You\'re only a few thousand miles off...Abbey Road is a London studio.
In general, the reason you\'d record on a large-scale soundstage is for the lack of discernable \"room,\" in the recording. The ambient content of that kind of recording is usually high-dollar Lexicon reverb.
An impulse of a 4000-or-so square foot soundstage like Abbey Road would probably not be all that useful. In fact, the very design of a room like that is focused upon eliminating the reflections that would yield any sort of ambient information being focused into the microphone. The non-parallel walls, diffusors, and absorption materials are all about making sure that reflections don\'t make it past the first bounce.
Check out some nice pictures of very often used studios in the UK:
Abbey Road 1: http://www.abbeyroad.co.uk/studio1/graphics/studio1big.jpg
Recorded here: Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Lord of the Rings, Shrek, Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace, Captain Corelli’s Mandolin, The Talented Mr Ripley, Chicken Run, Enemy At The Gates, 13 Days, Hollow Man, Notting Hill and Braveheart and many, many more.
What you\'re saying seems to make sense, because some of these rooms are so big, but actually, these huge rooms really do have a sound that shows up in the mics.
I\'ve had the privilege of recording in some fairly big rooms. I\'ve recorded the LSO at CTS/Landsdowne, and the engineers there (as in other places) will often hang room mics 30 feet or more above the orchestra, just to catch the sound of the room. CTS really does sound different from Abbey Road, which sounds different than Javalina, etc.
To get the true sound of \"no walls\", I guess you\'d have to record outside somewhere -and I don\'t think this is the sound you\'d be looking for.
I disagree somewhat. I recorded the tuba from Quantum Leap Brass in a 4000 square ft. room, with some absorbant walls and high ceilings. There was a nice ambience that made it into the recordings. Not big hall ambience, but nice stage ambience. I am not bragging about this patch, but when you add good reverb to that kind of sound, it works pretty well. I think soundstages function as stages in a concert hall do. There is enough room to fit an orchestra and, in a good soundstage, there is a nice balance of neutrality (lack of early reflections) and stage ambience. There is also plenty of room to keep the mics at a distance that allows for the sound to develop. But, here\'s the real point- I did alot of experiments recently and I realized that traditional close micing doesn\'t work well because some instruments project sound in many directions. That sound can be very different in the various positions around the instrument. So, unless you close mic with many mics and are very careful about phase and balance, you will end up with a fraction of the sound. Sometimes that is nice, but not for an orchestra. These large soundstages allow the \"whole\" sound to be captured. Bleed from farther mics and mics in the ceiling, or in the conductors position all contribute to this. Add some verb and it\'s like you tacked a hall onto the stage ( a good thing). I think an impulse of a soundstage would not help our orchestral sound, because the stage functions as part of the orchestral sound. You can\'t add it later. It is a crucial part of how the sound develops. It is the perfect mixer, capturing the complete sound and preparing for release into the hall or Lexicon. Ofcourse, you have to know where to put the mics, as well.
I think there needs to be some distance in recordings.
I\'ve had this discussion with other people, and one thing that people tend to forget about is Mic Bleed. I keep hearing about spot mics on instruments, but if there\'s spot mics on each instrument section there\'s going to be alot of mic bleed, and if you use gating, thats gonna sound weird.
Cant wait to hear QLSO. The options for mics are in that sucker, thanks for that!
Most males prefer \"it\" wet. No doubts there. But we have had this debate tons of times. How wet we want it is a matter of taste. Taste is a matter of flavour. Flavour is a matter of chemistry. Chemistry is a matter of molecular structure. Molecular structure is a matter of atomic composition. Atoms are matters of quarks.