Getting stereo imaging right

Stereo imaging is one of the more important aspect to achieving three dimensional sound.

[@wilcalint]

Remember the old RCA "Living Stereo" LPs from the 50's and 60's. On many of those LPs they used to put a photo of the recording session that showed the location of the mics. Then also a brief description of the equipment used to capture the performance. Telefunken U47 mic and Ampex 300 running at 15ips. Maybe you should include that somewhere.

[@AdrianJFabre]

When recording a live or one take performance with a pair of mics or single stereo mic a photo taken mid-performance would answer a lot of questions for a lot of people. For example, one may believe their system improved because the cello is now much farther behind the singer. A photo may show them standing beside each other.

[@brentcollins9727]

“Take five” is a perfect example of a live recording. You feel like you’re in their room.

[@borisgrigull7772]

Im on the same page with the 'live take' recordings here in my studio. There is inevitably almost always overdubs as a part of the creative process. Being first a musician then an engineer/hifi geek. I figured early on, that playing music, especially to an audience is the most profound and immediate experience. Recording is an artform in its own right and secondary, It can be a reference, non-invasive or invasive to a performance, and also entirely its own practice with or without musicians, creating wonderful musical experiences. In regards the matter of placement, 2 speakers are simulating multiple sound sources, It will never accurately emulate an acoustic performance, It can however with the skills of engineers, surpass a live performance through a PA system. Otherwise it is the engineers role as a member of the group in this case to present the music like a photographer would represent a capture... I have thereby discovered to 'just listen' without needing to critically analyze and forgetting to miss appreciating 'what is' ..... awesome channel here from PS audio!

[@ceylonmooney]

my friend, apex means peak. vertex is the point at which 2 or more line segments meet.

[@colanitower]

I played one of my favorite test tracks ("Icycle" from album "Under the Pink" by Tori Amos, a piano track) on a stereo system like my own and then on a really high-end system in the same listening room. On the simple system it sounded nicely from the loudspeakers. On the high-end system it sounded like she was right there performing on her own grand piano. I guess that was the difference between just good stereo sound and a full soundstage. Amazing it can be achieved with still just two speakers. Now I have to find the budget ...

[@davidstevens7809]

thank you.. ill look for that ..

[@colanitower]

@@davidstevens7809 Enjoy 👍

[@shanestephenson8423]

I think it's a great idea to put something in the liner notes Paul, describing the setup in the tracking room. I'm reminded of a three blind mice recording on vinyl where there was a picture of how the room was setup, and where the artists where in the recording room. Its really good information, because you can sit there in your listening room and reconstruct a picture in your mind. To see if it checks out with the perception of what your hearing in your room.

[@kentracy2533]

All the detail help us enjoy the music and the recording itself

[@twangbar2806]

I keep it simple. I get a lot of enjoyment by just playing around with the bass and treble controls. I've added some vintage tweeters firing backward behind my speakers and gotten some interesting results. Of course, my approach to hi/fi I like to call the "garage approach." Just have fun. That's what I say.

[@metebalci]

I like that some albums give details about how it is recorded, which equipment etc. It would also be nice to include a photo if it is a live recording. Furthermore, it would be interesting to have a dummy head binaural recording of the live recording session so it can also be used for this purpose.

[@budgetaudiophilelife-long5461]

🤗👍😎 BOUGHT YOUR 📖 AND THE CD 💿 AND NOW I HAVE DON GRUSIN AND I HAVE BEEN HELPED 👍 Now I know what to look 👀 for in recordings THANKS 💚💚💚

[@henrygrimmius8138]

