Stereo mics

[Marc Wielage]

The UKs most popular soap opera Eastenders - made by the BBC - gave it a try for a while, but ran into huge stereo image problems when trying to swing the microphones during dialogue scenes.

Same deal with Fox for the early CinemaScope films of the 1950s. The stereo dialog sounds weird and phasey today. Mono dialog makes far more sense. Leave it to the re-recording mixer to decide where to place it in the final.

Stereo for ambience & FX is great, though, so it has its use. I'm just opposed to it for dialog, for Richard's reasons above. It's a lot of potential opportunities for trouble.

--Marc W.

[Fernando]

Fernando,

              I own and use the MSH 10. I do sometimes record dialogue with the M (a shotgun) in doco situations and I quite like it. I have never used MS2/8 so can't compare.

Suresh Rajamani,

Bombay, India

Thank you very much Suresh.

How does it compare in terms of reach to the other usual short shotguns (CS3e, MKH416, MKH60) and hyperc. (Schoeps 41, MKH50) ?

I guess it will be closer to the non-interference-tube hyperc. mics but as a reference.

I need a single-body MS mic with more reach than my Schoeps CCM41/8 MS rig.

I'm looking at the Sanken CSS-5 too, but it's heavier than the MSH-10 (250gr vs 160gr, plus a larger suspension) and it's double cilinder body it's odd to hold in a suspension, that's why I want to find opinions on the MSH-10.

Thanks again

[Fernando]

Remember documentary is another context. MS works very well in that case.

For a complex feature is another story and it calls for mono dialogue for all the reasons exposed above in this thread.

But

- it has to be the only boom used

- it has to be handled smoothly

- the surrounding sound has to be the target too, of course.

Then you can get a very "real", "natural" and "complete" sound portrait that will sound stellar in small-room difussion contexts (TV, internet, DVD)

Even for the big screen if it's the only sound source/layer (but it will sound narrower there, because of L and R speakers location in a theatre's screen)

[Christian Holm]

There are many techniques to use stereo in film or storytelling with sound.

As illustrated with the nice recording from Tibet.

To just discard the possibility of yet another tool in the magic box of tricks is a bit depressing.

I agree on most things said here about recording dialog for film... it is a mono job.

Most of the time and on most productions its hard enough to get a clean mono track as all of us know.

So Yes its not advisable to MS on dialog. more channels, more time in post... Tricky imaging the MS and so on...

But once and again u find yourself trying something new. Exploring and searching to advance...

MS encodes very nice to LCR and the width can be adjusted(not possible in the same maner for XY or AB... and foldsback nicely to stereo.

//Christian

[JDirckze]

Anyone used the EMESSER?

[Philip Perkins]

Remember documentary is another context. MS works very well in that case.

For a complex feature is another story and it calls for mono dialogue for all the reasons exposed above in this thread.

But

- it has to be the only boom used

- it has to be handled smoothly

- the surrounding sound has to be the target too, of course.

Then you can get a very "real", "natural" and "complete" sound portrait that will sound stellar in small-room difussion contexts (TV, internet, DVD)

Even for the big screen if it's the only sound source/layer (but it will sound narrower there, because of L and R speakers location in a theatre's screen)

Maybe some very ambient docs would do well in MS, but I as a postie I would NOT like to get MS dialog on a verite content-doc.  Having it would complicate my dialog cutting and noise reduction a good deal, and then there is the issue of what happens w/ wireless lavs, not to mention needing to reduce the dialog to a mono C channel to make LtRts.  Most docs I hear of are still recorded w/ only 2 channels of audio--boom on one and lavs on the other, mostly, so no room for TWO channels from the boom.  If the filmmaker committed from the start to a stereo approach to the whole production AND allowed the production soundie to roll in multitrack (to have separate M/S and lav tracks) then I'd be interested.  But most docs that come through my studio have been shot and recorded in many locations over many years by a series of variously skilled and equipped soundpeople often in locations pretty un-sound-friendly, so it seems best to keep things simple.

Philip Perkins

[Suresh]

Thank you very much Suresh.

How does it compare in terms of reach to the other usual short shotguns (CS3e, MKH416, MKH60) and hyperc. (Schoeps 41, MKH50) ?

I guess it will be closer to the non-interference-tube hyperc. mics but as a reference.

I need a single-body MS mic with more reach than my Schoeps CCM41/8 MS rig.

I'm looking at the Sanken CSS-5 too, but it's heavier than the MSH-10 (250gr vs 160gr, plus a larger suspension) and it's double cilinder body it's odd to hold in a suspension, that's why I want to find opinions on the MSH-10.

Thanks again

Fernando,

            Fernando,

                  My standard microphones are the 416 and the Schoeps 541. In terms of  sensitivity wise I’d say the M  microphone of the MSH 10 is closer to the 416 but of course it does not match it.

                    I was thinking of the Sanken CSS5 too. But since that outputs only L & R  and sometimes I am asked to deliver discreet M & S and since I have a 442, 302 and 702T all of which can decode M & S if need be, I decided to go with the MSH 10.

Suresh Rajamani

Bomaby, India

[mikewest]

I've used my Sanken CSS-5 for 10 years on features MOW's and documentaries.

Sure mono booms and radio mikes are the essential tools for dialogue but to support

post production with additional sound effects an atmospheres is a valuable contribution.

