Pipe Organ at the First Congregational Church, Los Angeles,

Discussion in 'rec.audio.pro' started by hollywood_steve, Aug 19, 2003.

  1. Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    types of recordings?

    thanks.

    steve
    lex125@pacbell.net
  2. Arny Krueger

    Arny Krueger Guest

    "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message
    news:55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com...

    > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > types of recordings?


    I'm micing a smaller (natch!) pipe organ weekly at my church. Right now I'm
    using suspended spaced omnis and not really happy with the results.

    It appears to me that there are at least three main conditions that you want
    to achieve:

    (1) A lively, bright, full sound with reasonable room acoustic.
    (2) Not too much noise from the mechanical parts.
    (3) Reasonably smooth bass response.

    I'm not saying I'm anything like an expert, but offer these comments in an
    effort to smoke out some words of wisdom from people who actually know what
    they are doing.
  3. ScotFraser

    ScotFraser Guest

    << But is there a typical method used for these
    types of recordings?
    >>


    Stereo pair backed way off. When I use to do this it was an ORTF pair back, oh,
    20 or 30 feet from the pipes, occasionally a spot mic on a specialty rank or a
    bass rank if it didn't seem to have the presence the player was after.


    Scott Fraser
  4. "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message ...
    > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > types of recordings?
    >
    > thanks.
    >
    > steve
    > lex125@pacbell.net




    That is a great sounding organ if it is the one that I remember.... It has
    been a few years since I've been in there, but I seem to remember I got a
    pretty good sound with a pair of spaced B&K 4006s. I've also gotten good
    organ sounds with KM 184s, but the low end is a bit lacking in those...
    With an organ like that it is important to have mics that extend as high and
    low as possible in their frequency response. The high keeps the sound of the
    notes distinct, but the lows need to be able to rumble. (Don't they have a
    32 foot stop there?)

    Sometimes, you may find that multiple pairs are needed to get a good organ
    sound. A close pair to capture the pipe sound and a further pair (omnis) to
    capture the sound of the room (which is just as important as the
    instrument).

    Good luck and have fun...

    --Ben


    --
    Benjamin Maas
    Fifth Circle Audio
    Los Angeles, CA
    http://www.fifthcircle.com
  5. Denny Meeker

    Denny Meeker Guest

    First, I second Arnie's "conditions". (No pun intended, it just occurred)

    It's hard to give a general answer, because each organ/room combination is
    different. Typically, a pair of spaced omni microphones is used; a third
    for center fill, at a lower (sound) level, may be added; however, I have
    also gotten good results using an ORTF pair. If the organ is entirely
    arrayed across the front (or rear) of the church, the ORTF pair may be
    preferable. As to height, try to place the microphones at about the level
    of the mouths of the pipes. Place them too high, and you will emphasize the
    higher overtones (the Mixture III sounds like the Screaming Mixture XVII).
    Place them too low, and you will lose overtones (a North German Baroque
    style instrument will begin to sound like a 1920s romantic instrument). If
    the organ divisions are on multiple levels, height recommendations are
    normally based on the Great division.

    Regarding horizontal placement, get into the church early, while it is quiet
    and there is no audience. Wander around the floor, clapping your hands and
    listening for the room response. Whereever the room "sings" in response to
    your clap is potentially a good place for the microphone. Put down a "sticky
    note" there, and continue looking for other mic placements. Then return to
    your "sticky notes" and narrow down the choices. Avoid "slap echo" and dead
    spots like the plague.

    If this is an unfamiliar instrument in an unknown room, try to get there for
    the organist's rehearsal, typically the night before, to go through the
    above exercise and do a test recording. (It might help to give the organist
    a cassette copy of the rehearsal recording.) Remenber, however that the
    performance will be louder than the rehearsal (just because) and the hall
    will be less reverberant (due to the presence of the audience).

    Finally, as to microphone selection: Use the flattest response microphones
    you have. I really like AKG C414B/ULS mics for the organ, as they are
    multi-pattern mics and can reproduce fundamentals down to 16 Hz, the lowest
    you are likely to find outside of Atlantic City or Sidney, and up to beyond
    your likely ability to hear. Other people like B&K (now DPA) for the same
    reason (except that they are single-pattern). SM58s are absolutely out of
    the question ;-). Use "rubber band" shock mounts for your mics in order to
    prevent vibrations from being transmitted from the environment to the mics.
    I prefer stands to suspending microphones because I set up only for a
    performance rather than deal with a long-term installation. However,
    audience members don't usually kick suspended microphones ...

