Sennheiser 441 on piano?

[Tom Jancauskas]

Hi All,

Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
this mic and thought it might be good for the job.

I have other mics at my disposal (ribbons/dynanics/condensers) but I was
thinking of the 441 to reduce some of the spill from the drum kit, horns
etc... I have recorded this group before, but was a bit dissatisfied with
the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in the past.

Any suggestions? Placement?
--
Tom Jancauskas
Imedia
imediarecording.com
630.443.6858

[Scott Dorsey]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
>big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
>this mic and thought it might be good for the job.

I tend to like two 441s on piano for jazz stuff. It has a nice tone, it
brings the piano forward a little bit with a little hammer sound. I tend
to mike with an overall pair that has plenty of piano in it, but I'll
bring the spot in to make the piano closer-sounding.

>I have other mics at my disposal (ribbons/dynanics/condensers) but I was
>thinking of the 441 to reduce some of the spill from the drum kit, horns
>etc... I have recorded this group before, but was a bit dissatisfied with
>the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in the past.
>
>Any suggestions? Placement?

My tendency is to take two of them a little back from the hammers pointed
at the strings. One around middle A, one a couple octaves above. Maybe
six inches above the strings.

You could probably get away with one but you'll have to pull it farther
back to get a good balance.

You will often get less leakage with the lid removed completely...
reflections of the band off the lid directed right into the piano mikes
are often a real problem, and with the lid removed the piano gets a little
less clangy as well.

Another trick is to mike underneath the piano.... you don't get that hammer
sound, you get a much more mellow sound. If you're using the piano spot
exclusively for the piano sound you might like that. If you're using the
piano spot to brighten up a piano sound that is in a main pair, you won't.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Neil Gould]

Tom Jancauskas wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano
> for a big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick.
> I just got this mic and thought it might be good for the job.
>
> I have other mics at my disposal (ribbons/dynanics/condensers) but I
> was thinking of the 441 to reduce some of the spill from the drum
> kit, horns etc... I have recorded this group before, but was a bit
> dissatisfied with the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in
> the past.
>
> Any suggestions? Placement?
>

I think you'll like the sound of 441, and you may be able to take advantage
of its more directional characteristics compared to the 414. Since you're
using a single mic, I'd have to know more about the role of the piano in the
pieces you're going to record to make specific placement suggestions. But,
generally, I'd start with it around G above middle C, about a foot above the
strings, pointed toward the hammers (from behind). The off-axis response of
the 441 is pretty good, but I'd still pay close attention to the high-mids,
since a lot of that will be radiating off the sound board. Even small
angular adjustments might make an audible difference.

--
best regards,

Neil

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
> big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
> this mic and thought it might be good for the job.

The old communist regimes seem to have loved the 441 because it was such
an impressive sight when they stacked half a dozen of them on the
rostrum at their party conventions.

Other than that, it's no good for anything unless you need almost hyper
card directivity and don't care too much about the off-axis sound. Might
be OK for voice or sax but certainly not for a piano.

There are far too many better mics around for that purpose. Use a decent
pair of SDCs and you should be fine.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web : http://www.fotoralf.de

[geoff]

"Tom Jancauskas" <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:CCDCDB10.33AA1%mix...@sbcglobal.net...

> Hi All,
>
> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for
> a
> big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
> this mic and thought it might be good for the job.
>
> I have other mics at my disposal (ribbons/dynanics/condensers) but I was
> thinking of the 441 to reduce some of the spill from the drum kit, horns
> etc... I have recorded this group before, but was a bit dissatisfied with
> the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in the past.

Not sure where I read about this one, but tried it and liked it.

For a grand (piano) only. One MD421, pointed at the open lid on long
'stick' (40 degree-ish typically) and close as possible to the lid.

Sort of like a PZM effect. I suupose you could use any other mic tht has
the element close to the grille....

geoff

[Scott Dorsey]

Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:
>Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
>> big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
>> this mic and thought it might be good for the job.
>
>The old communist regimes seem to have loved the 441 because it was such
>an impressive sight when they stacked half a dozen of them on the
>rostrum at their party conventions.
>
>Other than that, it's no good for anything unless you need almost hyper
>card directivity and don't care too much about the off-axis sound. Might
>be OK for voice or sax but certainly not for a piano.
>
>There are far too many better mics around for that purpose. Use a decent
>pair of SDCs and you should be fine.

