides, it would turn the mics from cardioids into omnis?

If that's correct, then I should place the mics 6 feet behind the conductor instead of 10 feet? This would not only increase the quality of the sound as it would be closer (therefore capturing more detail) and it would increase the bass response?

But I would *not* do this!

Yes, in theory, blocking the rear entry ports of a directional mic. will turn it into an omni.

However - the diaphragm of a directional mic. is normally at a different tension from an omni and everything will be optimised for a pressure-gradient mic. rather than a pure pressure mic. (which the omni is).

So Ron, you're saying that if I bought a pair of Rode NT5 mics and put some gaffers tape over the sound vents on the sides, it would turn the mics from cardioids into omnis?


Robert .. it's not advisable to promote and encourage anyone to modify and operate any Rode mics in any fashion, other than the way they were intended by Rode.

You'll be operating the mics outside their designed specifications, in direct contradiction to the user manual .. and voiding the warranty.
Cheers.

Well, it does make sense to use the mic as intended, I guess tape won't be happening. So, would you recommend a mic that would provide a better sound for an orchestra like an omni, but can still be used as a cardioid? (within the budget, of course)

The AT4051b is a Card, but you can get omni & hyper caps for it. Sweet sweet mic! Best mic for the money.

I'd really love to buy it, Chad. But I can't buy it as a pair, as it's way too expensive for me.

The AT4021 is still a great cardioid at half the price. Just no changeable caps. I have not studied it, but I suspect that the 4021 capsule is the same as the 4051, only not exchangeable.

Well, it does make sense to use the mic as intended, I guess tape won't be happening. So, would you recommend a mic that would provide a better sound for an orchestra like an omni, but can still be used as a cardioid? (within the budget, of course)

A pair of Rode NT 5 + a pair of omni capsules from the NT 55 bought seperately.

An alternative is the Sontronics STC-1S (http://www.sontronics.com/stc1s.htm) stereoset + a pair of the optional Omni Capsules (http://www.sontronics.com/capsules.htm).

Hmm. So it is possible to swap out capsules on the NT5?

NT45-O according to the Rode website

Hmm. So it is possible to swap out capsules on the NT5?
Yes


NT45-O according to the Rode website
You said it.

Just wanted to chime in and offer a few clarifications:

Robert .. it's not advisable to promote and encourage anyone to modify and operate any Rode mics in any fashion, other than the way they were intended by Rode. You'll be operating the mics outside their designed specifications, in direct contradiction to the user manual .. and voiding the warranty.

Putting tape on a microphone will not void any warranties. Can't promise it'll sound good, but then again, it might be great. Shure actually offers a microphone just like this -- the KSM 141. It is switchable between cardioid and omni. When you twist the cap, a mechanical baffle rises over the vents, changing the pickup pattern to omni. This also happens when a singer cups a mic on-stage with their hands. The "hand baffle" changes the pattern to omni, often resulting in feedback problems.

However, the advice concerning omnis has its own complications:

...you can lift the LF response by turning them into omnis simply by wrapping tape around the side vents. If you get a little bit closer to the orchestra to compensate for more audience noise, you may then find an overall improvement to the general balance, but you would need to experiment with placement etc.

The difference between an omni & a cardioid pattern is approx 1.4 times the distance as far as side pick-up is concerned. In other words an omni needs to be about 1.4 times closer for the same amount of audience sound.

To restate what Ron pointed out, you need to have a cardioid microphone at 1.7 times the distance as an omni in order to achieve the same source:room ratio. So, if you had a cardioid pair in ORTF at 17ft and it sounded really good, you would need to have the pair of omnis at 10ft to achieve the same ratio of source:room. What does that mean? It means that moving 7ft closer and using omnis didn't actually help reduce audience noise!

Additionally, being closer will result in a harsher sound on the strings. If you are recording an amateur or scholastic orchestra, this is often the opposite of what you want! If the room sound is awful, you may try EQing and adding reverb in post, but just remember that closer does not always equal better.

