Louis,
You said that much better than I tried to.
Angie Dickinson Mickle
Avocado Productions
Broomfield, CO
www.avocadoproductions.com
800-246-3811
Visit us on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=118773287678
Or Twitter
http://twitter.com/AvocadoProd
Louis Hone wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I remember reading an interview with Phil Ramone where he talked about a mic
> that was only used for vocals (it may have been a 47 or a 67 - my memory is
> shot). It was never to be cleaned, restored or used for anything else but
> vocals, because apparently the micro layers of human breath on the capsule
> had turned that particular mic into a gem.
>
> Good engineers know their mics (not the models but the actual ones they have
> in their cabinet). They know that such a mic produces a particular sound and
> the same model produces a different sound. I met a colleague years ago who
> had a vast collection of ribbon mics and dynamic mics that had never seen
> phantom power across them and to him these "virgin" mics sounded better than
> those that had been hooked up to phantom power from the console.
>
> Recording sound is not recipe based like in a cookbook. It's more like
> painting: you have to know what you want to achieve and start by using the
> right tools (canvas, paintbrush, pigment, etc). So an old beat up 77 may
> sound more appropriate for the sound you are trying to achieve.
>
> The tube revival craze drives me crazy because old engineers like me know
> that Pultecs could sound horrible (noisy, distorted, etc) if they weren't
> adjusted regularly. In a rack where you had 5, none of them sounded the
> same. But you knew that unit number three's sound was the one you wanted for
> a particular instrument in a particular session. Same with old 67s or 47s.
> We've all had our stories of a tube mic going haywire during a session.
>
> So it all boils down to the fact that mics, processing gear, consoles, etc
> are tools that you use for a particular purpose. But you have to know your
> tools and that requires years and years of patient learning and using your
> EARS (wow what a concept ).
>
> Louis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Angie Dickinson Mickle
> Sent: 3 février 2011 14:35
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for recording in the late
> 1920s?
>
> Tom,
>
> I only responded because it made no sense to me to replace the guts of a
> ribbon mic with a condenser purely to upgrade the sound of the mic. As
> it turns out it was more for the visual.
>
> Regarding old mics , I'd rather use my ears than read a spec sheet.
> Specs mean nothing if the mic sounds good. We have two SM-81's. One
> manufactured in the late seventies or early eighties. The other dates
> to the late 90's or early 2000's. This model has never changed
> according to Shure. Yet, both sound completely different. This
> information demonstrates your point. But here is the catch. The older
> one sounds better. It is fuller where the newer one is more toppy. Do
> I want to have the older one brought up to spec? No way. I love how it
> sounds. This also illustrates that you can't trust that a commonly used
> mic is always going to sound the same from studio to studio.
>
> Our almost 70 year old 77B has never been restored. Unless some bozo
> blows into it, we are not interested in having it "repaired" or brought
> up to spec. It sounds great as is. When it comes to old mics, it boils
> down to knowing *your* mic well enough to make the knowledgeable
> decision as to what instrument to use it on or room to use it in.
>
> Angie Dickinson Mickle
> Avocado Productions
> Broomfield, CO
> www.avocadoproductions.com
> 800-246-3811
>
> Visit us on Facebook
> http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=118773287678
> Or Twitter
> http://twitter.com/AvocadoProd
>
> Tom Fine wrote:
>> I have to put a little backspin on this notion.
>>
>> Yes, when they are in good working order, the famous vintage mics sound
>> great and are very useful when their "flavor" is desired. However, I've
>> had some interesting conversations with the guys who restore them and
>> it's surprising how many un-restored, damaged, ancient mics are in use
>> in famous and semi-famous recording situations today. One of the better
>> makers of modern condenser mics explained to me how the gold sputtering
>> can't help but start coming off the older European mics because the
>> material it was sputtered onto becomes brittle and warps/shrinks with
>> age. In the case of the ribbon mics, things like rubber, fabric and the
>> ribbons themselves change over time, especially when exposed to breath
>> and spittle. The mics become less uniform in their response and less
>> sensitive overall, a former RCA technician still in the restoration
>> business told me.
>>
>> So yes, an old Neumann, AKG, RCA or other famous mic is very desireable
>> today, because they sound good when they work properly. But "work
>> properly" is the key term here, and just because something looks good
>> doesn't mean it works to its published specs.
>>
>> Also, I'm sure there are many recordists on this list who would prefer a
>> modern less-colored mic for what they are doing. If you look at the
>> published curves on these old mics, there was a lot of coloration
>> built-in, which is desireable to some and undesireable to others. I
>> would suggest that modern recording methods, which are essentially
>> noiseless and offer very wide dynamic and frequency range, emphasize the
>> coloration on these old mics more than back-in-the-day recording
>> methods. Again, whether that's a plus or a minus depends on the
>> situation and the user.
>>
>> -- Tom Fine
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Angie Dickinson Mickle"
>> <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 10:41 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for recording in the
>> late 1920s?
>>
>>
>>> The couple of instances given were understandable. 25 years ago, these
>>> mics were probably not that desirable. But to tout improvements in
>>> sound would not be a selling point today.