So, here's the thing: this idea only works if you are recording in stereo, with 2 microphones (maybe some outrigger mics for added space and LF extension using omni-patterned mics). Whenever you add spot microphones, you've automatically gotten rid of what would actually be called stereo recording. You now are dealing with pan-potted mono. There's nothing wrong with that, and that's how most recordings are done, even orchestral recordings. There are several stereo recording techniques that have long been known about and used. All of these have their advantages and compromises. X-Y, ORTF, NOS, DIN, Gerzon, Blumlien, A-B using either omni or cardioid mics, Decca Tree. And there are others. So, as much as I'd think it would be a cool thing, you would HAVE to know what these types of captures do/don't do in order to think about moving your speakers around to try and make it sound like you were there, which having worked in the audio field for over 40 years, we are only creating an illusion. All that said, I DO believe it would be cool to have photos of the recording sessions, especially if you're doing minimalist miking, if for no other reason than to see what recording technique was being used. That was one of the cool things about albums, as there was room for that type of stuff. I know that somewhere on the interwebs, there are recordings that demonstrate different stereo recording patterns and what they sound like. It would be wise to hunt them down to see what you prefer, especially since they are of the same event.

[@betaomega04]

I am in the process of building a professional wind band (on the high side ~80 performers), and we've been talking about who we want to record us. Not sure if this is territory OR has considered, but it might be worth a conversation.

[@jimspencer5610]

In addition to simply panning a channel on the mixer to give it a volume difference between left and right, a large part of spatial audio is delivery time and phasing between our two ears. It seems that a wider image, or a particular instrument that’s way off to the side would need a time/phase delay to accurately reproduce the same psychoacoustic effect.

[@JonAnderhub]

Instrument position in recordings is achieved through the use of panning and delays primarily.

[@davidlively]

Hey, look at that! Thanks for putting my question up. Than you for the reply.

[@paulgaerisch]

A room map or layout showing placement of the musicians/instruments and the microphones would be useful. Many Telarc recordings had pictures of the orchestra during a session and you could clearly see the microphones in the picture.

[@sMASHsound]

an idea i had, was to record everything with stereo mics 8ft apart. so, u can place ur speakers 8ft apart and get the exact stereo reproduction.

[@JonAnderhub]

It seems like a great simple idea at first, but unfortunately, it has some major drawbacks. Give it a try sometime and find out for yourself why it doesn't work.

[@sMASHsound]

@@JonAnderhub i dont have mics to try it. coudl u explain or put a link for a vid or article that explains the draw backs?

[@MarcoRistuccia]

IMHO, even if it is not a live recording, a hint on how the panning is configured (lateral and depth positioning) and on how much ambient "room" audio has been mixed down can give us some sort of guide on where to expect the instrument being placed and how much "air" we should get from the final recording. If it is a live recording all this of course applies even better. :) I have a vinyl, for example, the "The Gil Evans Orchestra* - Out Of The Cool" from Analog Productions, which has a picture/map of the players' position printed on the back side of the cover. Comparing such map with what I listen has been a very interesting and educative experience. Not everything of what I hear matches with what I see on that map right now. Should I further work with my setup then? Good question. :)

[@Thebarleymasher]

I would like to see more recordings with combos playing together, no isobooths, no overdubbing. Then provide a photograph of the setup showing musician and mic placement. It helps to picture in the mind while listening, to pick out the various individual sound images.

[@donaldchamble6897]

Dear Sir I for one would like to know what the company did to audio during the recording process. What a defined moment in time for audiophiles.

[@xsmi]

Apex is about a 15min drive from Cary NC, home to Cary Audio.

[@bossybill7437]

My expectation is that when mixing, the producer has an image of a small number of model stereo setups. For example, a 2 channel set of mediocre to good speakers, earphones or 4+ channel automobile. Not quite what the question was asking but I think the producer has mixed it for generic target audiences. As long as your system matches some kind of generic expectation, (be it an audiophile setup, massive sub-woofers, or a Harman Freq Response earphones), you're good to go.

[@jasonkillsformomy]

Most music is produced to sound good on crap speaker. Car speakers and in-ear headphones.

