R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8   Go Down

Author Topic: dual mic recording phase issues?  (Read 16329 times)

bryan k

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
dual mic recording phase issues?
« on: October 17, 2006, 08:40:07 PM »

i understand about the thory of phase issues when using 2 mics on a guitar amp for recording.

my problem is, i place both mics right up on the grill, and they are the same distance away from the speaker, but im still getting a 'flanged" sound from them.

ill keep one mic in the same position, and move the other closed mic around untill i get less of a flange sound....but it seems to be always there, even when both mics are positioned EXACTLY the same spot as each other and same distances!

i dont get any MAJOR phase canceling like loss of bass, or a major thinning sound....just a darn "flange effect' like its a flanger ,.... but with no "swoosh" sound.

what are some possiblities or advise for close micing with 2 mics on the same cab?
Logged

iCombs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2006, 10:13:40 PM »

it's not an issue of aligning the grills for the micropohnes...it's about aligning the DIAPHRAGMS of the microphophones, which are at different distafrom their respective grills...there are a couple ways to fix your issue...you could figure out where the elements are and make sure those are lined up...or you can slide tracks around in your DAW (if you are working with a DAW) and visually align the tracks...I know when I use a multi-close-mic setup, i almost always end up re-aligning the tracks to make sure they are 100% in phase.
Logged
Ian Combs
Producer/Engineer
Lightspeed Group, Inc.
----------------------
"Mista apareeatah... can I have maar beass at all frequencies?"

J.J. Blair

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12809
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #2 on: October 18, 2006, 12:57:53 AM »

Aaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrgh!!!!!

Can we stop this preposterous urban legend about re-aligning the time being the same thing as aligning the phase?  This shit drives me nuts.  

While moving one track around in relation to the other may cause a more or less acceptable comb filter, you are still not changing the phase when changing the amount of time between two mic signals.  The difference in phase between the two is the phase of the soundwave, meaning the point of compression or rarefaction in relation to zero of that particular wave.  When mics are spaced apart, you are capturing a different phase of that sound wave.  If you make it earlier or later, it does not change whether the wave is compressing or rarefacting.  The only way to change that is by actually adjusting the phase of the signal, or aligning the diaphragms of the two mics, so that the phase is coincidental.  

Let me illustrate it this way: A mic one inch from the source might capture the 1kHz portion of a wave's phase at 30˚ above zero, but one nine inches away might cappture it at 70˚.  But the 100Hz portion of the wave might be at 20˚ above zero at one inch and 18˚ below zero at nine inches.  The sum of those two is going to give you constructive interference at 1Khz, making that louder, but cancellation at 100Hz, making that quieter.  Delaying one or the other never aligns the phase.  You just may be negating the amount of cancellation is all.

If you are using two different mics and it sounds "phasey", there are likely a couple things going on:
The capsules are not aligned.
One mic is 180˚ out of phase with the other, and you need to flip the phase on one.
Those two mics just sound like shit together.  

As I said in WW about moving OH tracks around, if you have tracks that need to be moved around to sound OK with other tracks of that same source, then you fucked something up when tracking.  
Logged
studio info

They say the heart of Rock & Roll is still beating, which is amazing if you consider all the blow it's done over the years.

"The Internet enables pompous blowhards to interact with other pompous blowhards in a big circle jerk of pomposity." - Bill Maher

"The negative aspects of this business, not only will continue to prevail, but will continue to accelerate in madness. Conditions aren't going to get better, because the economics of rock and roll are getting closer and closer to the economics of Big Business America." - Bill Graham

dcgzr

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 158
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #3 on: October 18, 2006, 04:36:04 AM »

Time aligning and phase coeherency or the lack of is what gives dual mic'ing it's magic. If you don't want the issues don't do it. But like I said the issues are sometimes the magic of it.
Logged

U1176

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #4 on: October 18, 2006, 07:33:20 AM »

Try using this.
Logged
0111010100110001001100010011011100110110

iCombs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2006, 10:57:13 AM »

J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 17 October 2006 23:57

Aaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrgh!!!!!

Can we stop this preposterous urban legend about re-aligning the time being the same thing as aligning the phase?  This shit drives me nuts.  

While moving one track around in relation to the other may cause a more or less acceptable comb filter, you are still not changing the phase when changing the amount of time between two mic signals.  The difference in phase between the two is the phase of the soundwave, meaning the point of compression or rarefaction in relation to zero of that particular wave.  When mics are spaced apart, you are capturing a different phase of that sound wave.  If you make it earlier or later, it does not change whether the wave is compressing or rarefacting.  The only way to change that is by actually adjusting the phase of the signal, or aligning the diaphragms of the two mics, so that the phase is coincidental.  

