FROM THE EDITOR

June, 1998

We are pleased to give you additional articles, posted in May and June 1998. All of the articles listed on this page are slated to be posted to the site by the end of June.

We are pleased to report that the Recording Engineer's Quarterly Glossary of Recording Terms is now active on the site by going to the "References" button on the front page or by clicking here: REFERENCES.

Planned for our July, 1998 issue is a MOTOWN HISTORICAL MUSEUM GUIDED TOUR page with links to the previously published Engineer's Quarterly article series "Our Motown Recording Heritage." Any company that can go from a basement recording operation to the largest independent record company in the world in half a decade is worthy of serious study.

In the meantime, good reading!

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

LEAD ARTICLE

"Our Feature For This Month"

ADAT WINS THE WAR?

BY ROBERT DENNIS

Editor's Note:

Alesis with the ADAT MDM (Modular Digital multitrack Recorder) revolutionized the recording industry. Within a few months Tascam released their DA-88 format recorder. Engineer's Quarterly reviewed and compared both formats in several articles. The question was: Which format will win supremacy?

Now years later we answer the question. But, wait a minute! Did anyone win the war?

Links for this article are at a) http://www.alesis.com. for Alesis & ADAT, b) http:www.tascam.com for Tascam, c) http://www.paris.ensoniq.com/ for Paris by Ensoniq

Now for the article:

Recently ADAT released its 20 bit Modular Digital Recorders in the LX-20 and XT-20. Since 1993 there has been a war for supremacy between formats for these types of machines. The war has been between ADAT format and Tascam (DA-88) Format.

The ADAT format was introduced in 1991 is recorded onto SVHS tapes for 40 minutes of recording (60 minutes using the thinner T-180 SVHS tapes). The original model (black) sold for pennies under $4000. The Big Remote Control (BRC) allowed multiple machines to be controlled, synching to the outside world. The BRC was a marvelous device with multiple locate points. The ADAT system allowed you to store BRC locate points on the beginning of the ADAT tape.

The original system worked but didn’t work well. Machines were slow to sync, slow to rewind and variable in quality. An engineer once told me: "I guess you are responsible for us doing more DA-88 sessions than ADAT sessions. I want to let you know that I would quit if I had to do all of the sessions on ADAT."

But since the original release of ADAT, Alesis has been working. In 1995 they released the XT series of recorders that corrected or reduced the synching and wind speed problems with the original model.

Somewhat later Alesis released their pro model machine called the M20. This was a machine designed for studio use and included most all of the features of the BRC with the machine. The 20 bit ADAT format was also adopted by Studer for their first MDM.

This year ADAT has released the XT-20 and LX-20 recorders.

Although Alesis "announced" and "showed" the ADAT late 1991, it was over a year before they were shipped to dealers. Tascam, on the other hand was working on their DA-88 format which shipped to dealers several months later than the ADAT. The DA-88 format was on Hi-8 tape, providing 110 minutes on standard length tape. The lost was about $500 more than the ADAT.

The DA88 tape machine looked much better to many. The solid housing was bigger and stronger than the ADAT. The DA-88 case had removable "cards" of electronics. To synchronize the DA-88 to the outside world a SY88 synchronization card was installed in the machine. Although the DA-88 was more expensive, it looked worth more money and didn’t have the initial problems that ADAT had.

Alesis has continually sold more machines than Tascam. Their supremacy in sales started by being the "only machine" on the market for several months. When the competition finally arrived, it was more expensive. In 1994, Alesis reduced their list price by $1000 and the Tascam units began to get more expensive. Tascam released a more competitive unit, the DA-38, which was the same price as the ADAT and the same size. The DA-38 could not get a sync card but could be synchronized by hooking it up to a DA-88 or through smaller add-on units.

Today there are over 110,000 ADATs in service, tens of thousands more than the Tascam format machines. An ADAT XT-20 costs the same as a DA-38 machine. The LX-20 is less expensive (although "stripped-down" in comparison). The new machines offer 20-bit recording, the Tascam units are still 16 bit.

The bottom line is that there seems there is no reason that ADAT sales will slow down and ADAT seems to have won the war of format supremacy.

Is There Any Winner?

In my opinion, no one has won the war, the MDM market is poised for a phase-out. Many companies are now releasing software and hardware for recording multitrack on your personal computer (PC or Mac). It is interesting that Alesis has the ADAT PCR which records and plays back 8 channels of digital audio in your PC (or Mac) making it operate as a virtual ADAT. I haven’t seen any entries of this kind for Tascam. The ADAT PCR has 24 bit resolution.

Hard disc recording systems need extra hard disc space. In our April, 1998 article, "Tape Has A Heart Attack" we talked about the recent strides that companies have made with inexpensive removable hard drives that are suitable for audio recording.

Another interesting entry is the Paris system by Ensonic. The Paris 3 system can include (with two optional cards) inputs and outputs for 12 tracks of recording for about $4500 out the door. The system is much more than a mere recorder, having console functions in the software and controlled by a 16+ fader interface unit, several internal reverb and effect simulations and much more. Internally there are 128 tracks. You only get 12 in and out of the device with the two additional cards. You can however, have 20 in and out with 2 more cards (another $800 list price). The Paris system looks so effective and inexpensive that I can see this system (and competitive systems) basically replacing the MDM format.

Web Image#6* Click on image to get Ensoniq original web photo

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

 MICHIGAN MUSIC 

"Devoted To The Rich History and Bright Future of 'Made In Michigan' Music"

MICHIGAN SINGERS RECORD "ON-KEY"

BY MARSHALL BLOCK

Editor's Note

For decades singers have recorded in Nashville because "Nashville knows how to make a singer sound good." One of the "tricks" of Nashville has been digital "pitch correction" which puts an otherwise good performance precisely in key. The latest, greatest and one of the least expensive pitch correction boxes is now working in Michigan Studios. Marshall Block gives us the scoop on this little-known studio technique.

Antares Auto-Tune is the most significant tool for record producers since the development of MIDI, hard disc recording for ProTools or a free-standing native Power Mac version. Auto-Tune will place any vocal or mono instrumental performance in almost perfect pitch

Recording a "world-class" vocal "take" is always one of the most challenging, rewarding and frustrating goals in record production. Many times an artist will deliver a passage with the perfect performance, intensity, attitude, and tempo, only to be told by the producer to try to do it over because of a minor pitch problem. Hours and hours of studio time are wasted, tempers are inflamed and many times the essence of the initial take is never recaptured. Never again! Antares is here!

Auto-Tune is like a scalpel: in the hands of a surgeon it can work miracles, but in the hands of the unskilled it can do severe damage. There is a method and a rhythm to successfully utilizing Auto-tune perfectly every time. The Auto-Tune manual falls short in this area as do many other manuals written today. Bob Dennis of The Recording Institute of Detroit specializes in re-writing many "Quick-Start" manuals for recording products used by the students. I wish more manufacturers would follow his lead.

Auto-Tune has two modes: Automatic and Graphic. The Automatic Mode sets the key and scale of the passage and the Graphic Mode allows surgical manipulation of the selected passage. When used properly, the results are consistently stunning. The Automatic and Graphic Modes can be compard to the "Hard-Knee" and "Soft-Knee" functions of a compressor. In the Automatic Mode, the retune function determines the amount of time in milliseconds that is applied before the not is "slam-dunked" to the target note. A setting of zero immediately places the sampled note at the target pitch. If modulation is present in the sampled sound (ie. Vibrato), it is removed at thise setting. Depending on the passage, this may or may not be appropriate. Any volume changes will be unaffected, however. The Graphic Mode creates a template of the original passage, and the passage as processed by the Automatic settings. The target note as defined by thekey and scale settings in the Automatic Mode is now replaced by the resultant Automatic waveform template. This is a much softer and kinder target. The Retune function in the Graphic Mode now determines the time delay before the sampled sound is corrected to conform to the Automatic waveform template. Finally, vibrato can be artificially added to portions of the sampled sound using Auto-Tune.

If you are involved in independent productions or own or work in a recording facility, having Antares Auto-Tune is a must. This software tool will be as prevalent as those little Yamaha NS10-M near-field speakers seen in nearly every control room in the world. Antares is available from Al Nalli Music in Ann Arbor, Mi. (1-313-665-7008) or contact Antares Systems at 1-503-878-4400, Fax 1-503-878-8577, Web: www.antaressystems.com

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

RECORDING TECHNIQUES

THE UNIVERSAL MICROPHONE PLACEMENT

BY ROBERT DENNIS

MICROPHONE PLACEMENT APPROACHES

Using a "microphone placement chart" is the amateur’s approach to placing microphones. It may get you started, but it won’t get you very far in a professional recording life.

For example, people in the industry judge the quality of engineering by the drum sound an engineer can obtain. This is because drum sets vary wildly from drummer to drummer, and an engineer must be good to consistently get a good recorded drum sound. With drum kits, the number of toms, the number and type of cymbals all vary. In addition, the height, size and angles of the set-up change. One drummer has cymbals high and at a severe angle; another has the cymbals flat and down close to the toms. If you only used a microphone chart to place microphones on a drum set, you may get a fantastic sound on today’s drum kit and pretty bad sound on tomorrow’s.