[@Harald_Reindl]

@@Wizardofgosz for 80% of all albums the expectations where pretty low, 10% acceptable and 10% are really good leading to the conclusion producers don't give a shit

[@Harald_Reindl]

@@Wizardofgosz I know that because I am not deaf and most records are terrible

[@Harald_Reindl]

@@Wizardofgosz WTF are you deaf? A majority of music releases is flat - no energy, no heights, no bass, no dynamics - if you only listen to a subset I can't help you - I own over 90k tracks out of 55 genres and 70 years of music history

[@Harald_Reindl]

@@Wizardofgosz and the right word for audiophiles is audiofools

[@machavez00]

I read your post on QSound. Most of us solo listen in the sweet spot, which your post points out is the place QSound is best. Have the patents expired, and can it be used with DSD? Sting’s “Soul Cages” sounds durn good.

[@gmtju]

Hi Paul, positioning sound sources is the way of Dolby Atmos, with a lot of DSP :-( Mixing should produce a good sound image, can NOT move my spreajers around. Greetings from Frankfurt/Germany

[@Antoon55]

Info like room size, and character would be nice. Placement of musicians too. Even in a mixed stereo image you could explain what room size you want to mimic. A hall or a bar...etc.

[@philprocter]

This cuts to the heart of audiophilia: How can I judge my system's accuracy if I don't know exactly what I'm trying to reproduce. The other side of that coin are your comments regarding engineers 'tweaking' the sound to 'improve' the result. What if my system is more revealing of some particular attribute than your monitors and can detect that 'tweaking' as artificial. I've always giggled about reviewers who discuss soundstage and depth of '70's rock recordings. Every one of those instruments was separately recorded, modified and assembled into an artificial soundscape by the engineer on his board. All that said: Yes, I'd heartily love to see diagrams and notes and even things like unprocessed out-takes as part of a premium audiophile recording.

[@milkman100001]

do you think that when you make the tracks sound like they are in the studio is what everyone wants to hear? for me i would want to produce the music to the best sounding capabilities. i wouldnt want to listen to a high end recording of 20 x 20 sound proofed room..

[@Eric_DiRisio]

Any advice on Audrivana settings for people with a mid to high tier desktop (recording) audio interface like a Universal Audio Apollo for DOP playback? Or should I just get a cheap dedicated DSD usb Dac to listen to true DSD the first time?

[@richardsmith2721]

What does it sound like if it's just a live performance with two mics, no mixing or no overdubs?

[@Harald_Reindl]

You can't play a recording without any compression in a living room

[@Harald_Reindl]

@Douglas Blake where do you think you ever got such a recording from? it don't exist!

[@dawsonbaker2741]

Have you thought of doing Surround or Dolby Atmos recordings with DSD? I can imagine that the technology doesn’t exist yet for multichannel production of DSD. Thanks for all the content you put out

[@RealityADT]

I have quite a few 5.1 surround SACDs, one of the best being Pink Floyd’s Dark Side of the Moon, so DSD surround has been around for decades. Paul, however is a stereo purist so I doubt he’d want to do this with Octave Records. He strives to get a 3D spacial sound with only two speakers, which many have heard him do…

[@jeffwalther]

And then what happens to the "sound stage" if your "left" and "right" channels get reversed somewhere in your system?

[@EduardoCruz-ur4wq]

I have done live records with a dummy head in the audience, and two 90º microphones, you get dimension and space and also unwanted reflections in dummy head, and nice spatial and sound in near 90º stereo mics as they are more near of the sound font, the problem is that you have to do the mixing and balance manually, what I mean is that you have to do a lot of work placing the instruments and musicians like positioning speakers one more for the left one meter to rear and play normal mixing with the others, now you go to another musician and turn 45º to the other, oh the drums what a mess, blankets because the drummers as a lot of power, them the other guy needs monitoring in the instrument and you add an amplifier to the equation, is a blind blowing job, but when is well done you get a hell of a recorder.