I disagree completely, the 441 is one of my favorite piano spots because
it is so directional, and because it actually does sound decent off-axis.

But, try it and see. If you have a hypercardioid condenser that is that
narrow, it can be worth trying for comparison.

I think the 441 is very much a sleeper that deserves a lot more attention
than it gets today. Ralf, if you ever want to get rid of some let me know.

But really, don't believe me, try it.

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:

> Ralf, if you ever want to get rid of some let me know.

Why would anyone want to use such a narrow cardioid as a single mic on a
piano if it weren't for a particularly difficult setting with a high
likelyhood of acoustical feedback from the PA?

I've never owned any myself but I've had to make do with them at a radio
station I've been working for as an O/B engineer in the late 70's. All
we had was a suitcase full of MD 421, MD 441 and AKG D202.

I've loved the 421 for speech and I've made some quite decent recordings
with the D202 but I've never become friends with the 441.

Then again, whatever rings your bell... ;-)

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - K�ln/Cologne, Germany

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k983l3$4iu$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/29/12 10:48 AM:

> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
>> big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
>> this mic and thought it might be good for the job.

>> Any suggestions? Placement?
>
> My tendency is to take two of them a little back from the hammers pointed
> at the strings. One around middle A, one a couple octaves above. Maybe
> six inches above the strings.
>
> You could probably get away with one but you'll have to pull it farther
> back to get a good balance.
>
> You will often get less leakage with the lid removed completely...
> reflections of the band off the lid directed right into the piano mikes
> are often a real problem, and with the lid removed the piano gets a little
> less clangy as well.
>
> Another trick is to mike underneath the piano.... you don't get that hammer
> sound, you get a much more mellow sound. If you're using the piano spot
> exclusively for the piano sound you might like that. If you're using the
> piano spot to brighten up a piano sound that is in a main pair, you won't.
> --scott

Thanks Scott. This mic will be the only piano sound for the recording short
of any bleed into other mics. There is only one channel available for the
piano. The piano will be the usual big band chord stuff with occasional
solos AFAIK.

Hopefully I can steal a few extra minutes away as we set up the rhythm
section to listen closely to the piano to see if micing from underneath
would work better for the session. I have used this technique with uprights,
but never a grand. It is a very tight schedule with limited setup time.

I'll bring a few mics and switch them out if I get time. I was also going to
bring the 414, and an AKG 535. Any others I should drag along?

Thanks,
-Tom

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k988o0$ptp$1...@speranza.aioe.org, Neil Gould at
ne...@myplaceofwork.com wrote on 11/29/12 12:14 PM:

> I have recorded this group before, but was a bit
>> dissatisfied with the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in
>> the past.
>>
>> Any suggestions? Placement?
>>
> I think you'll like the sound of 441, and you may be able to take advantage
> of its more directional characteristics compared to the 414. Since you're
> using a single mic, I'd have to know more about the role of the piano in the
> pieces you're going to record to make specific placement suggestions. But,
> generally, I'd start with it around G above middle C, about a foot above the
> strings, pointed toward the hammers (from behind). The off-axis response of
> the 441 is pretty good, but I'd still pay close attention to the high-mids,
> since a lot of that will be radiating off the sound board. Even small
> angular adjustments might make an audible difference.
>
> --
> best regards,
>
> Neil
>
>

The piano AFAIK, will be the typical accompaniment with some solos here &
there.

Thanks for the great suggestions! It was where I was leaning toward having
recorded this piano before.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k98k7m$pb8$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/29/12 3:31 PM:

>> There are far too many better mics around for that purpose. Use a decent
>> pair of SDCs and you should be fine.
>
> I disagree completely, the 441 is one of my favorite piano spots because
> it is so directional, and because it actually does sound decent off-axis.
>
> But, try it and see. If you have a hypercardioid condenser that is that
> narrow, it can be worth trying for comparison.

What condensers out there have that tight of a pickup pattern?

[PStamler]

> What condensers out there have that tight of a pickup pattern?

Schoeps?

Peace,
Paul

[Scott Dorsey]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Thanks Scott. This mic will be the only piano sound for the recording short
>of any bleed into other mics. There is only one channel available for the
>piano. The piano will be the usual big band chord stuff with occasional
>solos AFAIK.

