Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site houxm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!5121cdd
From: 5121cdd@houxm.UUCP (C.DORY)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Recording Practices
Message-ID: <736@houxm.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Apr-84 09:42:31 EST
Article-I.D.: houxm.736
Posted: Wed Apr 18 09:42:31 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Apr-84 03:22:21 EST
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 32


In a recent article describing a comparison of the cassette, LP disk,
and CD of a DG recording of M.B., the recording setup was described.
This is another case in point as to why CDs often get a bad rap.
By putting the microphones over the conductor's head, the tonal
balance of the orchestra will sound trebly and hard.  The strings,
especially, will have a (as identified) steely quality.  This is due
to the radiation pattern of the strings.  The high harmonics tend to
radiate straight up while the lower harmonics radiate more omnidirectionally.
Therefore, realizing this, you can equalize the sound of the stings
(and many other instruments as well) by simply changing mike placement.

CDs are also criticized for lack of ambience; it is clear that with close
miking techniques (either multi or simple) that there is a definate lack
of reverberant information.

As I have discussed before on the net, this form of "natural" equalization
is often used to make up for subsequent losses in the recording chain.
The problem lies, then, when master tapes made for LPs are used for CDs.
As well, many recordists out of habit compensate for LPs when specifically
mastering for CDs.

Why don't we (on this net at least) spend more time discussing CREATIVE
ways to increase our enjoyment of recorded music.  Discussions of
mike placement and recording techniques, error correction, speaker
placement & construction, etc. have a hellava a lot more merit than
personnal attacks on opinions and senseless flames.
 

Craig Dory
AT&T Bell Laboratories
Holmdel, NJ