Re: y2k7 mp3s

["Krispen Hartung" <khartung@cableone.net>]

> [miked recording at y2k7 vs directly from board at y2k5/6]

> I understand, so this had in part to do with the extraordinary situation
> that the main festival uses two PAs?

That does complicates, and not just for me, but for the sound guy. I've 
asked
Rick to re-consider getting a snake and a main board at the back of the 
room
for next year. It would be a few hundred dollars, but well worth it! For 
the
last two Boise Experimental Music Festivals, I did this...one giant snake, 
one
sound guy who also recorded, and a stage helper so the sound guy doesn't
have to make an ass of himself by running back and forth between the main
board the the stage while people are performing, to troubleshoot, etc.  
Rick
if you are reading this, I highly recommend doing this next year...of 
whoever
you decide to have run Y2K8 for you.

>> With the mic setup, I was able to use a more consistent level
>> for all the performances, and walk away from the recorder for
>> long period of time. I couldn't do this with the direct
>> recording system. Levels were too erratic.
>
> So using a) a FOH engineer who would give you more or less consistent 
> levels
> on a subgroup and/or b) using a limiter/compressor/normalizer/whatever in
> you signal chain would help?

I think so...I've never had a chance to get a compressor/limiter in there, 
but
that is a stellar idea for next year.

>> Based on my own experience, and especially for this type of
>> music where there a lot of folks doing some intricate stereo
>> imaging. The stereo mics just don't capture that well.
>
> Have you tried a) placing the microphones more to the front (e.g. stage 
> lid)
> (for a X/Y setup) and b) working with M/S signals in postprocessing to
> increase the S part?

That would be highly problematic given the Y2K7 venue, because the space
is too small, and people are running back and forth. However, if I could
suspect mics from the ceiling, that might work.

>> The dynamic range of the soundboard recordings is much better
>> too. I can hear freqencies on direct recordings that just
>> don't come across clear in live mic recording....despite the
>> fact that the mics claim an appopriate frequency response.
>
> This may also have to do with PA and room properties.

Agreed. Many factors at play.

Next year, my ideal situation would be a snake to the back of the room 
with 
a main
board and a sound guy. Then, I would have stereo direct lines running from 
the
board into my digital recorder, and then two stereo condensor mics 
suspected
from the ceiling close to the stage running back into a separate digital 
recorder.
That way I would have two separate takes, and could mix them if anyone 
wants
a live feel added to the direct, or visa versa. Or, taking more of a risk, 
I 
could
run both the direct lines and the mics into a sub-mixer and record the mix 
to
one digital recorder...but that leaves less room for editing out bad stuff 
from the
mics.

Kris