Try it and let me know what you think.

>Hopefully I can steal a few extra minutes away as we set up the rhythm
>section to listen closely to the piano to see if micing from underneath
>would work better for the session. I have used this technique with uprights,
>but never a grand. It is a very tight schedule with limited setup time.
>
>I'll bring a few mics and switch them out if I get time. I was also going to
>bring the 414, and an AKG 535. Any others I should drag along?

Have you got two identical mikes of any sort? Two 535s on a piano is not
bad.

Part of the problem is that for something like this you may have to get very
close into the piano to avoid leakage and when you do that it can get clangy
and clattery. The narrow pattern on the 441 helps avoid that but a mike with
a rolled off top can also.

[Scott Dorsey]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>in article k98k7m$pb8$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
>wrote on 11/29/12 3:31 PM:
>
>>> There are far too many better mics around for that purpose. Use a decent
>>> pair of SDCs and you should be fine.
>>
>> I disagree completely, the 441 is one of my favorite piano spots because
>> it is so directional, and because it actually does sound decent off-axis.
>>
>> But, try it and see. If you have a hypercardioid condenser that is that
>> narrow, it can be worth trying for comparison.
>
>What condensers out there have that tight of a pickup pattern?

Schoeps CMC641 is a favorite. Josephson used to make the 606. Sennheiser
MKH50 is also popular although it has a little lower midrange weirdness
sometimes.

[hank alrich]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
> big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
> this mic and thought it might be good for the job.

One of the best microphones ever designed, IMO. Incredibly versatile.
Amazingly effective hypercardioid pattern, textbook case.

> I have other mics at my disposal (ribbons/dynanics/condensers) but I was
> thinking of the 441 to reduce some of the spill from the drum kit, horns
> etc... I have recorded this group before, but was a bit dissatisfied with
> the piano sound. I had used an AKG 414 in omn in the past.
>
> Any suggestions? Placement?

Given the power of those nulls, you'll be seeking a spot that allows the
mic to hear the piano well while rejecting spill from the other sources.
It will handle very high SPL but if you move in too closely, obviously,
it'll start missing info.

I encourage you to try the 441 for this, or for anything.

Has anybody here ever used the 541 "Blackbird" Senni, which appears to
be a 441 sans some of the EQ/filter features of the 441?

--
shut up and play your guitar * http://hankalrich.com/
http://www.youtube.com/walkinaymusic
http://www.sonicbids.com/HankandShaidri

[hank alrich]

Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:

> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > Was looking for opinions about using a single Sennheiser 441 on piano for a
> > big band recording. It will be a 7' Steinway grand-short stick. I just got
> > this mic and thought it might be good for the job.
>
> The old communist regimes seem to have loved the 441 because it was such
> an impressive sight when they stacked half a dozen of them on the
> rostrum at their party conventions.
>
> Other than that, it's no good for anything unless you need almost hyper
> card directivity and don't care too much about the off-axis sound. Might
> be OK for voice or sax but certainly not for a piano.
>
> There are far too many better mics around for that purpose. Use a decent
> pair of SDCs and you should be fine.
>
> Ralf

I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>> The old communist regimes seem to have loved the 441 because it was such
>> an impressive sight when they stacked half a dozen of them on the
>> rostrum at their party conventions.
>>

>I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
>paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
>Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.

I do seem to recall both Muammar Quadaffi and the Ayatollah Khomeni using
the 441, but I believe Fidel Castro is still using a 421. He used to use
those RCA ice-cream-cones. I guess I always picture the eastern bloc
folks with Nevatons....

[Peter A. Stoll]

klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>>Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>>> The old communist regimes seem to have loved the 441 because it was such
>>> an impressive sight when they stacked half a dozen of them on the
>>> rostrum at their party conventions.

<clip>

>I do seem to recall both Muammar Quadaffi and the Ayatollah Khomeni using
>the 441, but I believe Fidel Castro is still using a 421. He used to use
>those RCA ice-cream-cones. I guess I always picture the eastern bloc
>folks with Nevatons....
>--scott
>--
>"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Here is a link to a very recent North Korean microphone array. I guess if half a dozen
was enough for the old eastern block, North Korea needs to demonstrate clear
superiority.

