I stumbled across a few posts mentioning "Earcatcher array", but could not find the definition or any photos showing it.

I know (from reading the posts I found) that it is something dreamed up by an esteemed forum member by that moniker, but found no detailed explanation what it actually consists of. I liked what I heard, though!

And, I doubt you ever will; he's holding it quite close to the vest.

Ah, I thought it was public knowledge till now, but hidden somewhere in the vast array of forum posts...

Anyway, nice recordings! Good dream!

I try not to speak about it as to avoid being tantalizing while knowing it will not be public, at least for some more years. There are a few GS members though who actually use it, since I explained it to them, on condition of keeping it to themselves. For me, using the array is second nature by now and it is my go-to, especially for album recordings of finicky chamber music. But I know that some of those who are using it as well have difficulty sometimes wrapping their head around it and to make it work for them like it does for me. Since the array has a certain flexibility in optimisation, a good understanding of how its use can influence how it "listens" is needed to make it shine. Discussing the workings of the array in public will be pretty futile, as all sorts of misunderstandings are to be expected, along with the dismissiveness of certain "know-it-alls". Instead I try to use my collected knowledge to explain some of the deeper insights that it has given me and apply that info to how more known techniques work, so that everybody can enjoy the discussion and take something out of it.

Recently I was recording with ECA in a very famous concert hall and immediately the house technician came to me to find out what I was using. It showed me once more how greedy even well-established sound engineers can be to find better ways to get a good main array sound. I cannot afford to let the cat out of the bag on an internet forum, simply because finding enough of the good work is already difficult enough and there are a lot more readers than writers here. Especially given the huge investment I have made for researching all sorts of techniques and equipment, without any warranty of any ROI ever, I have to be cautious not to give away one of my most unique selling points. Hope you can understand that.

Understood, only I would add that it's YOU, who are the "most unique selling" point, not any particular technique that you use...

As you wrote - there are people using it who struggle with it and even if they do it correctly, I am sure it is not just the technique, but how one listens and approaches the recording... and maybe even some more "esoteric" or at least "not visible to the rational mind" effects that a combination of persons in the room produces in any particular situation... It could be just the minute placement changes, strategically placing objects - towels, bags, screens in the room or even something more obscure and unnoticable that makes some persons produce quite different results with the same gear and techniques from others... Music is magic after all... ������

The response from Earcatcher is really bad news even though no one here really needs his technique.

One of the best things an engineer can do is to pass on knowledge about their techniques.

He could do it without affecting any of his work.

His response is really bad news.

Rudy van Gelder was notable (notorious) for being highly secretive about his recording techniques for Blue Note...he took most of these to his grave. There seems to be a similar mystique about ECM's approach. Then on the other hand there's 'open source' sharing with the likes of Jecklin's Disk, Decca's Tree, Blumlein's M-S, Hamasaki's Square, Faulkner's (several) arrays...not to mention the various radio broadcast configs eg ORTF, DIN, NOS, RAI

Published technique details can become cemented as dogma...but they can also spur on developments and advancements/refinements...enhancing the evolution of good practices. Arguably some of today's better recordings stand upon the shoulders of yesteryear's giants...and not a bad legacy to leave the world with either !

Protection of market share and competitive advantage appears to be very much in the ear and imagination of the beholder, it would seem...and all sorts of motivations inhabit the broad church of the recordosphere !

Here's an example of such that I give my tip of the hat appreciation for :
https://youtu.be/CkbkoP8tCMk?si=XYoOBo7XGuWofsE-

Reminds me of all the rampant guesses, speculation and mis-quotes about the actual dimensions of the Decca Tree, till the publication of 'The Book' finally put it all to rest. But that had to wait for Decca to fold, before their engineers felt comfortable confirming all the ''deets'.

In terms of the intensive and exhaustive detail contained in the Haigh, Dunkerley et al book that’s right….but several others began selectively ‘leaking’ Decca wisdom many years prior eg Tryggvi T and Michael Gray…let’s not paint over their contributions to opening the door:

https://sengpielaudio.com/DeccaTree-TryggTryggvason.pdf

http://www.polymathperspective.com/index.php?p=3219

Even if I find it peculiar and unneccessary to be so secretive, everyone has the right to share or not share their approaches, so no harsh judgement from me.