You will also change the balance of the sections of the orchestra (violins : violas : low brass : etc etc) as you get closer. Every time you cut your distance in half to your source, you increase your signal by 6db. Because we cut our distance to the front of the orchestra from 17ft to 10ft (1.7:1), the instruments front row of instruments received a 4-5db boost. However, our distance from the instruments in the back only changed from ~47ft to 40ft (1.175:1), resulting in a boost of less than a decibel.

So what's the real trick here? It's knowing what an orchestra is supposed to sound like, and then choosing you mic placement and/or polar pattern based on that sound. It will change from space to space and from group to group. This is the REAL reason why a versatile microphone might be useful. All of the mics that have been mentioned can get good results on orchestras. If I were in your position, I would strongly consider the Octava MK012s because of their price, quality, and availability of cardioid, omni, and HYPER-cardioid caps all in one little kit.

Better yet, team up with an audio engineer in your area for the best results, but it can't hurt to have some decent microphones in your locker for solo gigs.

For those of you that are interested in learning a little more about issues like this, check out DPA's Microphone University: DPA Microphones :: Microphone University - The Essentials (http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Microphone-University/Lite.aspx)
Especially this graph: http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Microphone-University/~/media/Images/Content/MicUni/Lite/relative_distance.gif
Or Audio-Technica's page on the matter: Audio-Technica - Microphones, headphones, wireless microphone systems, noise-cancelling headphones & more : What's The Pattern? (http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/site/aa901ccabf1dfc6b/index.html/)

You've made a couple of really good points! Thanks for the post.

I guess there's areason why the orchestra is structured the way it is with brass and percussion etc in the back!

Also - if the orchestra is any good, the director has it balanced so it sounds great right where he is - mf for the back isn't quite the same as mf for the violins and folks in the back have to almost lead the beat to keep balance. I play in the back row and we're always being yelled at for being behind even when we're right on the beat - have to get a bit ahead of it when you're in the back and have a slow-speaking instrument to boot!

So you're right on with your comment re having to know what the orchestra is supposed to sound like and knowing the particular group you're recording and the space itself.

By the way, thanks to your post an analogy occurred to me. A telephoto lens on a distant camera will "flatten" the image more than a wide angle lens close up. Just like a hyper at 2X the distance will flatten the group more than an omni close up.

Putting tape on a microphone will not void any warranties.

In a lot of cases yes but don't bet on it .. signs of something being taped to a mics body in a lot of cases can lead to other strange mods which haven't worked either and the mic very roughly returned to original specs for warranty. You'd be surprised what turns up for some claims.

Folks would be better off spending their time on something else rather than trying to 2nd guess any long established pro mic designers.

Cheers.

Thank you Christian, Jim and Allan! I’m receiving a wonderful education on sound and orchestra just through reading your words.

A few weeks ago I went ahead and bought a slightly used Rode NT5 matched pair for $244! Two for nearly the price of one new NT5 at $219! eBay is awesome.

Taking previous comments into consideration, I realized that a cardioid would be better for this particular orchestra as they aren’t very good–backing away would help blend any performance issues and a cardioid is necessary to keep audience levels at bay. Now your recent comments confirm this!

So when I need an omni or two, I can just buy the NT45-O capsule(s) and be ready to go!

Right now I have a Mackie 802-VLZ3 mixer that I really like, but it would be great to have a digital mixer so that I can record individual tracks right into Logic or Soundtrack with my MacBook Pro. The Mackie Onyx mixers seem really nice and can be used to plug into my laptop or even my 5D Mark II (via an attenuator cable). What do you guys recommend for, say $500?

Hello Robert. Sounds like you are moving onward and upward.

Since you are doing audio for video, I would steer away from laptop based interfaces. After all, you don't want to bring a computer to every gig, and you want to make sure you get something that is as versatile as possible and will last you a long time. To that effect, try taking a look at the Edirol R44, Tascam DR-680, or even higher-priced units geared towards the video community by Sounds Devices.

A stand-alone unit will go with your where-ever you go, from concerts to interviews to short-films. And if you are just doing two tracks right now, then there definitely isn't any advantage to a computer interface.

BTW, since we were on the topic of the Rode NT5, I wanted to let everyone know that I just listed a NEW matched pair of Rode NT5's in the classified section.