[Peter A. Stoll]

"Peter A. Stoll" <Lyn2Stol...@gmail.com> wrote:


>Here is a link to a very recent North Korean microphone array. I guess if half a dozen
>was enough for the old eastern block, North Korea needs to demonstrate clear
>superiority.

That would have worked better had I provided the link:

http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/121129/photo_1354176714751_1_0-18be6lk.jpg?
x=292&sig=TF_dVL5C0I45YQYeSVM_sQ--

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9alpa$l9i$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 10:10 AM:

>> I'll bring a few mics and switch them out if I get time. I was also going to
>> bring the 414, and an AKG 535. Any others I should drag along?
>
> Have you got two identical mikes of any sort? Two 535s on a piano is not
> bad.
>
> Part of the problem is that for something like this you may have to get very
> close into the piano to avoid leakage and when you do that it can get clangy
> and clattery. The narrow pattern on the 441 helps avoid that but a mike with
> a rolled off top can also.

I will probably have to get in close to get any sort of useable sound.

I do have 2 535's, 2 414's, and a second 441. I usually buy mics in pairs
whenever I can.

I only have one channel for the piano though. I am working on the setup to
get one more channel to use a stereo pair for the piano.

Thanks!

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9alt1$os0$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 10:12 AM:

Those are out of my price range right now. I have a pair of CMC64's that I
am using elsewhere.

I also have a pair of SM81's BTW.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 1kud6r1.l6dp4b1lev05iN%walk...@nv.net, hank alrich at
walk...@nv.net wrote on 11/30/12 10:48 AM:

> Given the power of those nulls, you'll be seeking a spot that allows the
> mic to hear the piano well while rejecting spill from the other sources.
> It will handle very high SPL but if you move in too closely, obviously,
> it'll start missing info.
>
> I encourage you to try the 441 for this, or for anything.

Thanks Hank! It will be the first mic I'll put up & go from there.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9alpa$l9i$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 10:10 AM:

> Have you got two identical mikes of any sort? Two 535s on a piano is not
> bad.

Along with the pair of AKG 535's, I also have 4 MCA SP-1s.

Also available for the project not assigned to duty:
1 SM-7
4 EV 308's
3 421's
2 MXL R44 ribbons
1 Crowley & Tripp Studio vocalist.
2 A-T ATM-11's

[Frank Stearns]

Might not be quite as narrow as the 441 but the Gefell 940 is also an excellent
hyper. It has very good pattern control across the entire spectrum, and at all sorts
of working distances. And, it sounds very good.

Frank
Mobile Audio
--
.

[Neil Gould]

I think that Scott's suggestion to use two 441s was more for coverage of the
piano's range than a stereo mix. Using a pair of identical mics can reduce
the tonal spectrum issues. The 441 will not cover the piano's range like an
omni, but that may not be a bad thing in your context, since it will reject
more of the ambient sound from the rest of the group. You'll know which way
to go after you try it!

--
best regards,

Neil

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:

> I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
> paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
> Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.

Hold on. I stated that there are better mics for recoding a piano. You
say you disagree.

Are you seriously suggesting that there is no better mic for a piano
than a 441?

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - K�ln/Cologne, Germany

[Scott Dorsey]

Neil Gould <ne...@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:
>I think that Scott's suggestion to use two 441s was more for coverage of the
>piano's range than a stereo mix. Using a pair of identical mics can reduce
>the tonal spectrum issues. The 441 will not cover the piano's range like an
>omni, but that may not be a bad thing in your context, since it will reject
>more of the ambient sound from the rest of the group. You'll know which way
>to go after you try it!

Yes, and if you use one mike, in order to get the full spectrum without
having some notes louder than the other, you will have to pull the mike
back. And then you get more leakage. So two mikes give you a little less
leakage. I pan them close together; I don't like fifty-foot pianos.

[Scott Dorsey]

Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:

>hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>
>> I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
>> paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
>> Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.
>
>Hold on. I stated that there are better mics for recoding a piano. You
>say you disagree.
>
>Are you seriously suggesting that there is no better mic for a piano
>than a 441?

There are many better microphones for solo piano.

But when you're putting a piano spot into a band mix, with a brass section
playing in the same room with the piano, I don't think there is any better
mike made.

[Scott Dorsey]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>
>Has anybody here ever used the 541 "Blackbird" Senni, which appears to
>be a 441 sans some of the EQ/filter features of the 441?

