Daniel,
I noticed the improvement in sound quality as well in your most recent
video. Can you tell us what was the "superior mic" you used?
Stephen
P.S. You're one of my "lute heros."
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Shoskes" <[email protected]>
To: "wikla" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 4:44 PM
Subject: [LUTE] Re: Modern lute recordings
I've posted several times the processing I use, based on the
recommendation of my sound engineer uncle. I apply an "inverted smile"
EQ and if I am recording in my small office, I add a small amount of
reverb (if I am alone in the house and can record in the big living
room the reverb is not necessary). The "inverted smile" corrects for
inadequacies in the response of the mic. I was once recorded with a
$15,000 mic and that led me to believe that cheaper mic+EQ is very
close to the reality captured by the expensive mic and therefore that
the EQ isn't "cheating". In my most recent recording, using a superior
mic (but not in the thousands of dollars) I thought the sound was much
better and only the tiniest adjustment (taking down the highest and
lowest bands in the EQ) was needed:
[1]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2w15WCzoWY
Danny
(not a "lute hero" but a regular "y-tuber")
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:00 PM, wikla <[2][email protected]> wrote:
Well, my new "y-tubings" of very variable quality certainly cannot
hide
anything! ;-)
The Zoom O3 hears everything and I play in very dry acoustics...
Is it really true that people "y-tubing" - and especially our "lute
heroes"
making CD's - really add artificial reverb and other machine
generated
effects to their canned performances? Perhaps that explains
something?
Just a thought... ;-)
Arto
On Mon, 15 Mar 2010 22:50:47 -0400, "Roman Turovsky"
<[3][email protected]> wrote:
> But the reverb hides the imperfections so
effectively..................
> RT
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[4][email protected]>
> To: <[5][email protected]>; <[6][email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 10:46 PM
> Subject: [LUTE] Re: Modern lute recordings
>
>
> Ned,
>
> You're not alone at all. I'm in complete agreement with you. It
seems
> to me that the ideal place to record a lute of all instruments, is a
> controlled environment like a recording studio where a touch of
reverb
can
> be added if wanted. The long decay of a cavernous cathedral might
feel
> good
> for the player, but its a very un-HIP place to find a solo lute. I
would
> love to turn down the reverb on nearly all my recordings.
>
> Chris
>
> --- On Mon, 3/15/10, [7][email protected] <[8][email protected]> wrote:
>
>> From: [9][email protected] <[10][email protected]>
>> Subject: [LUTE] Modern lute recordings
>> To: [11][email protected]
>> Date: Monday, March 15, 2010, 9:10 PM
>> Looking on youtube
>> for a video of the Earl of Essex Galliard the other
>> night, I came across one by Elizabeth
>> Brown. A fine player, but sounds
>> I never heard from a lute live. I
>> wondered what her recording engineer
>> was thinking. But then I remembered
>> that "her" sound was not
>> completely unlike what I hear on many
>> lute CDs, and it occurs to me
>> that today's recording engineers
>> generally have an odd concept of what
>> a lute should sound like.
>> Primarily, they seem to think it should
>> sound BIG and with the oodles of reverb -
>> as if heard from many feet
>> away in a large and empty
>> catherdral. Harmonia Mundi records Paul
>> O'Dette this way, as do ECM and Naxos
>> Nigel North, Naive Hopkinson
>> Smith, and (not as exaggeratedly)
>> Hyperion Elizabeth Kenny.
>>
>>
>>
>> Going into my vinyl collection I found
>> that in the past, both Nonesuch
>> and Astree did a much more natural job
>> with Paul O'Dette, Edition Open
>> Window is wonderful with Jurgen
>> Hubscher (and Alfred Gross), and Decca
>> always gave Joe Iadone and Chris Williams
>> a natural sound.
>>
>>
>>
>> So, my appeal is to recording engineers:
>> go into a medium size - or
>> even fairly large - room with a lutenist
>> sometime and listen to the
>> sound he/she produces. Then
>> forget recording in churches or
>> cathedrals and by all means leave all
>> electronic 'enhanements' out of
>> the recording chain.
>>
>>
>>
>> Am I alone in this view?
>>
>>
>>
>> Ned
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>> To get on or off this list see list information at
>> [12]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> [13]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
--
References
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2w15WCzoWY
2. mailto:[email protected]
3. mailto:[email protected]
4. mailto:[email protected]
5. mailto:[email protected]
6. mailto:[email protected]
7. mailto:[email protected]
8. mailto:[email protected]
9. mailto:[email protected]
10. mailto:[email protected]
11. mailto:[email protected]
12. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
13. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