[@zulumax1]

Has Octave Records ever given thought to doing a live digital stream from the studio? Now if that can be done streaming DSD and playing it back on a DSD converter at home, how cool would that be! I remember when KPLU here in Seattle would do live FM streams from their studio with live jazz musicians. Analog FM broadcast can be very very good, about as direct to the source as one could get 40 years ago. Someone has thought of this I am sure.

[@randomtube8226]

What do you have to get right first the phantom image or soundstage?

[@ondersar1]

Why don't you upload them as podcasts anymore?

[@Hammboss4life]

What are your thoughts on a 3d stereo image expander

[@BTom16]

An overhead picture of the studio showing mics and musicians would be ideal.

[@JonAnderhub]

It might seem ideal but it would only go to confuse the situation. Also, the musicians\vocalist positions often change throughout the recording process. Drums may be in a corner with all the musicians in a circle (just an example) for the initial recording, but then the drums may be moved to an iso booth to keep them bleeding into other instrument microphones. The vocalist is often put into an iso room as well to keep the instruments from bleeding into vocal mics. A vocalist may use one mic to record the initial track but then be put on another mic that is more suitable for the vocalist on another take. Contrary to popular belief setting up a stereo mic in the middle of the recording session to record the band is rarely used and it rarely works to capture the sound of the band right.

[@mauriciojv7901]

Dear Paul, if the new recordings are all DSD 256, why we can only buy DSD 64 from Octave ? Cheers

[@edfort5704]

Because they have just started recording in DSD256 a few weeks ago or so, whereas they have been doing DSD64 recordings before their Octave Records studio for several years now. Have some patience. The DSD256 stuff should slowly appear.

[@mauriciojv7901]

@@edfort5704 Hi Ed. I think I heard Paul in some video tell that it would be valid to pay extra for DSD128 content cause it shifts the noise way beyound 100KHZ or so. Then I just assumed all previous recordings were done above DSD64.

[@jimh1021]

Yes please. Hand scratch a mapping of what the engineer imagined. Doesn't need fancy. Just needs to be accurate from the perspective of the engineer. Should come on a napkin.

[@shawnmathew825]

Just send a picture of the band recording where they are in the room so we can see where the sounds should be coming from

[@osliverpool]

As Paul says, that only makes sense for a "live" recording. Other than that, members of the band might be recorded in different rooms, perhaps with vocalist in an iso booth. Or in a fixed position in one room but each at a different time. Or one player might be recorded multiple times in different places and overdubbed... etc

[@ebindboby6020]

Does this somehow relate to binaural audio

[@randysims3359]

Yesterday I was listening to Iron Butterfly and Made in Japan albums the guitar comes from the opposite side than when they play live even the album covers show this This drove me crazy I check to see if I had cables correct I did so I played these tracks on another stereo same results Must be the way they mixed these

[@johnloupis2347]

It's possible when they printed the picture they had the negative flipped over. I've seen it plenty of times before.

[@alternativemusicandbeyond6519]

Room size makes the biggest difference. Like me in Bailey in my 20s watching the movie Fame in 70mm. Such a chk flick I fell asleep. However at one moment when I had woken up there was this night scene. Two young females talking, and then there was a subway train moving from the front to the rear of the cinema it left a life impression. This theartre was call the University Theatre, in Toronto it was an old opera house converted to a movie theater. It was later torn down and turned into a woman's fashion store. Like really a a theatre the size of an area turned into woman's fashion???

[@pedrodepacas4335]

My momma caught me in my bedroom tinkering with my system.

[@rbartsch]

We need all setup information about microphones, instruments and musicians in a digital format to re-arrangw our stereo systems automagically by quadrocopters! 😉

[@stimpy1226]

I like ACME Instead of APEX. Didn’t help coyote though, road runner always beat out ACME products.

[@memorycard1000]

My biggest question is why you have to print out the queastions on paper? And why the heck the questions never fit on just one paper? 👀😁

[@nicolasjoly1755]

it is printed big to avoid wearing spectacles

[@ford1546]

Printing out questions on paper is a waste of paper and not environmentally friendly. Imagine how much paper is used in a year!? Much better to use a tablet!

[@ford1546]

Printing out questions on paper is a waste of paper and not environmentally friendly. Imagine how much paper is used in a year!? Much better to use a tablet!

[@memorycard1000]

@@nicolasjoly1755 Can't he just zoom on a tablet or whatever. But ok, I'm not super serious about this. I legit have been thinking bout this and you're right, ofc. ☺️

[@Bob-Fields]

@@ford1546 Can't use a tablet wipe my ass.

[@ShishKerBabS]

If you guys like chill electronic music, must try Rufus Du Sol their music has alot of "directionality".

[@gtrguyinaz]

Better than knowing each recording, make a demo album to dial in spatial imaging… my system does perfectly place instruments on the soundstage. How do I know.. attend symphonic events, make notes and buy the record of the event….

[@davidbryanbartlett4071]

Tom Waits 1970s used live Musicians in the same room- He"s not everyone Taste but a good examble of a proper recording that sound very good-compaired to Modern recording that are Sent thru Telephone lines-that is Musician is in Washingston-Singer in California etc. Engineer has to put puzzel together

[@charleebrown173]

Use líder imagino, in one shot you can have a site image and a 3D sacan of the ataje, wich later the usar can donwñoad and make measurements with.

[@jeffhunter4395]

Put the info in the liner notes!

[@ford1546]

Tt piano is mono like the singer and guitar and many other instruments are. Ofte then will be instrument recording seppparat. The stereo you hear is often mixed and made in a computer

[@johndough8115]

Thats not really accurate. If You were 12 ft away from a piano... and listened with an Ear-Plug in one ear... you would have a VASTLY different experience, than if you listened with Both ears. Why? Because each of the strings are creating a sonic 3D vibrational "IMAGE". And, part of that image, is the actual way that each soundwave hits, reflects off of surfaces, and or is absorbed by various materials and surfaces. If you listen to this same piano... and take 5 steps around it, going in a clockwise circle... you will experience a different kind of sound, depending on where you are, in relation to it... due to: 1) Its construction, and how it funnels sounds in certain directions better / worse 2) The environment. Walls, floor, carpet, people in the room, items in the room and on the walls... etc. Here is the thing... If the recording studios are good... they can and will use two mics, for every instrument... to capture the true stereo dynamics of these instruments. That said, even an excellent single mic... can still manage to capture some of the 3D qualities of the sound "Image". And a good set of speakers... can be able to more accurately reveal this 3D Image / depth. The rest, as you said... is faked 3D. Where as you choose to place instruments and singers, in virtual space.. using lower or higher volume levels, EQ the tone, duplication and panning between channels, and other special effects... to enhance the experience. Again, while each instrument might be placed artificially... they still could be quite 3D sounding, if the recordings are of good quality... and again... if your speakers are good enough to replicate this level of detail, without distorting.

[@D1N02]

People who move their speakers for every single track?

[@johndough8115]

In order to Generate a Live music 3D image... you really need something like a Binaural microphone, like the 3DIO. Which is two mics, imbedded into a human head shape, complete with molded ears. This "Head-Spacing" is the best way to capture what an actual human would hear, if they were inside of a room, of a live band playing. The mics will not only capture the instruments... but they will capture the 3d positions of them... which includes all of the waves that are bouncing off the walls, instruments, humans, and other recording room objects... before the sounds hit the Dummys heads mics. I do not believe It matters that much... how your actual speakers are placed. The effects of a 3DIO mic, works incredible with headphones... which is where each ear is completely separated. That said, I see no reason why it wont translate to standard audiophile speakers, placed apart a good 6 to +8 ft apart. The biggest issue with the 3DIO... IMO... is that the mics used in it, may not be the highest quality Mics. As such, a similar method, but using superior Mics.. should be capable of generating a superior result. Ive also stated in another video... that for the utmost realism.. a 4 channel surround sound recording, would be one of the best ways of 3d image capture and playback experience. I do not think you need 4 mics to do this, but it would be a worthwhile experiment to point two mics away from the human head, to capture sounds and reflections that come from behind the Dummys head. While most times, the human is to music, where the band members are merely in front of them. However... in movies, the listener is completely in the middle of a sonic experience. From overhead jets, to jackhammers from behind... car noises, horns honking, people walking and talking from all directions... and even various music being played from shops, and cars. Its also then possible, to create actual music, where the band instruments are surrounding the listener from all directions. As well as using certain "Effects" which are projected into 3d space. The basic and easiest form of this, is just to have the bands or amped speakers of each instrument, being placed all around the Binaural Mic. The more complex things... could be the wheeling of a speaker, around the studio, that is playing an "Effect". It could be driven around by cables, a hanging guide-rail system, human-pushed or hanging boom-walked. Or it could be inserted digitally, using high level technology, that simulates the 3d positional audio characteristics. Or finally.. just "Winged", like typical studio pans and effects. A lot of movies, tend to fake the entire environment. They may shoot the film with audio... but then replace a lot of the audio with sound effect crews over-dub tracks. Even the vocals may be completely replaced. A lot of these effects makers, were needed because of a few different factors. 1) They were not using a proper Binaural mic setup. 2) They could not control the audio well enough on live sets. 3) To enhance certain sounds, so that they sounded better on certain poor quality theatre speakers... which had to be projected long distances from the listeners, and often caused issues where the sounds were diminished, unclear, and or distorted. Personally, Id LOVE to hear a film that was completely recorded, using a good binaural mic setup. I believe it would really impact people far more profoundly... really putting them into these various real environments... due to the exact 3d image being recorded, and then projected with accuracy, to the Listeners. Additionally, they might also want to add wind machines, and serval vibration transducers, that are placed in various areas of the theatre. The wind generators, could also be made to produce hot or cold air... to simulate an Icy winter mountain... or the heat from a desert of an explosion. The use of Inferred lamps, could also be used to create invisible heat on the skin. And or, the potential use of Ultrasonic projectors, that can create an actual feeling of touch... such as if a ghost whisked right through you. This is what the theatre experience SHOULD be, in todays modern day and time. That said.. the Theatres are being shut down by the ECO-Nuts... and soon to replace large projection screens, will be the mass use of 3D Virtual Reality glasses. (If the economy doesnt tank so bad, that it takes us all back to the stone age)

[@drummafereva829]

lol what did i just read😂😂 check out atmos my guy thats the top new surround technology. also sometimes simpler is better (or rather, easier to consume); theres a reason 3D phone/laptop screens havent taken off yet

[@johndough8115]

@@drummafereva829 Stereoscopic Movies on Imax sized screens, were selling a LOT of tickets, despite being much more expensive. Stereoscopic 3D on a small screens, like a phone size... does not work well.. because the images can only pop out of the screen about an inch or two, max. The reason why Imax 3d is so different, is because the screen is like 200ft long, and 80ft high... allowing the projections to pop out of the screen, within about 6 to 8ft away from you... in the very Back Row of stadium seats. With high resolution VR Glasses, it may be possible to simulate an Imax 3D level of depth and effect... due to the use of micro-displays and special lenses. Though, sadly, Ive never gotten my hands on a unit to try it out yet. Furthermore... realize that its only recently, that Non-CRT Displays, have had the ability of high refresh rates, and low pixel transition times. Certain tricks are used to make LCDs perform better (like blacking every other frame)... but even then... they are not the best for gaming and especially, when dealing with 3D glasses timings (which if off a tiny bit, causes Ghosting of the images) Where as, if they started with OLED displays, 3dtv might have stood a chance. But again.. the real issue is Size. Even a 40" display, is not going to produce a massive depth effect. Yet my buddies old 720p 3d projector... on a 14 foot wide screen... was able to pretty much duplicate the imax level of 3d depth. At nearly 14 ft away from the screen.. the images seemed to be about 6ft away from me being able to feel like I could reach out and Grab them. As for surround sound technology... again, the home systems tend to be designed differently from the theatre usage. Most especially problematic at home, is the use of a center channel. They are often not well balanced, and do not blend in seamlessly, with the other speakers. That said, I have not experienced a good modern setup recently... So Im going off of my previous experiences with the older surround processing technology.