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/private-classifieds/485221-rode-nt5-matched-pair-new-360-a.html#post1572450

For 90% or more of what I do 2 channel is fine and I use a Sound Devices 702. For the occasional time whem I ned more mics I will record my main stereo pair into the SD702 as usual and then run the output of the 702 into a Mackie Onyx FW interface and run single instrument mics into the same interface and then record in Cubase on a Mac. Advantage is that I have my main stereo pair on the SD 702 a well as the Mac so I'm reasonably well covered and only the additional instrument mics depend on the Mac. And I run everything on an APC battery backup power unit for insurance.

I could get a larger SD unit, but the cost isn't really justified for the rare occasions whn I need more than two channls.

Thanks again guys for all your advice and input on this. I ended up buying some nearfield monitors (Mackie HR624 mkII) instead of a digital mixer.

The recording and performance went splendidly on Sunday, and I'm finishing up the mastering (or tweaking, in my case) now.

But there's a rather strange phenomenon that's happening. As soon as I begin playing any piece of the recorded music, my eardrums act like a low pressure weather system moved in. It doesn't happen to other music. It doesn't matter what volume, nor what audio system I play it on. I think it's just some frequencies are too pronounced, but I haven't trained my ears to identify equalization problems, being a video guy.

Would you guys listen to my attached file and tell me what the problem might be? And whatever else you find wrong with it too.

To me it sounds like the low end is lacking. Your 256kbps file hung up for me, so I'm listening to the 128. The brass is the most prominent thing on this. I would start with a flat EQ curve. Try boosting the lows at around 120hz go get the articulated notes of the bass, and maybe 70-80kz too to get some oomf. Perhaps a little high end boost to ad some "air" to the spectrum.

Not sure what do do about the brass. Maybe there was just too many of them? Or too few strings? The brass is more on the right channel. so perhaps a multiband compressor on the right channel focused on the frequency of the brass, to sort of pad that down in the loudest sections, yet leave the rest of the orchestra alone, effectively bringing up the strings.

Listen to it at a low volume, and at medium volume. If you are mixing too loud your ears will get tired and start acting like a compressor, effectively lying to you. Make sure your ears are even in height with the tweeters, and that your monitors form an equilateral triangle with your head and eachother. That is the sweet spot. Angle the monitors in towards your ears.

You say this was recorded with a pair of NT5s? I have an NT4, with has the same capsules. I know how conductors can be, but if you can get a couple more mics near the sides you could get the bass and strings better represented. Overall it's a nice recording, but the Brass is the prominent thing here. I would go to a practice and experiment with placement, taking notes so when you get the recording back in the studio you know where the mic(s) were on the best recording.

It's not even all the brass dominating, - it's the trombones (noisy b*gg*rs by nature - I should know!) and just occasionally the horns. The trumpets are as distant sounding as the strings for the most part.

I listened with the bass end boosted and it improved the sound but I think it's mainly a question of the musical balance - at least from the perspective of where the mics were placed. It sounds like the trombones were pointing more at the mics than the trumpets were, but it may be more the distance or even the playing. I would have a better idea if I could see a pic of the orchestra and where the mics were.

I think the suggestion of trying out different mic placements at a rehearsal is very sensible. I'm not sure if reducing the frequency range where the trombones operate (approx 80-500Hz fundamentals) on one channel would help but give it a try. Double Basses operate right down to about 40Hz for a normal 4 string bass or even lower for a 5 string but a lot of the character of the sound is from the harmonics.

BTW I couldn't get the 256 bps file to be recognised either.

Thanks Chad! I adjusted everything you suggested, save the compression on the brass. I spent 45 minutes playing with it, but it wasn't very natural for the piece. At the end I remember having a conversation with the conductor who said this music by Schubert has an unusually high range to it, so I think I'll preserve the original dynamics in it.

Attached is the new file, with a compromise in size (apparently anything over 16mb gets stuck on download). The compression reduces the depth and air considerably, though. It has a different name (the other one was incorrect).

From an equalization perspective, is there anything else I can do to enhance it?

EDIT: Sorry Colin! I posted mine before reading yours. The mic placement was about 10ft behind the conductor and about 13ft high, the mics were pointed down at the strings, but the woodwinds and brass were on separate higher levels with lovely 3ft walls behind each, so some frequencies were resonating more than necessary. It was in a church.