I am surprised how generous with sharing their ideas and techniques are some very successful artists and recordists, though.

Even the most detailed and banal questions I sent to Markus Heiland of Tritonus were answered. Big respect and gratitude!

Glen Velez, Zohar Fresco, Suresh Talwalkar were all very detailed with their instructions of percussion playing and secrets of rhythm... especially Glen Velez gave the impression of wanting to leave the legacy upon which others will develop further contemporary frame drumming...

Strange to present (results of) a new technique on a forum where people share, and than keeping the details secret

To which purpose...you've been very forthcoming about your DIY BLM (™) Floorcatcher © ® array here in previous years !

as paiste's international artist relation 'manager' back in the 90's, i was privileged to work with literally thousands of percussionists, drummers etc. from all genre (and regardless of whether they were playing paiste or didn't use any cymbals, gongs or metal percussion of some sort at all): what all artists (not only drummers) of format had in common is that they were sharing their ideas, approaches, concepts etc. - (almost) without exception...

...so i give nothing about secrecy in our trade, on the contrary: i even believe that we technicians have a moral obligation to preserve and pass on our knowledge!

Even though I share the sentiment of many, I don't want to turn this thread into some sort of passive aggresive attitude towards Earcatcher's decision, which is valid and should be respected.

Yes but one could argue, why come here and post samples ?

I agree with ddy, I have zero issues fully disclosing my trade secrets.

It is all quite futile, the magic is ptobably not in the array but the ultimate refusal for compromise.

For which I applaud Earcatcher. But IMO he is mistaken when he thinks the array is what gives him an advantage.

I know "Earcatcher" in person ... (that is something very much different than this kind of online anonymous "barking" and he gave me many valuable hints how to improve my acoustic music recordings ... and it was really an enjoyable improvement in many ways and I am very grateful to him.

But why someone thinks that everyone is obliged to share his discoveries online to everyone ?

Over the years, after endless enthusiastic crazy experiments, I have discovered many new special ways how to record some acoustic instruments (handpans, special flutes, violin, string instruments etc.), found fantastic microphones, preamps, EQ, compressors etc. that have no comparison for this purpose. For example our recorded sound of handpans (my son is a world renowned handpan player) would be difficult to replicate but I am not going to share how I am doing it - just on some online platforms. Similarly with other special instruments or techniques.

So I fully understand "Earcatcher" not freely sharing all his knowledge and experience everywhere around ... It is everybody's decision and shall be fully respected.

Like in old times - a student coming to a master was first obliged to clean the room for 3 years, than cook for 5 years and then maybe he started learning something

A position can be disagreed with without being disrespected.

There are no secret techniques once you understand microphone basics.

Once the engineer has read Jens Blauert technical books, Spatial Hearing: The Psychophysics of Human Sound Localization, MIT Press

and the Jürgen Meyer book, Acoustics and the Performance of Music, Springer Link

https://www.amazon.com/Acoustics-Per.../dp/0387095160

In any case I would posit that the specific mic technique/configuration/choice has less to do with the success of a given session than the recordist's knowledge and experience. There is a great line from the cinematographer Gordon Willis in answer to a persistent questioner about his technique, to the effect of "You are looking for a formula. There isn't one. The formula is me."

This is the most that's been said here: First organ recordings with DPA 2006C

In short, omnis at any spacing, but ILD increased by some undisclosed means (without a barrier).

I think he posted samples because he wanted feedback from other classical engineers on how they sounded, to see if others were hearing the same things he was or if they caught issues he might have missed. I think he was still making some adjustments and refinements when he started posting those samples (some of which I listen to regularly as they sound so great and the music is wonderful).

Very welcome post, this thread started innocently enough as my curiosity... Some expressed more critique of "not sharing", but I understand and agree that everyone has the right to share or not share. I didn't know it was an issue... Simply asked what the array was, since I saw some thread and no explanation anywhere. I am a curious guy.

I already found a new way I wish to experiment with and actually don't need too many ideas to distract me at the moment, but I am always curious...