[@georgeradulescu7175]

Personally, I wouldn't bother with production or mixing notes. I mean, for the end consumer, what is their recourse? Are they going to have to move their speakers around? I don't think so. As much as audiophiles like chasing that one last 0.00001% of sound magic, they are also creatures of habit. I can't imagine there being more than a handful of people for whom that information tangibly means something. Now, if people want to vote with their money and prefer one recording over another because of how it's mixed or how it sounds on their system, then yeah, sure.

[@gizmoochi]

Funny story: Early in his career a young Kanye West was leaving a recording studio when the members of the band AC/DC were walking in. He thought it was funny and couldn't understand or comprehend why all five members of the band were needed in the studio at the same time......

[@robertyoung1777]

With contemporary pop records the recording documentation would consist of a photo of a dude or dudette sitting at a computer in a cubical drinking a coke and smoking a Marlboro!

[@ikemi1]

What's all this message me on telegram stuff in the comments section? Is that a scam?

[@JonAnderhub]

YES!

[@edfort5704]

spamming bots invading YT channels is nothing new and not likely to go away unfortunately.

[@beamer.electronics]

I've experienced recordings where you are spatially placed in the middle of the playing instruments, I find that unnatural. I much prefer all instruments, effects and mixing done spatially in front of me - using left/right. Even up/down can sound weird. That's not to say that I don't admire the technology and skill to achieve such things.

[@johndough8115]

Are you saying, that you have never experienced a modern film at the Theatre? Or home Theatre? Because PROPERLY done surround sound, is fantastic. My guess, is that you are coming from the perspective of a POORLY done recording... and on poor quality surround systems.

[@beamer.electronics]

@@johndough8115 I've listened to a fair amount of remarkable binaural sound etc., it's just that I prefer music to arrive from the front - as it does when listening, as a member of the audience, to a live band on a stage.

[@nagumaninagu9368]

Hi sir

[@JonAnderhub]

Well the dirty little secret is out. All this time you have been feeling like you were there in the room with the band but it turns out the band wasn't even in the same room and the instruments weren't even where you thought they were. You've been fooled this whole time and you didn't even know it. This isn't just an Octave Records thing. Almost all your favorites are done that way. And you thought they just put a stereo mic in the room and let the band play. Jokes on you!

[@davidstevens7809]

how was fleetwood mac the dance recorded? you hear the band..the audience and the room.. anything else is fake in my opinion..

[@JonAnderhub]

Well here's the good news\ bad news. The Dance was primarily recorded live on a soundstage at Warner Brothers Srudio. The bad news? The recordings contain overdubs done on later dates.

[@davidstevens7809]

@@JonAnderhub ok..thats expected. at least they kept the room .. in the mix.. I can hear the people talking..but I cheat..I still use a diff channel in the back and no modern surround with delay and 9 speakers sounds as good.. I can play any 2 channel vintage recording and its magic... thanks..

[@hoobsgroove]

you only want one room mic and that should be on the ceiling at the back to the musicians. then you add the effect hall effect or whatever. yeah maybe be good if you did some live recordings at venues theatres concert halls churches the viola well sound good in a fairly large church. you want something with vaulted ceilings. you should send some you guys out and find some local talent bands and offer to record for them live for free why not give them a break they might make it, lots of school bands out there that fade away. another good thing is to look for writers composers maybe a competition tell them to send them in and decide out of maybe 10 that you will record their pieces for posterity