On 09/02/2011, Doug Pomeroy wrote:
> There are studio photos which show jazz bands arranged with the softer
> instruments (eg., acoustic guitar) positioned quite close to the mic,
> and the louder instruments spaced farther back, with the drums at the
> rear. I believe this type of set up was most common. If there was a
> singer, there would be a second mic, and vocal booths were not
> unknown.
>
> I think the reason many of the early records sounded so good has to
> do with use of the early large-diaphragm condenser mics. The Western
> Electric type-394 had a 2" diaphragm which produced a "presence peak"
> right where the human ear is most sensitive (about 3 kHz), and the
> engineers
> knew this on-axis peak could be used to achieve a satisfactory musical
> balance when when arranging instruments around the mic. The mics
> were inherently omni-directional at low frequencies (the 394 was
> basically
> flat down to a few Hz!), so some instruments could be placed behind
> the mic and still be picked up adequately. (Smaller diaphragm designs
> were eventually developed to raise the peak to a higher frequency,
> where the ear is less sensitive.)
>
> Of course, the use of a single mic has the advantage of coincident
> arrival time of all sound waves, avoiding phase cancellations which
> plague multi-mic set ups. But more than one mic was used on some
> occasions, such as Jelly Roll Morton's 1926 Victor recording of
> Doctor Jazz, where you can hear his vocal mic being opened
> just before he starts singing at the piano.
>
Yes, and one can see why: the piano is usually placed behind the other
instruments (as are the drums), so a singing pianist would sound
faint and distant.
I have still not found any clue as to who invented the electronic mixing
circuit, and when it was first used. Probably very early in broadcasting
history.
> I believe the skill of the engineer was a critical factor.
> The Bix And His Gang recordings, made in Okeh's NYC studio
> are remarkably well-balanced and obviously made with one mic.
> I believe the engineer was Chas Hibbard, who had learned his
> craft working for Edison.
>
> The ribbon mics, used with the equipment designed for them,
> produced a splendid, less peaky sound, altho they sounded dull
> compared with the condensers, so equalization was often applied
> to brighten their sound (not always with good results).
>
>
> Doug Pomeroy
> POMEROY AUDIO
> Audio Restoration & Mastering Services
> Transfers of metal parts, lacquers,
> shellac and vinyl discs & tapes.
> 193 Baltic St
> Brooklyn, NY 11201-6173
> (718) 855-2650
> [log in to unmask]
>
> "Never apologize for a song that sells a million copies."
> ---Irving Berlin
>
>
> =======
>
>
>> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:40:26 +0000
>> From: Don Cox <[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Re: How would a band be setup for recording in the late
>> 1920s?
>>
>> On 08/02/2011, Roger Kulp wrote:
>>
>> I have been reading this thread about the inferiority of these mikes
>> from the 20s.Why then,is it.that many of these early electrical
>> recordings sound so good,even 70+ years later?
>>>
>> I think the main reason is that only one, or at most two, mikes were
>> used. This makes it very easy for the brain to understand the sound.
>>
>> A multiple mike setup is like nothing you ever hear in the real
>> world,
>> and the instruments are in no logical relationship to each other or
>> to
>> the reverb.
>>
>> Regards
>> --
>> Don Cox
>> [log in to unmask]
Regards
--
Don Cox
[log in to unmask]
|