I'm not sure what exactly you did Robert, but it sounds like there is more bass and the strings are coming through better.

If you had iZotope RX, you could remove any coughs from the audience or clicks in the room. You could even select only the offending horns and reduce their gain by 2 or 3 db, but as it is it seems better.

Nice work!

I thought that latest file was better. I boosted the bottom end a bit more and enjoyed listening to the performance which has a lot of good playing in it. There's still a lack of definition from the bottom end (basses and timps particularly) but I'm not convinced you can do much about it (harder timp sticks might have helped in that acoustic and I suspect there's a bit of fumbling in the basses at times and a fair bit of resonance is evident). The trombones are still very prominent but that's how I llke it! It's a great piece (pun on symphony title intended) - thanks for sharing.

Since KSM 141s were mentioned in this thread, as is orchestra recording in general, I thought you might be curious to hear this sample of a recording I did recently.

KSM141s in omni, about ~40cm apart, angled 90*. Rode NT5s on the woodwinds, ~20cm apart, angled ~100*, very low in the mix.

...


Strike that. Why can't I upload mp3s? Additionally, I can't upload the 10mb .wav due to file size limits.

I had problems with uploading earlier as well. Try CloudApp. It works really well.

CloudApp (http://www.getcloudapp.com/)

I would really like to hear your recording!

If you want to e-mail them to me I can put them on a web site where folks can listen/download. I THINK I can receive a 10MB file - but it wouldn't hurt to split it in two. and send as two separate files.

OK, well since this is DVinfo.net, I figure you all would rather hear it with the video anyway. Below, you will find clips of a concert recorded with two Shure KSM 141s in AB omni (mains), two Rode NT5 in at 90* ~20cm (woodwinds), and two AT4050s (flankers). The 141s form 90% of the mix. The AT4050 were in figure-8 for the piano concerto (nulls towards the piano) and in omni for the symphony. I brought up the NT5s only when the woodwind solos warranted it. All mics are visible in the video if you look closely. Please listen in at least 480p. The focus of this recording was the audio.

Barber's Piano Concerto, Mvt. 1: YouTube - UNC Symphony Orchestra - Barber Piano Concerto: Mvt. 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS7Sw-KNtjE)

Brahm's Symhony No. 2, Mvt. 4: YouTube - UNC Symphony Orchestra - Brahms Symphony No. 2: IV. Allegro con spirito (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skR7SZOwVEs)

Speaking from experience, I do not like the 141s in cardioid on orchestra. I do like them in omni on orchestra.

Both of these pieces are amazing, by the way.

OK, well since this is DVinfo.net, I figure you all would rather hear it with the video anyway. Below, you will find clips of a concert recorded with two Shure KSM 141s in AB omni (mains), two Rode NT5 in at 90* ~20cm (woodwinds), and two AT4050s (flankers). The 141s form 90% of the mix. The AT4050 were in figure-8 for the piano concerto (nulls towards the piano) and in omni for the symphony. I brought up the NT5s only when the woodwind solos warranted it. All mics are visible in the video if you look closely. Please listen in at least 480p. The focus of this recording was the audio.

Barber's Piano Concerto, Mvt. 1: YouTube - UNC Symphony Orchestra - Barber Piano Concerto: Mvt. 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DS7Sw-KNtjE)

Brahm's Symhony No. 2, Mvt. 4: YouTube - UNC Symphony Orchestra - Brahms Symphony No. 2: IV. Allegro con spirito (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=skR7SZOwVEs)

Speaking from experience, I do not like the 141s in cardioid on orchestra. I do like them in omni on orchestra.

Both of these pieces are amazing, by the way.

Well done! That's really nice. Good dynamic range, good bottom end. Nice brasses, nice balance. Top end felt a little closed off, not as opened and airy as it possibly could be -- but that could be the hall, YouTube compression, whatever. The thing is, if sounds pretty neutral and uncolored from top to bottom. It sounds like a symphony orchestra sounds.

Again we learn the lesson: It's not just the equipment, it's knowing how to use it. And it sounds like you know how to use that equipment to make a first class recording. Good on ya!