>>>
>>> Angie Dickinson Mickle
>>> Avocado Productions
>>> Broomfield, CO
>>> www.avocadoproductions.com
>>> 800-246-3811
>>>
>>> Visit us on Facebook
>>> http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=118773287678
>>> Or Twitter
>>> http://twitter.com/AvocadoProd
>>>
>>> Dan Nelson wrote:
>>>> Im with you Scott, my mic collection for big band sessions have 77dx,
>>>> 47's, BK5's. All have that warm ribbon sound on the right sections.
>>>> dnelsonward
>>>>
>>>> --- On Wed, 2/2/11, Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Scott <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for recording in
>>>>> the late 1920s?
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Date: Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 9:03 PM
>>>>> Me too. I have U-87's and 414's and
>>>>> many others, but the unmodified but
>>>>> restored BK-5's and Dx-77's I have are terrific all by
>>>>> themselves. I admit,
>>>>> it took a while to find the right person with original RCA
>>>>> parts down to the
>>>>> wind screen liner material to keep them properly... But some things are
>>>>> just not replaceable with a look alike. There are retired
>>>>> guys out there
>>>>> still that have the bits and knowledge you need.
>>>>>
>>>>> If it is a music video they are to appear in, the original
>>>>> parts serve as
>>>>> well as the look-alikes. If you want to record... Well, the
>>>>> right mic
>>>>> regardless of vintage for the a source material is what is
>>>>> order. No one
>>>>> needs to know what they look like.....
>>>>>
>>>>> YMMV !
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>>> On Behalf Of Angie Dickinson Mickle
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 2:47 PM
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for
>>>>> recording in the late
>>>>> 1920s?
>>>>>
>>>>> Louis,
>>>>> Why would you do that? It seems to me that if someone
>>>>> wanted the sound of a
>>>>> 414, they'd just rent a 414.
>>>>>
>>>>> Angie Dickinson Mickle
>>>>> Avocado Productions
>>>>> Broomfield, CO
>>>>> www.avocadoproductions.com
>>>>> 800-246-3811
>>>>>
>>>>> Visit us on Facebook
>>>>> http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=118773287678
>>>>> Or Twitter
>>>>> http://twitter.com/AvocadoProd
>>>>>
>>>>> Louis Hone wrote:
>>>>>> A crystal microphone that sounds good ??? I
>>>>> can't comment on this
>>>>>> actual broadcast, but I wouldn't go with looks
>>>>> alone: I have several
>>>>>> vintage microphones that I rent out and some of them I
>>>>> have modified, so
>>>>> that the
>>>>>> guts are AKG 414s or Neumann U-87, or
>>>>> KM-84s. So they may look like RCA
>>>>>> 44s or RCA 77s or RCA BK5s but they sound very
>>>>> different.
>>>>>> Louis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>>>> On Behalf Of Daniel Roth
>>>>>> Sent: 2 février 2011 14:19
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for
>>>>> recording in the
>>>>>> late 1920s?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I seem to recall a Fresh Air broadcast in the mid-90's
>>>>> with the
>>>>>> Squirrel Nut Zippers in which the producers employed a
>>>>> vintage
>>>>>> Philmore Crystal Microphone from the 20's. The entire
>>>>> room was
>>>>>> captured by this one mic and it sounded tremendously
>>>>> authentic, despite
>>>>> the FM broadcast.
>>>>>> ------
>>>>>> Dan Roth
>>>>>> Audio Technician
>>>>>> Walter J Brown Media Archives and
>>>>>> Peabody Awards Collection
>>>>>> University of Georgia
>>>>>> Main Library
>>>>>> Athens, GA
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>>>>>> [[log in to unmask]]
>>>>> on behalf of Tom Fine
>>>>>> [[log in to unmask]]
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:53 PM
>>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for
>>>>> recording in the
>>>>>> late 1920s?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Start with engineer Raymond Sooey's journal:
>>>>>> http://www.davidsarnoff.org/soo-maintext.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He may have run the very sessions you are asking
>>>>> about.
>>>>>> -- Tom Fine
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Kathryn Hobgood Ray" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 12:17 PM
>>>>>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] How would a band be setup for
>>>>> recording in the
>>>>>> late 1920s?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi folks, I am wondering if anyone has a resource
>>>>> recommendation that
>>>>>> would
>>>>>>> discuss how a band would record in the late 1920s?
>>>>> (Specifically for
>>>>>>> Victor.) My colleague here in New Orleans tells me
>>>>> that the
>>>>>> instrumentalists
>>>>>>> would arrange themselves around a microphone in a
>>>>> semicircle, the
>>>>>>> loudest instruments being staggered further away.
>>>>> The vocalist,
>>>>>>> meanwhile, would have his/her/their own mic some
>>>>> distance from the
>>>>>>> band, and the two lines would run straight to the
>>>>> machine. Does this
>>>>>>> sound accurate to you? I need to verify this setup
>>>>> and would love some
>>>>> resource suggestions.
>>>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Kathryn Hobgood Ray
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>>>> 504.650.1238
>>>>>>> http://www.snoozerquinn.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> =
>>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>>> Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3418 -
>>>>> Release Date:
>>>>>> 02/02/11 02:34:00
>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security,
>>>>> version of virus
>>>>>> signature database 5841 (20110202) __________
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of
>>>> virus signature database 5841 (20110202) __________
>>>>
>>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.eset.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
>> signature database 5843 (20110203) __________
>>
>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>>
>> http://www.eset.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.872 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3420 - Release Date: 02/03/11
> 02:34:00
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 5844 (20110203) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
|
