• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 9 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 81

Topic: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

  1. #1

    This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    Okey I\'ve had enough of this chit chat. We posted this example a long time ago and it still stands as a great argument PRO far micing for orchestral samples.

    Many people here claim that they prefer their samples dry because they believe that Digital Reverb can be used to simulate whatever distance from the mic you may prefer.

    Well PLEASE prove me wrong! I\'m so tired of the same old debate!

    Raven, Franz, Bruce A. Richardson, ChrisAxia etc...

    Can any of you tech wiz\' make this completely dry horns recording sound like it was far back in the mix and give it its natural resonance that comes from the sound bouncing off the walls in an orchestral hall?
    If so I will rest my case. Until you prove me wrong I will completely ignore future comments on this issue.

    Here are the samples:

    Good luck. (Coz you are gonna need it)


  2. #2

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    Hi Guys,

    I think Robert has nailed the problem in the other thread re: strings. There is a difference between \'close miking\' and \'dry\'. Maybe that\'s why Michiel\'s Steinway D responds so well to reverb? He mentions that the mics were far enough away that the body of the instrument was captured. This makes sense to me.

    Maybe the GOS strings, on the other hand, were too \'close-miked\' rather than \'dry\', because after all they were recorded in a large space.

    Has Robert found the problem?


  3. #3

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)


    Would you please set your \"cocky smart***\" parameter to 0? The current setting (11 or 127?) doesn\'t help your argument at all.



    P.S. As for the mic locations during the recording of GOS, I do know that Gary and his team spent considerable time locating the \"sweet spot\" (not too close, not too distant), and he did place a pair of mics farther back in the hall. If time permits, Gary might tell you more, but you may have to wait for a forthcoming article on the making of his library.

    [This message has been edited by PatS (edited 01-30-2002).]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Chandler, Arizona

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    It\'s sort of funning reading these threads. A couple weeks ago one guy posted that GOS was too dry. Within one day another person posted a thread that GOS was too wet!! Interesting!!

  5. #5

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    This post has nothing to do with GoS in ANY way. I have no idea if GoS is too wet or too dry because I don\'t have it. It sounds fine to me (judging by the demos I\'ve heard)

    As for \"setting my cocky level\" I think that comment was pretty far fetched :P

    (There is no better way to stir in the cauldron of discussions than to be a tad vulgar - Just look at Nick Phoenix\' post re: GOS!)

    Anyway, on with the debate! Please prove me wrong

    Have a nice weekend everybody!

    PS! I\'m sorry if I came off sounding cocky in any way, Pat. The fact is that I\'m doing it for my own sake. I hear people talking about how they can simulate these kind of orchestral settings with clever use of reverb. I would love it if there was a smart way of changing the character of a sample so drastically as to make it sound like it was recorded in an orchestra hall. Please don\'t be afraid to post anything! I truely hope there is a way of doing this that I don\'t know of!


    [This message has been edited by Thomas_J (edited 01-30-2002).]

  6. #6

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    I agree with Thomas that there eally is no way for a really closed mic\'d instrument to recreate the resonance that occurs in a big room

    It does depend on the instrument tho. Some instruments have more resonating characteristics.

    Also there are times i want a close micd sound, and just turning up the volume of a far micd sound causes more mud than anything.

    Compression and limiting helps this a bit, but still can cause a lot of mush....

    Best libraries so far are ones that give you both close and far, and LET YOU CHOOSE. Like Real Giga Drums.

    yes it doubles (in RGD\'s case quadruples) the librraies size....but MAN I LOVE IT!!!

    With DVDs becomin the new thing I would expect people tostart doing this.

    Many people say that the editing of multiple tracks is impossible/cumbersome

    there are ways around it, and come....on.....

    If I had the money I ould be doign all kinds of libraries and releaing them with multiple mic choices. I mean for god\'s sake...this close mic/far mic issue is easy so very easy to get around now......why does it HAVE TO BE one or the other. I\'d gladly pay a hundered bucks more for a library to get a \"far mic\" option. This includes GOS, QLB, DDSB, DDWW, basically ANY LIBRARY.....well... if I paid a hundered bucks for it in the first place...then maybe not a far mic optional add on for a hundred bucks ... maybe 20.

    BTW Here is a demo I did some time ago with QLB and alot of EQ and teaking. Its noisy, but I was trying to recreate an old Thomas J demo. I still think I could ahve gotten much closer to teh original demo with more tweaking. Also With DDSB I probably can do much more.

    Really...I am an Idiot

    [This message has been edited by KingIdiot (edited 01-30-2002).]

  7. #7

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    I just played around a bit with Sonic Foundry\'s Acoustic Mirror plugin:

    I used an impulse from the Meyerson Symphony Center.

  8. #8

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    Hey Thomas,

    Don\'t sweat it! Please know that I admire your passion for this subject, even if I have reservations about your method of communication (bear in mind that I\'ve been in somewhat of a prudish mood lately, as Nick may attest). Now let\'s see if someone equally passionate will take up the gauntlet.


  9. #9

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    The problem I ahve with those two demos of the hall and anechoic are that the playing is SO different. There is no \"overblowing\". Even in DD there is more sizzle, and its WAY CLOSE

    So trying to use any reverb/convolution on the anechoic to mimic the hall sound wont work/sound as good. Its most likely that the players all played diffeently because they weren\'t in a hall.

    The real test would be to record an instrument with far mics in a hall,....then do LOTS OF baffling and close mic the instruments. Then do some AC/Altiverb...etc

    I think one can get really good results.

    Also both those demos dont really show what we\'re talkinga bout here. Which is close micing/far micing.....thats more Hall/no hall.....

    then agian... maybe I\'m ion the wrong topis..this is \"dry/wet duh..

    Really...I am an Idiot

    [This message has been edited by KingIdiot (edited 01-30-2002).]

  10. #10

    Re: This is getting tiresome! (Dry vs. Wet recordings)

    Hey Timo and King,

    Both of your demos don\'t sound bad to my ears for creating room ambience.
    I tried using Cakewalks Soundstage tonight on a GOS demo I did and it placed the instruments in their proper places giving them a great sense of space, but the algorithms of Soundstage just aren\'t that great. They cheapened up the sound of the strings to my ears.
    It\'s to bad because the \'spaciousness\' sounded great, but the sound was kind of boxy even with the reverb of Soundstage set all the way to zero and Waves Rennaissance Hall verb applied over the room setting.

    [This message has been edited by Damon (edited 01-30-2002).]

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 9 1234 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts