Hi!
Last weekend I played a first "kind-of-gig".
Today I heard the recordings: It was cruel!
My sound was terribly muffled and hollow.
Do you have any hints how to work on it?

Thanks in advance

RicCiE

Hi!
Last weekend I played a first "kind-of-gig".
Today I heard the recordings: It was cruel!
My sound was terribly muffled and hollow.
Do you have any hints how to work on it?

Thanks in advance

RicCiE

On Nov 3, 12:17 pm, ann.meld... at (no spam) gmx.de (Ricci Ebert) wrote:

Hi!
Last weekend I played a first "kind-of-gig".
Today I heard the recordings: It was cruel!
My sound was terribly muffled and hollow.
Do you have any hints how to work on it?

Thanks in advance

RicCiE

Hi Ricci.  Some things that have helped me are:

-Practice in a dead room working to get as full and rich a sound as
you can.
-Practice outdoors with the same objective.
-Practice long tones playing in to a corner listening for as many
overtones in the sound above the fundamental that you can produce.
-Keep recording yourself with GOOD equipment to get feedback on how
your tone projects into a room.

A wonderful exercise in listening, using breath support, and learning
to "voice" notes can be found at this link:

http://www.cannonballmusic.com/overtone.php

Good luck

On Nov 3, 8:49 pm, jbtsax <jbt... at (no spam) yahoo.com> wrote:
On Nov 3, 12:17 pm, ann.meld... at (no spam) gmx.de (Ricci Ebert) wrote:

Hi!
Last weekend I played a first "kind-of-gig".
Today I heard the recordings: It was cruel!
My sound was terribly muffled and hollow.
Do you have any hints how to work on it?

Thanks in advance

RicCiE

Hi Ricci.  Some things that have helped me are:

-Practice in a dead room working to get as full and rich a sound as
you can.
-Practice outdoors with the same objective.
-Practice long tones playing in to a corner listening for as many
overtones in the sound above the fundamental that you can produce.
-Keep recording yourself with GOOD equipment to get feedback on how
your tone projects into a room.

A wonderful exercise in listening, using breath support, and learning
to "voice" notes can be found at this link:

http://www.cannonballmusic.com/overtone.php

Good luck

Overtone exercizes are really the strongest thing for developing
tone. Long tones are good, long overtones, done correctly (slurring
transitions, concentrating on relaxed embouchure and proper air
support) are even better.

I am a terrible player, but have good tone, and it's because my first
teacher gave me overtone series exercizes and matching exercises right
off the bat. If you find a good teacher, you might print this post
out and bring it with you, so that he or she can explain matching
exercises if you're not doing them already.

That said, most important thing: it's also possible you didn't sound
as bad as you think. It's possible that part of the problem was how
you were miked and/or recorded.

Listen to Dexter Gordon's recordings on CBS records some time. Even
Dexter was capable of being made to sound like crap with a bad sound
engineer.

Good luck.

Every timne Michael Brcker recorded he said he neede d anew
mouthepeice. We would go to his houise, listen, and he relaized it was
the crap engineering.

Every time.

And these were his supposed hand picked geniuses that were there to
serve him.

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
IainNG at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

"ansermetniac" <ansermetniac at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nvi5f5demqvfefm3qpa2tska39c53scb8v at (no spam) 4ax.com...
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
IainNG at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

Sundry?

Miking a solo tenor saxophone is is something that most
recording arts student learn fairly early on. It should be
bread and butter stuff for any competent engineer.

Usually a large capsule condenser (Neumann u49, u87)
will get you a very good sound. The traditional placing
for the microphone is about 25 cms above the bell
equidistant between the bell and the LH C# key.

You can use the cardioid, hpercardioid or fig-of-eight polar
patterns to give you the ratio of direct to indirect that sounds
appropriate. In some applications an omni, working a little
closer gives a nice ratio of instrument to room tone.

Sometimes a gradual LF roll off is required, as the bottom
notes on the tenor, C,B,Bb can be about 6dB louder than
mid-range.

It's not rocket science.

Now, balancing a five piece saxophone section, 2 altos,
two tenors, baritone, doubling on flutes, clnt, bs clarinet
across two tracks, that *can* be a challenge:-)

Iain.