I did once. Rex Garrett in Atlanta used to have a whole set of those
Blackfire things, including some of the 431s with switches and the 441s
without switches. They sounded the same as normal 431s and 441s to me.
Which was really good.

I think actually that might have been my first introduction to the 431s.

[geoff]

"Tom Jancauskas" <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:CCDE4C4A.33ADA%mix...@sbcglobal.net...

One channel is fine for the 421/PZM thing, but would probably pick up too
much of the rest of the band too !

geoff

[Les Cargill]

Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>
>> I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
>> paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
>> Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.
>
> Hold on. I stated that there are better mics for recoding a piano. You
> say you disagree.
>
> Are you seriously suggesting that there is no better mic for a piano
> than a 441?
>
> Ralf
>

Sometimes you don't want a piano to sound like a piano. You want
it sound like Nicky Hopkins on a Stones song.

--
Les Cargill

[hank alrich]

Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:

> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>
> > I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
> > paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
> > Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.
>
> Hold on. I stated that there are better mics for recoding a piano. You
> say you disagree.
>
> Are you seriously suggesting that there is no better mic for a piano
> than a 441?
>
> Ralf

Under the curcumstances and given the man's kit, I say perhaps not. And
I also say that I will not be deterred from getting a fine piano track
by having to work with a single Senn 441. I happen to think those are
not just good mics, but _great_ mics and on many sources. That has been
my personal experience over many years.

What's not to like about a textbook hypercard pattern with very flat
response to 20KHz, excellent off-axis response, and very high SPL
tolerance? That it isn't a condenser mic?

The problem here is that the tight pattern mean he'll have to pull it
back. That may or may not work. Now that we know he has a pair of them I
think he could do well with those, if he can muster another channel for
a second piano mic.

[PStamler]

Or just mix the two of them to a submaster and route the mix to a single track.

Peace,
Paul

[Ralf R. Radermacher]

hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:

> The problem here is that the tight pattern mean he'll have to pull it
> back. That may or may not work.

So much for the best mic of all for a life recording a piano. Great
advice, really.

No further questions.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9b9el$r1$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 3:45 PM:

After looking at the setup and adding and additional mixer, I think I'll be
able to have 2 mics on the piano. I'll try the 2 441's. They wouldn't be my
first choice for solo piano, but seem like they will work in this situation.

I don't like super wide pianos either.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9b9jf$m5a$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 3:48 PM:

Hi Scott,

That's the info I was looking for! That is the situation I am in...

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 1kuea5j.1rlf12qmcstc0N%walk...@nv.net, hank alrich at
walk...@nv.net wrote on 12/1/12 1:04 AM:

Thanks Hank. Yes it look like I'll be able to add a second piano mic. And
no, the 441 would not be my first choice for this piano-my schoeps would be,
but they are getting used elsewhere and would have too much leakage to be
useful.

Great info guys - much appreciated!

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 251f1e79-0991-4c2d...@googlegroups.com, PStamler
at psta...@pobox.com wrote on 12/1/12 1:37 AM:

Thanks!

That is an option. Physical channels are what I am missing, not tracks. I
gots plenty O tracks! :-). Additional channels on the way!

I am in a time crunch on this project. It is a 20 piece big band and I have
an hour to an hour & a half to set this whole thing up & hit red. 2 takes of
each song (10 tunes) and done. Some solos at a later date.

Could do it all with a stereo pair, but the director wants it more multi
miked so there can be fixes where need be. It is a local community college
big band. Usually some pretty good players, but more of a volunteer feel.

[Scott Dorsey]

In article <251f1e79-0991-4c2d...@googlegroups.com>,

PStamler <psta...@pobox.com> wrote:
>Or just mix the two of them to a submaster and route the mix to a single track.

I'm not going to recommend it.

But, because the 441 is mechanically pretty inefficient, it doesn't care
a whole lot about loading.

Meaning that if you were so inclined, you could probably Y two of them
together without too much fear.

You can't do this with a lot of dynamics. Don't even think about Ying
two SM-57s together. But sometimes desperate times call for desperate
measures, and you can kind of do it with the 421 and 441.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9d6b1$eq5$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 12/1/12 9:05 AM:

If I am going to use 2 441's, it definitely will be with separate preamps to
separate tracks.