    "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
    news:hoOdnRdC3oV9I9-iXTWJkA@comcast.com...
    >
    > "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message
    > news:55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com...
    >
    > > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > > types of recordings?

    >
    > I'm micing a smaller (natch!) pipe organ weekly at my church. Right now

    I'm
    > using suspended spaced omnis and not really happy with the results.
    >
    > It appears to me that there are at least three main conditions that you

    want
    > to achieve:
    >
    > (1) A lively, bright, full sound with reasonable room acoustic.
    > (2) Not too much noise from the mechanical parts.
    > (3) Reasonably smooth bass response.
    >
    > I'm not saying I'm anything like an expert, but offer these comments in an
    > effort to smoke out some words of wisdom from people who actually know

    what
    > they are doing.
    >
    >
  6. Denny Meeker

    Denny Meeker Guest

    OOPS! should have been "Arny". Sorry, Arny.

    "Denny Meeker" <dmeeker@mindspring.com> wrote in message
    news:nhA0b.903$sV.697@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
    > First, I second Arnie's "conditions". (No pun intended, it just occurred)
    >
    > It's hard to give a general answer, because each organ/room combination is
    > different. Typically, a pair of spaced omni microphones is used; a third
    > for center fill, at a lower (sound) level, may be added; however, I have
    > also gotten good results using an ORTF pair. If the organ is entirely
    > arrayed across the front (or rear) of the church, the ORTF pair may be
    > preferable. As to height, try to place the microphones at about the level
    > of the mouths of the pipes. Place them too high, and you will emphasize

    the
    > higher overtones (the Mixture III sounds like the Screaming Mixture XVII).
    > Place them too low, and you will lose overtones (a North German Baroque
    > style instrument will begin to sound like a 1920s romantic instrument).

    If
    > the organ divisions are on multiple levels, height recommendations are
    > normally based on the Great division.
    >
    > Regarding horizontal placement, get into the church early, while it is

    quiet
    > and there is no audience. Wander around the floor, clapping your hands

    and
    > listening for the room response. Whereever the room "sings" in response

    to
    > your clap is potentially a good place for the microphone. Put down a

    "sticky
    > note" there, and continue looking for other mic placements. Then return

    to
    > your "sticky notes" and narrow down the choices. Avoid "slap echo" and

    dead
    > spots like the plague.
    >
    > If this is an unfamiliar instrument in an unknown room, try to get there

    for
    > the organist's rehearsal, typically the night before, to go through the
    > above exercise and do a test recording. (It might help to give the

    organist
    > a cassette copy of the rehearsal recording.) Remenber, however that the
    > performance will be louder than the rehearsal (just because) and the hall
    > will be less reverberant (due to the presence of the audience).
    >
    > Finally, as to microphone selection: Use the flattest response

    microphones
    > you have. I really like AKG C414B/ULS mics for the organ, as they are
    > multi-pattern mics and can reproduce fundamentals down to 16 Hz, the

    lowest
    > you are likely to find outside of Atlantic City or Sidney, and up to

    beyond
    > your likely ability to hear. Other people like B&K (now DPA) for the same
    > reason (except that they are single-pattern). SM58s are absolutely out of
    > the question ;-). Use "rubber band" shock mounts for your mics in order

    to
    > prevent vibrations from being transmitted from the environment to the

    mics.
    > I prefer stands to suspending microphones because I set up only for a
    > performance rather than deal with a long-term installation. However,
    > audience members don't usually kick suspended microphones ...
    >
    > "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@hotpop.com> wrote in message
    > news:hoOdnRdC3oV9I9-iXTWJkA@comcast.com...
    > >
    > > "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message
    > > news:55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com...
    > >
    > > > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > > > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > > > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > > > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > > > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > > > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > > > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > > > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > > > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > > > types of recordings?

    > >
    > > I'm micing a smaller (natch!) pipe organ weekly at my church. Right now

    > I'm
    > > using suspended spaced omnis and not really happy with the results.
    > >
    > > It appears to me that there are at least three main conditions that you

    > want
    > > to achieve:
    > >
    > > (1) A lively, bright, full sound with reasonable room acoustic.
    > > (2) Not too much noise from the mechanical parts.
    > > (3) Reasonably smooth bass response.
    > >
    > > I'm not saying I'm anything like an expert, but offer these comments in

    an
    > > effort to smoke out some words of wisdom from people who actually know

    > what
    > > they are doing.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
  7. Carey Carlan

    Carey Carlan Guest

    sjp@soca.com (hollywood_steve) wrote in
    news:55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com:

    > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > types of recordings?