Ethnic music is also brought alive by stereo and CSS- 5 is a convenient way to do it.

Cheers

Mike

[Fernando]

Did you ever used the CSS-5 for dialog? Two people walk and talk, for instance, or other situations.

[mikewest]

No!!!!!!!

It's a very wide cardioid, prone to handling noise.

Useless as a normal boom mike under normal conditions

Otherwise I love it!

Mike

www.mikewestgatesound.co.nz

[Fernando]

a very wide cardioid? that was unexpected...!

[John Moore]

In case you're interested in the Pearl MSH-10 there is one for sale on the Taperssection board:

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=131781.0

No relation,

John

[studiomprd]

stereo options from Octava at www.oktava-online.com

Oktava is one of the oldest microphones´ manufacturers in the world?

The Tula, Russia factory was founded in 1927 and  next year Oktava celebrates its 80-th anniversary. The first Oktavas appeared in Europe and USA in 1994

[Christian Holm]

Here´s the film we did dialog in MS...

//Christian

[Fernando]

a brilliant example Christian, thank you

[Scott Smith]

The one project I had the most success using M/S micing on was a music documentary I worked on back in the early Eighties (all analog, obviously). Although we did all the music sequences on multi-track, there were some instances where we were interviewing subjects who might sit at a piano and play a few riffs, or do a bit of singing.

The fact that I was involved with the project all the way from the beginning through the final mastering and subsequent broadcast simul-cast meant that I could exercise control over how the sound editing and mixing was done. If it weren't for that fact, I would have thought twice about doing it in M/S, given all the ways that it can get screwed up.

It was interesting to note that we had do do very little in the way of the usual dialogue EQ in the mix-the additional intelligibility afforded by the stereo tracks made it mostly unnecessary. I think we did a bit of overall compression and the usual LF rolloff, but that was about it.

The most challenging issue was how to maintain the correct perspective in relation to the camera (for example, if the camera zooms in to a single from a two shot, do we move the dialogue for the person speaking to the center, or leave it in the same perspective as the two shot?). Also, it required some real finesse to make certain cuts work, as a constantly changing soundfield is very jarring to the viewer.

All in all, it worked pretty well, although it isn't something I would undertake for most projects.

--Scott

[Robert Buncher]

A question for Robert Sharman (or anyone whom owns an AT BP4029).

Robert, did you finally purchase the AT BP4029? If so, what is your take on it?

Thanks,

Bob Buncher

[RPSharman]

No.  A film has not come up yet that makes the purchase necessary.  Sorry.

[minister]

I'd look at a Sanken Css5.  A lot of FX recording guys use them and the results are good.  Best thing about them is they are incredibly durable and reliable.  And it is only around $2k.

The 418s sounds like a Senn, but is MS -- if that is a consideration.

The Neumann RSM 191, I have not heard, but I bet it is great.  But at $5300, I'd probably pass if FX collection were not my main gig.

If I had only one, and it had to be stereo, and I were a production guy, I would look seriously at the Sanken.

[Marco Lopez]

Here´s the film we did dialog in MS...

//Christian

Hej Christian,

Nice job! You used the MS for specific places, like the coridor or for the hole movie?

Best regards,

Marco

[Christian Holm]

We did the whole film in MS...

Schoeps fig 8, Senn MKH 50, and 744t

In post the tricky part is to balance and tilt the MS "stereo"

We did a narrow LCR upmix whith the MS for depth and width in the dialog track.

Some of the foley is also recorded in quad:)

This was some kind of test from our part.. As we did post inhouse..

Im thinking of trying a omni and a cardioid setup for dynamic pickup.

//Christian

[roundbadge]

I just used the Neumann RSM 190i in a hand held rycote zep on a multi red cam deal with dialog plus lots of car/heli stunts.

post also wanted lots of stereo ambiences along w/ the standard sfx

had a separate 744/Neumann rigged for over the shoulder stereo stuff.

worked great.sounded great.

because things were happening so fast in so many locations I [or my 3rd] could jump off the cart and run w/ the stereo rig and catch stuff quickly with zero fuss.

sometimes when I had time i'd throw it on a mic stand but for superfast run and guns it was brilliant.

[whatalob]

Regarding the MSH-10, its the only microphone (plus lavs) I use for a TV music-doc series. Its always acoustic traditional music, 90% outdoors. For up to 3 instruments and depending on the shot (as well as the instrument relative loudness), the boom is enough to get decent results. I also record short dialogues of up to 3 people, but there handling noise is often a problem.  The reach is fairly short. If the distance is more than 2 meters it starts sound too distant. Overall, a great sounding mic. I use another Pearl for my studio music stuff as well

[r.paterson]

hello

I have been using an M and S Rig sennheiser MKH30 and MKH50 for many years now, but do find it a bit big and cumbersome especially when using with MKH60 Rig , so i purchased the Audio technica BP-4025 X-Y large diameter capsule stereo mic specifically for atmos, FX etc as that is 95% of the stereo work i do on location other than when specific music recordings,  the BP-4025  fits into a Rycote Baby ball gag (JUST) But is very compact set up and it is very quiet not as much as the mkh's but is as quiet as my Neumann 140 x-y stereo rig if not quieter and with much more o/p gain, thought i would mention it as an alternative to someone..worth a listen

richard