I'm curious which mic costs $15,000. If it is any good, I'll get one! Or two theorbos...hmmm....
BTW, the Sennheiser MKH20s, The Schoeps MK2H and the DPA 4030 cannot be beat, I don't think, for lute. The go for about $1500 each. The are microphone emulators which do a pretty good job of morphing one mic into another with EQ, but I don't think they can right now surpass the real thing. dt At 02:44 PM 3/16/2010, you wrote: > 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
