Quantcast
EQing ORTF with Schoeps MK4 - Gearspace.com
The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
EQing ORTF with Schoeps MK4
Old 3 weeks ago
  #1
Gear Nut
 
EQing ORTF with Schoeps MK4

Is there a rule of thumb for EQing a recording that used only an ORTF setup with two Schoeps MK4 capsules?

I realise I am very much over-simplifying matters, but what would be a good start to make up for the bass attenuation typical for cardioids?

And while at it, any recommendations for EQ plugins for this sort of thing?
Old 3 weeks ago
  #2
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Put an AB pair of pressure omnis half the distance from the source that the ORTF pair are placed, record both pairs simultaneously to 2 discrete stereo files.

Level match them…then restore the ‘missing bass’ to the ORTF pair so that they’re as close as possible across the audible spectrum.

That exercise will inform your restoration of future near-coincident cardioid pair recordings
Old 3 weeks ago
  #3
Gear Nut
 
I wished I could do that, but the recording was done more than ten years ago, I am afraid putting up ABs will not help now...

I guess I could put up microphones to measure it, however, I am just hoping for a kind of best practice approach on a general level.

Sorry, I may have been unclear in what I want to do...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #4
Lives for gear
 
king2070lplaya's Avatar
I would probably look at the FR of the mics used, and then add an inverse EQ curve with a bass shelf. In my experience this doesn’t make them sound like omnis, but can add some missing weight back into the recording.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #5
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
the frequency response curves of the capsules are a good starting point; worth noting that there are different options for both the cmc5/6 preamps in terms of the built-in hpf.

in case you're lacking lf - which imo doesn't necessarily need to be the case - i suggest you use a low shelving filter and boost until lf is restored (and maybe a hpf if this results in too much bloom). for a potential lack of ambient sound, use efx.

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 3 weeks ago at 08:43 AM..
Old 3 weeks ago
  #6
Lives for gear
 
Plush's Avatar
 
5 Reviews written
🎧 15 years
No EQ is required when using ORTF. Instead, glory in the pure tone.
Old 3 weeks ago
  #7
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 
Agreed. If the low frequency rolloff is a problem, either you aren't using the right microphones (ie microphones designed for free field use) or else you're recording something that goes so low that no cardioid will be really right (which you might argue is an issue for larger pipe organs).

Now... the MK4 is intended for closer use than free-field use, so in the free field it will be down about 3dB at 50 Hz. The right thing to do is probably to use a different capsule, but if the MK4 is what you have, you can probably make up for that low frequency loss with placement. If you can't, EQ to taste but be careful to get good channel matching and make sure you have monitoring where you can believe the bottom end.

Now... you might well have to EQ because of bad rooms or bad placement, both of which are often encountered in the field. But that's a different issue.
--scott
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #8
Gear Nut
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kludgeaudio ➡️
Agreed. If the low frequency rolloff is a problem, either you aren't using the right microphones (ie microphones designed for free field use) or else you're recording something that goes so low that no cardioid will be really right (which you might argue is an issue for larger pipe organs).

Now... the MK4 is intended for closer use than free-field use, so in the free field it will be down about 3dB at 50 Hz. The right thing to do is probably to use a different capsule, but if the MK4 is what you have, you can probably make up for that low frequency loss with placement. If you can't, EQ to taste but be careful to get good channel matching and make sure you have monitoring where you can believe the bottom end.

Now... you might well have to EQ because of bad rooms or bad placement, both of which are often encountered in the field. But that's a different issue.
--scott
Now I am confused: Are you saying the MK4 is not the right capsule for ORTF? I find that hard to take, to my knowledge it is _the_ capsule for ORTF, used by almost any radio station in Germany here for exactly that purpose.

Which other Schoeps capsule would you recommend for ORTF?

Anyway, as I mentioned, the recordings in question were done many years ago.

Oh, and for the record, they are CMC6 bodies.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #9
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
originally, schoeps recommended mk41's for use in ortf...
Old 3 weeks ago
  #10
Gear Nut
 
Really?