The master engineer’s approach to placement is to know how the sound is projected off of instruments and to know microphone characteristics. The engineer then uses this basic knowledge to place the microphones for the particular session at hand.

UNIVERSAL MICROPHONE PLACEMENT

The first step in placing a microphone. is to get the microphone in the area that sound is thrown off of the instrument. This is done in steps.

1. Find the sound generator of the instrument and determine how physical changes to the generator causes different pitches to sound.

Something has to vibrate to make the sound pressure; this is the sound generator. Examples of generators include the stretched sting (used in guitars, piano, harp, bass, violins, etc.) and the tuned pipe (used in horn and woodwind instruments).

The physical changes to the generator that sound different pitches usually have to do with length. In the guitar, bass and violin family, the string changes length to sound different pitches by the fingers of the player contacting the neck in different places. This shortens the string and makes the pitch generated go up. Brass instruments, like the trumpet, trombone and tuba, have different pipe lengths for different pitches. Pressing a valve on one of the horn instruments openings up more pipe for the air to travel through, lowering the pitch. In woodwind instruments (such as the flute, sax and clarinet), the pipe changes length by holes opening, shortening the length of the pipe.

2. Find the acoustic amplifier of the instrument.

Most instruments, but not all, have acoustic amplifiers. The acoustic amplifier is a part of the instrument that makes the vibration contact more air, making a bigger sound pressure wave. Examples of acoustic amplifiers include the body of an acoustic guitar, the bell of a horn and the sound board of the piano. The acoustic amplifier of a drum is its shell. The shell works as an additional "tuned pipe" that is excited by the sound generator (the head of the drum).

Not all instruments have an acoustic generator. For instance the flute is a pipe that changes length by holes running down the piper are "opened." There is no bell on the instrument and nothing to make more air come in contact with the vibrating air inside of the pipe.

3. Determine the direction the acoustic amplifier (or sound generator) would move air and this is the direction of sound projection off of the instrument. Put the microphone in the sound projection of the instrument.

MICING FOR MAXIMUM DISTINCTION

On instruments like the acoustic guitar, placing the microphone close to the bridge increases harmonic frequencies and increases the distinction of the instrument. The bridge is right over the widest part of the body and in the sound projection of the acoustic amplifier. On the piano, placing the microphones over the ends of the strings also increases distinction. With the piano, the extremes need to be miced (highs and lows) and the sound board will automatically project the midrange of the instrument. Because the strings are over a wide area, the microphones need to be back at least a foot away from the strings. To prevent multiple microphone interference, the back of the two directional microphones are usually angled towards each other by about 45 degrees.

For horn instruments, like the trumpet, putting the microphone in front of the bell gets a good sound. There is no particular way to increase the harmonic content of the trumpet’s sound with microphone placement.

For woodwind instruments, such as the flute and sax, there is a different situation. The end of the pipe making the pitch changes position with the different as the different holes are uncovered to sound different pitches, To get the most natural sound of the flute you need to back the microphone away from the flute, above it to get all of the holes. The end of the flute is the end of other pipe only when all holes are covered. With a sax, the pipe length also changes. The bell does not really amplify the tuned pitch of the instrument because the pipe length only goes from the mouth piece to the open hole. The bell accents some of the harmonics of the instrument. To get a good sounding sax, back the mic away from the instrument and place it to pick up both the projection of sound from the holes and from the bell. Placing the microphone to get the bell only will result in a harsh sound.

When micing a foot drum, we usually place the microphone just inside the lip of the shell, in back of the drum. Usually there is no head on this side of the drum or there is a head with a hole cut into it. Place the microphone near the shell, pointing at the skin to get the overtones and distinction that is projected off the edge of the skin.

MICING FOR MAXIMUM SOUND PICKUP

There is something more important than placing the microphone for the most distinct sound. That is to place the microphone where you get instrument sound.

In the studio, we can usually place microphones for maximum distinction. When we mic a sax, flute or acoustic guitar, we have sound isolation with baffles and isolation rooms to prevent leakage. When all of the instruments are forced to play together, as in a live-sound performance, you have an entirely different situation.

If you backed up a microphone 2 to 3 feet to pick up all of the holes in a flute or sax on a live gig, you would hear very little of the instrument in the microphone signal. This is because of the high amount of leakage present on stage. Even in a studio, loud instruments that are on the studio floor can prevent a microphone from picking up a sufficient amount of the intended instrument’s sound.