"ansermetniac" <ansermetn... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:nvi5f5demqvfefm3qpa2tska39c53scb8v at (no spam) 4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
Iai... at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

Sundry?

Miking a solo tenor saxophone is is something that most
recording arts student learn fairly early on.  It should be
bread and butter stuff for any competent engineer.

Usually a large capsule condenser (Neumann u49, u87)
will get you a very good sound. The traditional placing
for the microphone is  about 25 cms above the bell
equidistant between the bell and the LH C# key.

You can use the cardioid, hpercardioid or fig-of-eight polar
patterns to give you the ratio of direct to indirect that sounds
appropriate.  In some applications an omni, working a little
closer gives a nice ratio of instrument to room tone.

Sometimes a gradual LF roll off is required, as the bottom
notes on the tenor, C,B,Bb can be about 6dB louder than
mid-range.

It's not rocket science.

Now, balancing a five piece saxophone section, 2 altos,
two tenors, baritone, doubling  on flutes, clnt, bs clarinet
across two tracks, that *can* be a challenge:-)

Iain.

On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:48:00 +0200, "Iain Churches"
IainNG at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:


"ansermetniac" <ansermetniac at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nvi5f5demqvfefm3qpa2tska39c53scb8v at (no spam) 4ax.com...
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
IainNG at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

Sundry?

Miking a solo tenor saxophone is is something that most
recording arts student learn fairly early on. It should be
bread and butter stuff for any competent engineer.

Usually a large capsule condenser (Neumann u49, u87)
will get you a very good sound. The traditional placing
for the microphone is about 25 cms above the bell
equidistant between the bell and the LH C# key.

You can use the cardioid, hpercardioid or fig-of-eight polar
patterns to give you the ratio of direct to indirect that sounds
appropriate. In some applications an omni, working a little
closer gives a nice ratio of instrument to room tone.

Sometimes a gradual LF roll off is required, as the bottom
notes on the tenor, C,B,Bb can be about 6dB louder than
mid-range.

It's not rocket science.

Now, balancing a five piece saxophone section, 2 altos,
two tenors, baritone, doubling on flutes, clnt, bs clarinet
across two tracks, that *can* be a challenge:-)

Iain.


And what about the electroic crap they add between the mic and the
tape deck?

"ansermetniac" <ansermetn... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:nvi5f5demqvfefm3qpa2tska39c53scb8v at (no spam) 4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
Iai... at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

Sundry?

Miking a solo tenor saxophone is is something that most
recording arts student learn fairly early on. It should be
bread and butter stuff for any competent engineer.

Usually a large capsule condenser (Neumann u49, u87)
will get you a very good sound. The traditional placing
for the microphone is about 25 cms above the bell
equidistant between the bell and the LH C# key.

You can use the cardioid, hpercardioid or fig-of-eight polar
patterns to give you the ratio of direct to indirect that sounds
appropriate. In some applications an omni, working a little
closer gives a nice ratio of instrument to room tone.

Sometimes a gradual LF roll off is required, as the bottom
notes on the tenor, C,B,Bb can be about 6dB louder than
mid-range.

It's not rocket science.

Now, balancing a five piece saxophone section, 2 altos,
two tenors, baritone, doubling on flutes, clnt, bs clarinet
across two tracks, that *can* be a challenge:-)

Iain.

Going to have to disagree with this.

Putting a mic in front of a saxophone and recording it is not a
challenge, but to get the magic Van Gelder got with many saxophonists
is a feat.

I think ears come into play here, to a considerable extent.

There
really are not that many really good recordings of saxophone, just as
there really are not that many really good recordings of the greatest
singers, and more people understand the human voice than understand
the saxophone.

I have made some decent recordings of big time musicians on modest
equipment, and I have good ears for saxophone; it takes
experimentation every time out to get the best sound, because
different mics behave differently on different days, different players
mix better with certain mics, yadda yadda yadda.

There are many, many factors, and if any idiot could do it there would
be far more great recordings of saxophonists than we have.

