
Stereo
Recording
Overview
of concepts and techniques for distance stereophonic recording
Recordists
working with classical and acoustic music must be able to consistently
deliver accurate recordings regardless of the acoustics of the
venue, size and composition of the ensemble, and stage layout.
This section will discuss the basics for creating consistent high
quality stereo recordings, and how to adapt to varying circumstances.
This discussion will focus on only dual microphone techniques,
and will not get into 3, 4, and 5 mic arrays such as systems used
by Decca, Mercury, BBC, etc. I will also focus only on cardiod
and omni polar patterns, as these are going to be the most commonly
used and will fit most situations. All of the other polar patterns
(including - hypocardiod/wide cardiod, super cardiod, hypercardiod,
figure 8) have a place in stereophonic recording, but will be
most often used to overcome issues of frequency balance, acoustics,
or other special situations, and since this is a basic overview
these issues will not be addressed.
To
begin the discussion of stereo recording, we first need to define
our goal; do we want to try to create the impression of an accurate
reproduction of the actual performance, do we want to make it
sound more focused, or wider and more open? And to this question
there is no correct answer, and often the answer may be different
for each event, but with an understanding of basic stereo recording
techniques each recording can be tailored for the desired result.
My
general approach to stereo recording is to create the impression
of the actual event as accurately as possible.
I say impression, because that is the best we can do with a recording.
Recreating the full breadth and depth of an ensemble that is 30ft
wide and 30ft deep with a pair of bookshelf speakers that are
3ft apart just is not realistic. Hearing a symphony orchestra
live is an experience that simply cannot be exactly duplicated,
though who is not to say as recordists we cannot paint a very
convincing picture. In general I try to use the entire stereo
field while maintaining a well defined phantom image (the perceived
sounds that are placed in between the speakers). For large ensemble
recordings this yields a sound that is big and full, and for chamber
ensembles one that is intimate and detailed.
So
what is the best way to go about painting this picture? If you
have some experience with stereo recording your first thought
might go toward established stereo micing techniques, the most
common being AB, XY, NOS, DIN, and ORTF. Each of these systems
refers to a specific angle and distance between the microphones.
For example in NOS the microphones are placed so the capsules
are 90° from each other (the mics will form a right angle)
with 30cm between the capsules, ORTF is 110° between the mics
and 17cm between the capsules. When reading about these mic techniques
they are often accompanied by a general description of how they
will sound such as spacious, tightly focused, accurate and open,
etc., which may lead to the conclusion that to choose the correct
stereo micing system, one must simply pick the system that 'sounds
best' to them, and then place it in front of the ensemble. What
most discussions of stereo techniques leave out is that each of
these systems is meant for a specific set of circumstances, and
will not yield consistent results for every application.

How
do we determine the correct micing system for each circumstance?
Rather than trial and error with these established systems, BBC
and freelance audio engineer Michael Williams has proposed a different
solution, where each situation is evaluated and the micing system
is tailored for optimum results. This variable dual micing system
is how I approach stereo micing. Though his system has a great
deal of complexity to it, its basic components are straightforward
and easy to implement. This approach can also be used if you prefer
an established system, as it will help you determine which system
most closely fits your recording situation.
The
most important aspect of the variable system is the recording
angle. This is not the angle between the microphones, but rather
the angle that encompasses what you wish to record from the perspective
of the microphones. This can easily be established by standing
at the microphone position and using a protractor (there are many
fine free apps for iPhone that work great for this) and measuring
the angle from the mic stand to the outside boundaries of what
you wish to record. If using two spaced microphones, like a pair
of omnis, stand between the two stands for this measurement. The
recording angle is not a hard boundary for what the microphones
will pick up, but rather defines the area that will be accurately
represented in the stereo image. Sound sources outside of the
recording angle will be compressed and represented entirely on
either the left or right speaker. Sources that are too far outside
the recording angle can also cause phase issues, so it is important
to be sure all the relevant sound sources are included within
the recording angle. For the most accurate results it is recommended
to slightly overestimate the recording angle and leave extra room
on the sides; I often try to not use more than 75-80% of the recording
angle to minimize localization distortion near the outer extremes
of the recording angle.