Let me illustrate it this way: A mic one inch from the source might capture the 1kHz portion of a wave's phase at 30˚ above zero, but one nine inches away might cappture it at 70˚.  But the 100Hz portion of the wave might be at 20˚ above zero at one inch and 18˚ below zero at nine inches.  The sum of those two is going to give you constructive interference at 1Khz, making that louder, but cancellation at 100Hz, making that quieter.  Delaying one or the other never aligns the phase.  You just may be negating the amount of cancellation is all.

 


But when it comes right down to application, isn't the effect of sliding tracks around to achieve a less comb-filtered (or at least more pleasingly comb-filtered) sound the goal?  It's like you say...negating the amount of cancellation...which, at least in my ears means equals "a generally more coherent sound."  I understand that semantically that yes, two microphones that aren't aligned properly will never actually catch the same phase of the sound (although the argument can probably be made that due to the fact that it's physically impossible for the capsules to share the exact same physical space, 2 microphones never really will capture the same phase), but it seems to me that the advantage to using multiple mics, aside from the obvious tonal differences that come from the mics themselves, is that they DO catch the wave at different points in phase and do create some comb filtering that may actually enhance the sound you hear.  

I may be very wrong about phase semantically, but I think that we can both agree that time alignment is a more than valid method for correcting some of the comb-filtering anomalies that come about when using multiple mics.  And ultimaely, I'll look for results first, and semantics secod.

I really don't mean to be a prick about this, BTW, but I think that the practical value here is simply far greater than the semantic value.
Logged
Ian Combs
Producer/Engineer
Lightspeed Group, Inc.
----------------------
"Mista apareeatah... can I have maar beass at all frequencies?"

imagineaudio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 92
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2006, 01:28:39 PM »

Quote:

...or you can slide tracks around in your DAW (if you are working with a DAW) and visually align the tracks...


This just seems so wrong.  If you're going to be sliding tracks around, why not use your ears to tell you when it's right?
Logged
"'Cause life's to short to sound like shit." -Smart guy from the music dept of San Jose State University.

iCombs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 537
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #7 on: October 18, 2006, 02:49:16 PM »

imagineaudio wrote on Wed, 18 October 2006 12:28

Quote:

...or you can slide tracks around in your DAW (if you are working with a DAW) and visually align the tracks...


This just seems so wrong.  If you're going to be sliding tracks around, why not use your ears to tell you when it's right?



I can visually see peaks that match, and I visually align the matching peaks on all tracks as a baseline for what the minimum amount of comb shiift or the most neutral comb shift can be.
Logged
Ian Combs
Producer/Engineer
Lightspeed Group, Inc.
----------------------
"Mista apareeatah... can I have maar beass at all frequencies?"

J.J. Blair

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12809
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2006, 09:07:52 PM »

Ian, actually, two mics that are properly aligned will capture the same phase.  Whether or not they capture the same frequencies in the same amounts is another story.  

I do not agree that time aligning is a suitable method for curing unwanted comb filtering.  Moving your microphones is a suitable method.  

And I disagree that you cannot ever have two mics in phase.  If the two mics are in phase, you are going to achieve constructive interference over all.  When you move the mics, you are going to achieve a combination of constructive and destructive interference at various frequencies.  By moving a waveform, you have eliminated both of these aspects of combining the signal.

It's not semantics, btw.  If you find yourself doing this to make things sound good, you didn't mic your instrument properly.  If you have multiple mics on a source, you should always be listening to the combination of them and checking to make sure that they are in phase enough, so that you are not experiencing cancellation of any frequencies that you want to hear.  In fact, the whole point of spacing mics off a single source is to take advantage of combined phase, as dcgzr said.  

But more importantly, if somebody has accidentally discovered that they are recording things out of phase, it's much more important for them to learn how to properly mic things, rather than to be told that all they need to do is shift things around in PT.  You are putting a band-aid on a symptom without curing the fundamental problem.  I keep reading people suggesting this on the Net, and it makes me want to pull my hair out.  It's bad advice.  That's like telling people who say, "Whenever I put my hand in the oven, I burn it," to use Aloe Vera on the burns, rather than saying, "Use an oven mit, so you don't burn your hand."
Logged
studio info

They say the heart of Rock & Roll is still beating, which is amazing if you consider all the blow it's done over the years.

"The Internet enables pompous blowhards to interact with other pompous blowhards in a big circle jerk of pomposity." - Bill Maher

"The negative aspects of this business, not only will continue to prevail, but will continue to accelerate in madness. Conditions aren't going to get better, because the economics of rock and roll are getting closer and closer to the economics of Big Business America." - Bill Graham

J.J. Blair

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12809
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #9 on: October 18, 2006, 09:11:39 PM »

iCombs wrote on Wed, 18 October 2006 11:49

I can visually see peaks that match, and I visually align the matching peaks on all tracks as a baseline for what the minimum amount of comb shiift or the most neutral comb shift can be.