All just to say, I don't think it's at all easy to get a really good
recording of and playback of a very good saxophonist. Once you have a
special way you do it, and some variants, it's probably cake, but if
you've never discovered that series of recipes, and you don't know
saxophones (don't have good ears for them), you would probably be lost
no matter how technically adept you might be.

inquir... at (no spam) justsaxes.com> wrote in message

news:019c051e-5506-4ab6-a8ae-ad385db2dca8 at (no spam) g27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 6, 7:48 am, "Iain Churches" <Iai... at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:



"ansermetniac" <ansermetn... at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:nvi5f5demqvfefm3qpa2tska39c53scb8v at (no spam) 4ax.com...

On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 12:52:33 +0200, "Iain Churches"
Iai... at (no spam) kolumbus.fi> wrote:

There are thousands of good engineers all over the
world making excellent recordings on a daily basis.

Listen again to the sundry cd

Sundry?

Miking a solo tenor saxophone is is something that most
recording arts student learn fairly early on. It should be
bread and butter stuff for any competent engineer.

Usually a large capsule condenser (Neumann u49, u87)
will get you a very good sound. The traditional placing
for the microphone is about 25 cms above the bell
equidistant between the bell and the LH C# key.

You can use the cardioid, hpercardioid or fig-of-eight polar
patterns to give you the ratio of direct to indirect that sounds
appropriate. In some applications an omni, working a little
closer gives a nice ratio of instrument to room tone.

Sometimes a gradual LF roll off is required, as the bottom
notes on the tenor, C,B,Bb can be about 6dB louder than
mid-range.

It's not rocket science.

Now, balancing a five piece saxophone section, 2 altos,
two tenors, baritone, doubling on flutes, clnt, bs clarinet
across two tracks, that *can* be a challenge:-)

Iain.
Going to have to disagree with this.

That's your prerogative:-)

Putting a mic in front of a saxophone and recording it is not a
challenge, but to get the magic Van Gelder got with many saxophonists
is a feat.

You make it sound as if a saxophone is a difficult instrument to
capture.  Any experienced engineer will tell you that the clarinet,
flute and cor Anglais are actually much more of a challenge as
woodwinds go.

Try recording a Ruckers harpsichord. Now, *that is* difficult"

I think ears come into play here, to a considerable extent.

More than "considerable" I would say:-)

There
really are not that many really good recordings of saxophone, just as
there really are not that many really good recordings of the greatest
singers, and more people understand the human voice than understand
the saxophone.

It seems to me you are making this out to be a lot more difficult than it
actually is.  The first thing any engineer should do is to go into the
studio
and listen to the instrument as it sounds in that particular acoustic.
You then pick a microphone which (in your experience) can
accurately capture the sound you hear, in this case the tenor saxophone.

One must bear in mind also that the acoustic leakage will also greatly
affect the overall sound. Drum leakage on a saxophone mic can
sound awful so you need to think carefully about the studio set up.
If your solo instrument is to be overdubbed afterwards, then you
have fewer problems.

I have made some decent recordings of big time musicians on modest
equipment, and I have good ears for saxophone; it takes
experimentation every time out to get the best sound, because
different mics behave differently on different days, different players
mix better with certain mics, yadda yadda yadda.

Like you, I too have made recordings of big time musicians, but using
state of the art equipment in major studios for major labels. I agree
that one has to be flexible. There are no "one size fits all" solutions.
One needs to use sound judgement based on experience to overcome
the problems you mention above.  There is no substitute for a formal
training and a lot of experience,

There are many, many factors, and if any idiot could do it there would
be far more great recordings of saxophonists than we have.

I don't think that idiots even come into the equation, but a competent
recording engineer with a wider experience than just guitar, keyboards,
drums and vocals should be able to make a very presentable saxophone
recording.

All just to say, I don't think it's at all easy to get a really good
recording of and playback of a very good saxophonist.  Once you have a
special way you do it, and some variants, it's probably cake, but if
you've never discovered that series of recipes, and you don't know
saxophones (don't have good ears for them), you would probably be lost
no matter how technically adept you might be.

That's precisely where a formal training comes in. Nothing is left to
chance.
You don't "discover the recipe" you are taught the basic concepts,
and use these as a foundation upon which to develope your own
ideas.  There are inumerable variations.

Best regards
Iain

Hi!
Last weekend I played a first "kind-of-gig".