[hank alrich]

It's that pattern thing. It's a really great example of what a hyper
should be, and that, in and of itself, is a very handy aspect of the mic
in a setting such as yours.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 1kuf0a3.8czawt1k3pwlcN%walk...@nv.net, hank alrich at
walk...@nv.net wrote on 12/1/12 10:18 AM:

> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> in article k9b9jf$m5a$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
>> wrote on 11/30/12 3:48 PM:
>>
>>> Ralf R. Radermacher <foto...@gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> hank alrich <walk...@nv.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I strongly disagree with everything written above, excepting the first
>>>>> paragraph. Those statements directly contradict my own experience using
>>>>> Sennheaiser 441's. I bought my pair in 1974.
>>>>
>>>> Hold on. I stated that there are better mics for recoding a piano. You
>>>> say you disagree.
>>>>
>>>> Are you seriously suggesting that there is no better mic for a piano
>>>> than a 441?
>>>
>>> There are many better microphones for solo piano.
>>>
>>> But when you're putting a piano spot into a band mix, with a brass section
>>> playing in the same room with the piano, I don't think there is any better
>>> mike made.
>>> --scott
>>
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> That's the info I was looking for! That is the situation I am in...
>
> It's that pattern thing. It's a really great example of what a hyper
> should be, and that, in and of itself, is a very handy aspect of the mic
> in a setting such as yours.

Thanks! It is always fun to "discover" a new mic. All the different ways to
use it-when NOT to etc...

[Ty Ford]

Ya know, a pair of Audio Technica AE5400 might sound as good or better than
the 441.

Regards,

Ty Ford


Try my new blog; http://tyfordaudiovideo.blogspot.com/
Try my audio sample archive: http://tinyurl.com/796z25d
Try my gear reviews: http://tinyurl.com/79q797r

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 0001HW.CCE21B42...@News.Individual.NET, Ty Ford at
tyre...@comcast.net wrote on 12/3/12 8:02 AM:

Hmmm never hard of that one! I'll look into it.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 0001HW.CCE21B42...@News.Individual.NET, Ty Ford at
tyre...@comcast.net wrote on 12/3/12 8:02 AM:

Hmmm never hard of that one! I'll look into it.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 0001HW.CCE21B42...@News.Individual.NET, Ty Ford at
tyre...@comcast.net wrote on 12/3/12 8:02 AM:

Hmmm never hard of that one! I'll look into it.

[geoff]

"Tom Jancauskas" <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:CCE26433.33B37%mix...@sbcglobal.net...

OK. OK. OK

;-)

geoff

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9b9el$r1$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 3:45 PM:

My remote will be this Monday. I'll report back how the 441's work out.

Thanks everyone for the help!

[hank alrich]

Good luck and enjoy!

[Neil Gould]

Looking forward to hearing about how it went. Good luck!

--
best regards,

Neil

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article k9b9el$r1$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 11/30/12 3:45 PM:

>

> Yes, and if you use one mike, in order to get the full spectrum without
> having some notes louder than the other, you will have to pull the mike
> back. And then you get more leakage. So two mikes give you a little less
> leakage. I pan them close together; I don't like fifty-foot pianos.
> --scott

Well the session is done and the 441's worked out OK. There was a lot more
leakage than I would have liked, but considering the situation and how loud
the band was, they worked well. What is nice is that the leakage sounds
good! I wish all mics sounded this good with the bleed they pic up!

What a great mic!

Thanks everyone.

[Scott Dorsey]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>Well the session is done and the 441's worked out OK. There was a lot more
>leakage than I would have liked, but considering the situation and how loud
>the band was, they worked well. What is nice is that the leakage sounds
>good! I wish all mics sounded this good with the bleed they pic up!

How far from the strings did you have them?

>What a great mic!

I think they tie with the RE-20 as the best moving coil dynamic mike ever.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article kaad8k$5d4$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 12/12/12 11:01 AM:

> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> Well the session is done and the 441's worked out OK. There was a lot more
>> leakage than I would have liked, but considering the situation and how loud
>> the band was, they worked well. What is nice is that the leakage sounds
>> good! I wish all mics sounded this good with the bleed they pic up!
>
> How far from the strings did you have them?
>
>> What a great mic!
>
> I think they tie with the RE-20 as the best moving coil dynamic mike ever.
> --scott

They were about 8-10 inches from the strings to get the coverage I needed.