Once
we have established our recording angle, Williams provides us
with charts for each polar pattern to determine the optimum configuration
for the microphones; the chart below is for cardiod microphones.
On this chart the microphone angles are along the left on the
Y axis while the distance between the mics is on the bottom on
the X axis. Recording angles are shown in ovals as a plus or minus
from a central axis, so a 100° recording angle will be shown
as ±50° on the chart. The square blocks represent Standard
Deviation, or the maximum angular distortion for each combination
of angle and distance. This represents how sources will be localized
within the stereo image. If we are using a combination of angle
and distance that intersects block 5 for example, this means elements
in the stereo image can be skewed up to 5° from their actual
position in the recording angle. The shaded areas at the top and
bottom represent reverberation limits, where the inclusion of
reverberation is considered to have crossed the threshold of what
would commonly be deemed acceptable.

Michael Williams - The Stereophonic Zoom - Cardiod Microphones
While
this may seem somewhat complicated, in practice it is relatively
straightforward. If we need a recording angle of 100°, we
look to the chart for the ±50° oval, then next look
to where it intersects the lowest angular distortion, represented
by the numbers in the boxes, outside of the shaded areas. We can
see on the chart that one such intersection with box 4 is very
close to a mic angle or 70° and a distance between mics of
25cm. This will be the optimum setup for achieving an accurate
stereo recording with minimal angular distortion.
This
may give us the most accurate recording in terms of localization
within the stereo field, but there are also other ways to utilize
the chart. Mic angle and distance use two different methods for
creating stereo sound,the variation of angle creates and intensity
difference, while the variation of distance creates a timing difference.
Both intensity and timing differential have a slightly different
sound to them, so if you prefer one to the other, the chart can
be used to make combinations what yield the desired recording
angle. So if we want a greater time differential, which may yield
a sound that is more open, we can look again at our 100° recording
angle and see that we could place the mics at 50cm apart with
0° mic angle (both mics straight forward). While this position
will maximize the effect of the time differential, it will also
create high angular distortion of 8° so sources within the
stereo field may sound fairly skewed.
We
can now use this chart to examine our established stereo micing
systems to better understand why they sound the way the do, and
how to best utilize them. One of the most common stereo techniques
that is often built into stereo microphones is XY, where the angle
between the mics is 90° with no distance between the mics
(capsules often placed one on top of the other). Using this technique,
especially with smaller ensembles, often creates a sound the is
tight and small and focused just in the center of the stereo image.
Looking at our chart we can see that this setup yields a huge
recording angle of nearly 180°. With a small ensemble this
leaves most of the available recording angle empty, hence the
impression the source is localized only in the very center of
the image. Conversely, this setup could be seen as very safe for
large ensemble recordings, as it could be placed at the front
of the stage and easily encompass all the performers within the
recording angle. Another common technique is to use two omni mics
placed far apart (omni chart not pictured). When omnis are placed
more than a few feet apart they do not create a coherent recording
angle, and angular distortion is very high. This lack of a coherent
recording angle can result in a bowed or even absent phantom image,
creating the perception of a hole in the middle of the stereo
image. In this setup elements on the left will be produced mostly
on the left speaker, and vise versa, creating an exaggerated wider
stereo image. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as this is
a technique I use as it often results in flattering recordings
that sound good in themselves. But it is important to keep the
limitations and compromises of each stereo setup in mind in order
to be confident in creating desired results.
What
type of microphone should I use? Almost any type of microphone
can be used for distance stereo recording, as long as we are aware
of their limitations. The most common mic type is a small diaphragm
cardiod condenser. Small diaphragm mics have better off axis coloration
that most other mic types, meaning that the sounds to the sides
of the mic are less altered. They have excellent transient response
and can cleanly capture all the textural and dynamic subtitles
of a complex source. They are also smaller and lighter, so are
easier to manage in a stereo configuration. Large diaphragm condenser
mics are popular on choirs and have great body and tone. Ribbon
mics can be used to great effect with a warm and natural sound,
especially with chamber groups, but are very sensitive to the
acoustics of a space. I use stereo ribbons for some ensemble types,
but have found that they are not well suited to many distance
stereo tasks unless conditions are just right. Dynamic mics can
be used as well, and I have even seen SM57s used in a distant
stereo setup with surprisingly good results. Many dynamic mics
are tailored for close micing and dealing with proximity effects,
so will need to be treated with EQ when used for distant micing.