They don't recommend the MK41 for ORTF at all on their webpage, recommended use is dialogue for film and spots in orchestra.
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #11
Gear Guru
 
1 Review written
🎧 5 years
they did - not sure i can still find a copy of the old literature; if i do, i'll report back...


[not too long ago, i wish i would have brought along additional mk41's for use of my mstc (ortf) mic system in a ridiculously reverberant venue...]
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #12
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGebauer ➡️
Now I am confused: Are you saying the MK4 is not the right capsule for ORTF? I find that hard to take, to my knowledge it is _the_ capsule for ORTF, used by almost any radio station in Germany here for exactly that purpose.
The right capsule for ORTF does not yet exist. Nobody has yet made a cardioid that is flat in the free field. The MK4 is as good as it gets. So we work with it.

The bottom end rolls off slightly when used in the free field which means you adjust placement a bit to compensate for that. The MK41 does the same thing. (I do prefer the MK41 in most rooms over the MK4 but that's a personal issue).

When a cardioid which is flat in the lowest octaves is made, things will be better, but nobody has made such a thing yet, not even Schoeps.
--scott
Old 3 weeks ago
  #13
Lives for gear
 
David Rick's Avatar
 
🎧 15 years
If you want SDC cardioids with more LF extension than an MK4, then Sennheiser will happily sell you some. I say, "Be careful what you wish for!", because they do it with equalization in the mic body. Sometimes it's helpful, and sometimes it simply serves to bring in a lot of LF "muck" from a mediocre hall which you'll then decide to roll off in post. Schoeps makes excellent capsules with patterns wider than cardioid and they're worth having in your kit when the ensemble and score suggest that their more natural bass extension is waranted and the acoustics and your enginuity permit their use.

To me, the important thing is choosing the correct mic pattern and placement for the hall and the ensemble, then adapting the stereo pair spacing and angle to make the soundstage work correctly. I use a lot of near-coincident pairs in my work, but very rarely are they "textbook" ORTF.

If the original recordist made poor choices on location, then you have to do the best you can with what you've been given. That could mean EQing the stereo feed, applying distinct M/S EQ, shelving up one channel but not the other, or adding artificial reverb with EQ on the FX send. The "ideal" choice at that point is whatever your ears tell you, because you're the man in the chair.

David L. Rick
Seventh String Recording
Old 3 weeks ago | Show parent
  #14
Lives for gear
 
kludgeaudio's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Rick ➡️
If you want SDC cardioids with more LF extension than an MK4, then Sennheiser will happily sell you some. I say, "Be careful what you wish for!", because they do it with equalization in the mic body. Sometimes it's helpful, and sometimes it simply serves to bring in a lot of LF "muck" from a mediocre hall which you'll then decide to roll off in post.
Sennheiser does something to their capsule which allows them to get lower noise floor at the expense of much poorer low frequency response than the conventional Schoeps-style capsules, and then they equalize it flat. So you get flatter response than the Schoeps, lower noise than the Schoeps, and some weirdness in the lower midrange (which may or may not be the result of group delay, I don't know for sure) that makes for annoying problems on some things and is totally unnoticeable on other things. And I agree, the low end extension is often more trouble than it's worth.

This is why we have more than one kind of microphone in the kit.
--scott
Old 1 week ago
  #15
Lives for gear
 
🎧 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGebauer ➡️
Is there a rule of thumb for EQing a recording that used only an ORTF setup with two Schoeps MK4 capsules?

I realise I am very much over-simplifying matters, but what would be a good start to make up for the bass attenuation typical for cardioids?

And while at it, any recommendations for EQ plugins for this sort of thing?
Make sure your monitors are capable of reproducing what you perceive as missing in your ORTF recordings.
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 471 views: 142159
Avatar for RobAnderson
RobAnderson 9th November 2010
replies: 52 views: 7698
Avatar for dfghdhr
dfghdhr 1st February 2021
replies: 99 views: 12808
Avatar for Rumi
Rumi 16th June 2021
replies: 60 views: 4488
Avatar for ric0chet
ric0chet 26th December 2019
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearspace Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…

Forum Jump
Forum Jump