I used RE-20 as spots for solos. Nice mics.

[Scott Dorsey]

Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>in article kaad8k$5d4$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
>wrote on 12/12/12 11:01 AM:
>
>> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Well the session is done and the 441's worked out OK. There was a lot more
>>> leakage than I would have liked, but considering the situation and how loud
>>> the band was, they worked well. What is nice is that the leakage sounds
>>> good! I wish all mics sounded this good with the bleed they pic up!
>>
>> How far from the strings did you have them?
>>
>>> What a great mic!
>>
>> I think they tie with the RE-20 as the best moving coil dynamic mike ever.
>

>They were about 8-10 inches from the strings to get the coverage I needed.

That's about where you want them to be. Farther back, and there is more
leakage. Closer in, it sounds clangier and less balanced.

If you got more bleed than you wanted with them arranged like that, there is
little you can do other than to move the piano around or move the horns
around or put the piano on the short stick. Or just learn to like the bleed.

>I used RE-20 as spots for solos. Nice mics.

They are great for that too.

[hank alrich]

Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:

> If you got more bleed than you wanted with them arranged like that, there is
> little you can do other than to move the piano around or move the horns
> around or put the piano on the short stick. Or just learn to like the bleed.

I find it important to remember that 180° point of sensitivity in the
pattern. Sometimes I've found it important to consider where that part
of the pattern is aimed.

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article kadlha$sbl$1...@panix2.panix.com, Scott Dorsey at klu...@panix.com
wrote on 12/13/12 4:40 PM:

>>
>>> Tom Jancauskas <mix...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well the session is done and the 441's worked out OK. There was a lot more
>>>> leakage than I would have liked, but considering the situation and how loud
>>>> the band was, they worked well. What is nice is that the leakage sounds
>>>> good! I wish all mics sounded this good with the bleed they pic up!
>>>
>>> How far from the strings did you have them?
>>>
>>>> What a great mic!
>>>
>>> I think they tie with the RE-20 as the best moving coil dynamic mike ever.
>>
>> They were about 8-10 inches from the strings to get the coverage I needed.
>
> That's about where you want them to be. Farther back, and there is more
> leakage. Closer in, it sounds clangier and less balanced.
>
> If you got more bleed than you wanted with them arranged like that, there is
> little you can do other than to move the piano around or move the horns
> around or put the piano on the short stick. Or just learn to like the bleed.
>
>> I used RE-20 as spots for solos. Nice mics.
>
> They are great for that too.
> --scott

That was my conclusion also. The band wanted to be in their "performance"
set up to be as comfortable as possible so I couldn't move them around too
much. Plus the stage they were on just barely fits everybody!

The bleed sounded good! I have no problem using the bleed at this point.

I am glad I decided to get the 441's. Gotta love it when you discover new
tools for the kit.

It's funny back when I started, I used to use my one pair of most expensive
mics because they were best mics I had, now after getting all sorts of mics,
I can choose the best mic for the job!

[Tom Jancauskas]

in article 1kv2euz.ax9ock1dk5i8cN%walk...@nv.net, hank alrich at
walk...@nv.net wrote on 12/13/12 11:36 PM:

> Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>
>> If you got more bleed than you wanted with them arranged like that, there is
>> little you can do other than to move the piano around or move the horns
>> around or put the piano on the short stick. Or just learn to like the bleed.
>
> I find it important to remember that 180° point of sensitivity in the
> pattern. Sometimes I've found it important to consider where that part
> of the pattern is aimed.

I had taken that into consideration when I placed the mics. It is amazing
how moving the mics just slightly in any direction affects the tone of and
amount of bleed.

I really appreciate all of the help with this. I had an idea of what it
would sound like and with the guidance here it made it much easier.

They are going to do another session in the spring to finish up tracking for
the CD. More than likely I'll use the 441's again.

[Ty Ford]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 09:09:28 -0500, Tom Jancauskas wrote
(in article <CCF08F38.33C5F%mix...@sbcglobal.net>):

> It is amazing how moving the mics just slightly in any direction affects the
> tone of and amount of bleed.

You got that right! An inch or a few degrees can take you form suck to great
and back again. It's difficult to make time for this when the band is tuning
up and want to rip, but it makes all the difference during the mix.