DAWs only show amplitude.  You are only aligning the peaks in amplitude, when you move that stuff around.  You can't see phase in a DAW waveform rendering.  Aligning the amplitude peaks does not guarantee that you are going to get phase combination in a pleasant or unpleasant manner.  You are going to get comb filtering no matter what.  

Besides, audio engineers should be using their ears, not their eyes, to get good sounds.
Logged
studio info

They say the heart of Rock & Roll is still beating, which is amazing if you consider all the blow it's done over the years.

"The Internet enables pompous blowhards to interact with other pompous blowhards in a big circle jerk of pomposity." - Bill Maher

"The negative aspects of this business, not only will continue to prevail, but will continue to accelerate in madness. Conditions aren't going to get better, because the economics of rock and roll are getting closer and closer to the economics of Big Business America." - Bill Graham

jimmyjazz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1885
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #10 on: October 18, 2006, 10:10:18 PM »

OK, that doesn't make any sense, JJ.  DAWs only show amplitude because (time-dependent) amplitude is all there is!

Sure, an amplitude vs. time plot can be transformed into a pair of plots (amplitude vs. frequency and phase vs. frequency), but the DAW isn't misrepresenting anything.

A microphone transforms an acoustic signal into an electrical signal.  At one point in time, the signal level is "A".  At another point in time, it's "B".  Rinse and repeat.
Logged

minister

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1761
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #11 on: October 18, 2006, 10:11:49 PM »

J.J. Blair wrote on Tue, 17 October 2006 23:57

One mic is 180˚ out of phase with the other, and you need to flip the phase on one.


Aaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrgh!!!!!

can we stop calling it swapping phase and call it swapping polarity!

Aaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrgh!!!!!

other than that you wrote a nice little post.

Logged
tom hambleton C.A.S.
minister of fancy noises
ministry of fancy noises

IMDb

J.J. Blair

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12809
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #12 on: October 19, 2006, 02:04:53 AM »

jimmyjazz wrote on Wed, 18 October 2006 19:10

OK, that doesn't make any sense, JJ.  DAWs only show amplitude because (time-dependent) amplitude is all there is!

Sure, an amplitude vs. time plot can be transformed into a pair of plots (amplitude vs. frequency and phase vs. frequency), but the DAW isn't misrepresenting anything.

A microphone transforms an acoustic signal into an electrical signal.  At one point in time, the signal level is "A".  At another point in time, it's "B".  Rinse and repeat.


I didn't say the DAW was misrepresenting anything.  I said that it is only representing one thing (besides time): Amplitude.  My point being that you cant visually align the phase, as is being suggested, if the only visual cue is amplitude.

Yes.  It makes sense.
Logged
studio info

They say the heart of Rock & Roll is still beating, which is amazing if you consider all the blow it's done over the years.

"The Internet enables pompous blowhards to interact with other pompous blowhards in a big circle jerk of pomposity." - Bill Maher

"The negative aspects of this business, not only will continue to prevail, but will continue to accelerate in madness. Conditions aren't going to get better, because the economics of rock and roll are getting closer and closer to the economics of Big Business America." - Bill Graham

jimmyjazz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1885
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #13 on: October 19, 2006, 02:18:15 AM »

Well, let's get specific.  A snare hit.  Are you saying that sliding a close-miced snare track in time such that the transient peaks at the same time it does in the overheads is ambiguous?  Is there some "mystery phase" which might be positive or might be negative, even if we make sure the sign of both peaks is the same?

Understand that I don't do DAWs, so I'm honestly asking a question.  Seems to me to be rather trivial to get that snare mic "constructively interfering" with the overheads.  (Like you, I do it by ear all the time.)
Logged

resolectric

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
Re: dual mic recording phase issues?
« Reply #14 on: October 19, 2006, 07:48:45 AM »

Enlighten me please, i am getting confused with the difference between moving a track in a DAW to, say, make the sound wave happen sooner, and moving the microphone closer to the sound source.

Isn't the result just the same?

I mean, if microphone #1 is 5 inches away from a sound source it will capture the sound, say, 0.05 secs after the sound leaves the source. It will capture a certain phase of a given frequency.

Microphone #2 whose diaphragm is 10 inches away from the sound source will capture the sound later and will capture a different phase of the same sound wave.

If i go to my DAW and pull back the 2nd mic's wave as to align it, timewise, with the wave from mic #1 isn't the result the same as moving mic 2's diaphragm to be time aligned/phisically aligned with mic #1?

Soundwave phase is a time dependant event, no?
Aligning sound waves is all about time alignment, no?

Now i'm confused.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 16 queries.