In situations like this, the engineer must realize that getting distinction is secondary to getting sound. For an acoustic guitar, placing the microphone at the hole gives a louder instrument signal. More sound is gotten of the sax by "cramming" the microphone down the bell. With these instruments, the board equalizer can be used to improve the tonal quality of the instrument. In micing a live flue, the mouthpiece is miced; this gives a lot of breath/air sound but at least you are picking up flute.

The piano, in particular, will pick up a lot of leakage. When micing a piano with the band it is best to bring the microphone to an inch or so away from the strings. This gives a less even tone, but again you have piano picked up.

SUMMARY

There is no chart that has ever been written which will tell you where to place a microphone for every session. The chart may be a "starting point." The proper way to place microphones is by knowing the instruments and microphones, then placing the microphones for the particular situation present for the session.

Copyright 1998, Recording Institute Of Detroit - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Use of content subject to terms of User Agreement

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

THE MUSIC & RECORDING INDUSTRY

"Did You Know This About Our Industry?"

MAKING A RECORDING SCHOOL FOR THE 21st CENTURY

BY ROBERT DENNIS

Editor's Note:

Many changes are being made to Recording Institute Of Detroit operations to assist the student to learn the subject well with a minimum amount of time spent on the campus. While we're finishing the article for loading on this page, you can view our current web page.

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

ARTICLE REVIEWS

Devoted to letting you know about current articles in various recording publications that got our attention.

From The Editor:

Like a lot of professionals in audio, I get over a dozen industry magazines monthly. It seems there aren’t enough hours in the month to read them all and still make recordings (and teach classes). Recently I have taken to reading the pro audio magazines at lunch. This month I finally got around to reading the May, 1998 EQ Magazine and came across one of the most interesting articles I have seen this year. You can visit EQ Magazine at their website by going to: http://www.eqmag.com

This is actually a series of four articles, lumped under the title The Project Record Label. This is an eye-opening article for the person who wants to get a hit record and doesn’t know where to start. Of the four articles, the best is by Allen Whitman and Jon R Luini on "Internet Promotion and Distribution." These guys, dubbed "The Fezguys" regularly write a column on Internet audio for EQ Magazine. You can visit their website and actually read 18 months of articles by going to http://www.fezguys.com. This is on my list of "highly suggested" reading.

Now for the review:

"The Project Record Label"

Review by Robert Dennis

Article 1 ( "Do It Yourself Distribution" by Dylan Magierek) starts out with "Congratulations. You’ve finished your CD. Now what will you do..." With these words, the article lets you know that this is reading for the vast majority of people in the recording & music industry. Almost all of us have been, are or will be in this situation.

The article does a good job of informing the reader of the various bases that have to be covered by the independent artist or producer to get the record distributed and selling. Unfortunately this subject is much too large to give a "workable plan" in this area. If EQ Magazine had allotted 200 pages to this subject...

Article 2 ( "Internet Promotion and Distribution." by Allen Whitman and Jon R Luini) gives us hard justification for even trying to put out a record. The authors point out that 97% of the major record company releases sell less than 700 copies. This means Mr. Average Joe Hobbyist actually has a good chance to outdo Sony Records.

The article gives insight into how to use the Internet for promotion and sales of the project studio generated release. The Internet is the most cost-effective and potentially successful avenue to sell and promote your own record.

Article 3 ("Production Smarts" by Jay Jay French) stresses the importance of having your deal with the studio, band members and anyone involved in writing. It gives guidelines of how those deals should be struck. Although the article stresses the need for an attorney, it also recognizes that many times the parties can’t afford one.

Article 4 ("Dupe It Yourself CD Duplication" by Roger Nichols) points out that low-volume initial sales and promotion copies can be made to look professional and are inexpensive enough to make it practical to start your sales and promotions without killing your bank account.

My conclusion is EQ Magazine has, with this series of articles, put together vital reading for many of us in the recording industry.

Copyright 1998, Recording Institute Of Detroit - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Use of content subject to terms of User Agreement

BACK TO: Top Of Article Top Of This Month's Articles

BACK TO: PREMIER ISSUE - APRIL 1998 "TAPE HAS A HEART ATTACK"

Copyright 1998, Recording Institute Of Detroit - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

*Web images seen with RECORDING ENGINEERS QUARTERLY articles are not published by REQ, but are views of web pages posted by the original copyright holder or its agent. Copyright notice for these images are available at the following hyperlinks: Web Image 1, 2 & 5 Copyright 1996, 1997, 1998 Alesis Corporation - Web Image #3 & 4 Copyright 1997Tascam, America, Inc - Web Image #4 Copyright Ensoniq Corp.

Use of content subject to terms of User Agreement