If you have two matching mics sitting around, try them out, they
may work well for producing a reference recording, and a mic should
not necessarily be excluded just because it is not the optimum
choice.
Steps
to put these techniques into practice:
First
- locate the position for the mic stand(s). To do this we want
to listen for the balance of direct to reverberant sound. Ideally
the mics should be placed where there is a greater balance of
direct sound to maximize clarity in the recording. If you want
a 'wetter' recording, find the place nearest the point where the
direct sound is overtaken by reverberant sound, and place the
mics where there is slightly more direct sound. In general you
will be placing the mics fairly close to the stage, if not on
it. For omni mics, the mics should generally not be placed more
than a few feet from of the performers, as the sound will get
washed out very quickly the further back they are placed. A question
I am often asked is: "if the best sound in the hall is in
the center or closer to the back, why don't you put the mics there?"
When you sit in your favorite spot, you also have your brain interpreting
the sounds for you. If there is a soft solo for instance, you
can look at the soloist and your brain will focus your attention
on locating the sound source and be sure it is brought to the
front of your awareness. Even if the sound is very wet from where
you are sitting, you brain will help you interpret the sounds
so you hear the music with clarity. A mic obviously has no brain
so cannot interpret the sounds it receives, it just picks up everything
within its capability, so we need to place them where they 'hear'
the best sound and balance. And this goes back to: we cannot completely
recreate the concert experience, and are creating the best possible
representation.
Once
we have found a location that will give us our desired sound we
must determine our recording angle and stereo mic setup, as discussed
above.
Next
we have to determine how high to place the mics. The easiest way
to approach this is to listen for balance. If the mics are too
low performers in the front row may be too prominently represented
and individuals may stick out, too high and too much reverberation
can creep in and make the sound muddy. Start on the lower side,
and slowly move the mic up until you are hearing an even balance
from front to back and individuals are not sticking out of the
texture. In general a 15ft stand is recommended for distance stereo
recording, as a standard stage stand will not be tall enough.
Mics can also be suspended from the ceiling or catwalk, which
offers a cleaner look with less audience sight line issues.
If
using widely spaced omnis, a starting point is to place the mics
where they divide the ensemble into thirds, and follow the same
procedure for determining height. The mics should be placed as
close as possible to the source, where individuals are not sticking
out. If moving the mics further apart listen as the center will
start to bow and then create a hole the further apart they are
positioned.
I
hope this overview has been informative and will help you make
the most out of your stereo recordings. While there are many steps
in this process of determining optimal stereo placement for a
horizontal plane, it is just scratching the surface of stereophonic
recording. Many more calculations, such as the inclusion and localization
of early reflections and reverberant field both within and outside
of the recording angle, the effect of elevation above the recording
plane on angular distortion, and optimizing for mono compatibility
can also be considered.
I highly recommend further reading of the research and articles
of Michael Williams as well as the research of Gert Simonsen and
Colin Preston. Many of Mr. Williams' articles can be found on
his website (http://www.mmad.info). If you have any questions
about stereo recording, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
Sources for further reading:
Williams, Michael. "The Stereophonic Zoom:
A Practical Approach to Determining the Characteristics of a Spaced
Pair of Microphones "
75th AES Convention March 1984, Paris - AES Preprint No. 2072
(Convention Paper)
Williams, Michael. "Unified Theory of Microphone
Systems for Stereophonic Sound Recording"
82nd AES Convention March 1987, London - AES Preprint No. 2466
(Convention Paper)
Williams, Michael. "Early Reflections and Reverberant
Field Distribution in Dual Microphone Stereophonic Sound Recording
Systems"
91st AES Convention October 1991, New York - AES Preprint No.
3155 (Convention Paper)
Preston, Colin . "An Analysis of Frequency
Dependent Hybrid Microphone Arrays for Stereophonic Sound Recording"
105th AES Convention, September 1998, San Francisco - AES Preprint
No. 4793 (Convention Paper)
Simonsen, Gert."Master's Thesis at the Technical
University of Denmark, Lyngby (1984)"
|