I am all for sharing, though, each and every banal detail - maybe could be helpful to someone... something I spent much trial and errors on - why not help if it is of help, of course...

And there were some good ideas spoken in the thread - like the Gordon Willis quote - "...the formula is me." or Plush's statement that there are no secret techniques once you understand microphone basics and the book recommendations - funny enough - I just have the Jürgen Meyer book on my table right now.

Anyway - cool to see you record handpans, I am sure replicating exactly your sound is difficult, but everyone has their own.

I am a percussionist and I also play handpans occasionally, sold my Hang years ago, now have RAV Vast - a different instrument of course, not "hang-like" and I borrow things from friends occasionally... like here - Manik sound sculpture - Low Pygmy with a very bassy ding - recorded with MKH40/30 in MS through AXR4 & Neve4081.

But the most important thing was finding the exact "euphonic" positon to capture less metal and more warmth, yet still have clarity... Handpans project in mysterious ways... or not once you understand them - usually a bit from the side and above works - it just gets clear, smooth, magic and nice in an exact spot...

I think I will try spaced omnis next time... or not, don't know... Must try out.

Unfortunately this is not purely acoustic - some synths and fx mixed in, but the acoustic sound is very upfront - no EQ and compression on the handpan, just some spacey reverbs - Eventide stuff and Strymon Nightsky. I do such "newagey" stuff, too.

https://nimetu.bandcamp.com/track/st-ee-ill-movement (Bandcamp stream is of rather average quality, though - 128kbps mp3 I think, the full resolution can be heard if you buy or a bit better on Tidal...)

there are dozens of techniques which all have their benefits and quirks; unless you're doing something awfully wrong, chances are that a recording turns out 'well', almost regadless of technique: after all, putting a pair of trio of mics up in the air ain't no rocket science!

however, any assessement remains (largely) useless if one cannot compare two or more mic systems (and/or approaches) which were used in parallel...

I think if you go back to the original Earcatcher Array thread you'll see that it was more about getting feedback on the clarity of the stereo image and balance among the instruments, that sort of thing. It was very much in the spirit of "I'm testing out this new array that I developed and would like to get your impressions on how well it's working." It wasn't an A/B comparison, more of a validation because I think we've all experienced how something that sounds good to us might not sound as good to another listener, and if that listener can articulate why, it can provide valuable feedback.

To my ears, the Onno double AB (10-12" omni pair on same bar as 10' omni pair; equal levels) has none of the issues Earcatcher states as the reasons for developing the ECA. Not for mic'ing individual instruments, though.

My guess, it's a caltrop configuration w/ 4x cart pattern mic's.

Now that Atmos is around to decode that into whatever speaker config is used, I bet that config get's used more.

whatever but why make a big fuzz out of it? - nevermind...

I will try out the system of "big AB" and closer mics in my next projects, since I liked the sound of such recordings, a nice sense of space and clarity/body of instruments at the same time... it is also in tune with my usual practice of stereo close micing individual instruments...

I have had personal correspondence with Earcatcher, listened to many of his recordings online, and even purchased one of his CDs. I know some details of his ECA - second hand - and have been involved with a recording using this set up (although apparently we weren't using it quite correctly). Earcatcher is very generous with his time, always ready to offer opinions and comparisons of the huge number of microphones with which he is personally familiar. It is his prerogative to guard his intellectual property however he sees fit. That's the end of the story as far as I am concerned.

I have no quibbles with Jim's summary above...Earcatcher has been consistently very generous and assistive in his engagement with forum participants' specific questions about approaches to their various recording puzzlements !

His deep knowledge of mics, cables, preamps, converters, stands and associated hardware...and the various synergies between these elements...gives valuable guidance to those seeking next-level engagement in the recording art and practice. With considerably more brevity, Hudson the Fair (Plushpuppy) treads a somewhat similar path...

He also takes specific care in outlining his rationale and the thinking behind his conclusions...a relatively rare trait amongst the more formulaic advice-distribution that abounds here.

Earcatcher often evinces strong opinion...but it's underpinned with considerable long-term experimentation and rigorous scientific process, something we could all benefit from emulating as 'sound method' !