    An organ and its church are an instrument together. The acoustics of the
    hall shape the timbre as the pipes shape the pitch.

    In a church the size of FCC, you could place a pair of mics almost anywhere
    in the nave and get a reasonable recording. As there are two main organs
    and a little one across an impressively long structure, there's probably no
    single best spot.

    It would be best to record your second visit. Use the first to scout the
    hall. Look at the architecture. Listen to the stone. The chancel
    captures the sound, guarding from the room. The transcepts open to the
    sides and let the sound spill out. The high, arched stone shapes the
    resonance.

    Start with the biggest organ in the rear balcony. Use your eyes before
    your ears for once. Get far enough back that you can see the whole
    instrument before you, somewhere about the second or third chandelier from
    the back. Your friend here would be height. Set up as high as you can go
    (no, higher).

    The organ in the chancel (behind the pulpit) faces inward from the sides in
    the English tradition. A mic pair would have to be out of the chancel to
    avoid "crossfiring" organ sounds. Again, tall is good.

    Each mic pair can act as the ambient mics for the other instrument. The
    combination of these two pair should capture most of the sound.

    Fidelity is everything here. Don't trot out your 57 or Dragonfly for this
    gig. B&K, Schoeps, your best omni. Whatever you have with ruler flat
    response from 17 Hz (pedal C in the balcony) to 20 kHz. Good shock mounts
    a must. Cleanest mic pre. Most accurate ADC.

    Set levels, press Record and enjoy.
  8. ScotFraser

    ScotFraser Guest

    << z (pedal C in the balcony) to 20 kHz. Good shock mounts
    a must. Cleanest mic pre. Most accurate ADC. >>

    I would add also, good wind screens. Amazing the kind of updraft a bunch of
    candles can cause, if the church in question does that. Also there are often
    HVAC drafts well up in the air that you don't perceive standing on the floor.

    Scott Fraser
  9. >
    > Fidelity is everything here. Don't trot out your 57 or Dragonfly for this
    > gig. B&K, Schoeps, your best omni. Whatever you have with ruler flat
    > response from 17 Hz (pedal C in the balcony) to 20 kHz. Good shock mounts
    > a must. Cleanest mic pre. Most accurate ADC.
    >
    > Set levels, press Record and enjoy.


    Curious if M-S is worth considering? If for no other reason than I
    thought it might be appropriate to break out the big BLUE Bottle
    against this massive source instrument? With maybe a 4038 or R121 as
    the "sides" mic? Or should I play it safe and just use my best pair
    of small D condensers? If M-S is not a good idea, can anyone explain
    why? Thanks.

    Steve
    lex125@pacbell.net
  10. "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message
    news:55147cb4.0308200951.4c5d62aa@posting.google.com...
    > >
    > > Fidelity is everything here. Don't trot out your 57 or Dragonfly for

    this
    > > gig. B&K, Schoeps, your best omni. Whatever you have with ruler flat
    > > response from 17 Hz (pedal C in the balcony) to 20 kHz. Good shock

    mounts
    > > a must. Cleanest mic pre. Most accurate ADC.
    > >
    > > Set levels, press Record and enjoy.

    >
    > Curious if M-S is worth considering? If for no other reason than I
    > thought it might be appropriate to break out the big BLUE Bottle
    > against this massive source instrument? With maybe a 4038 or R121 as
    > the "sides" mic? Or should I play it safe and just use my best pair
    > of small D condensers? If M-S is not a good idea, can anyone explain
    > why? Thanks.
    >
    > Steve
    > lex125@pacbell.net


    Not that I think it is bad, I don't think you'll gain anything with Mid
    Side... A pipe organ recording isn't so much about imaging, but the sound
    of the instrument in the room. That is why I've always gone Spaced Omnis...
    Also, your ribbon mics aren't going to have the frequency response to
    capture the low notes and the harmonics created by all the pipes... With an
    organ, there is a lot going on besides the fundamentals...

    The comments about height are right on as well.. I break out my bogen
    stands that can go up 17 feet when I record organ. Another reason for using
    Small-D condensers. These stands aren't the most stable thing in the world
    when they are that high. I'll add that very often, I'll go to my black
    (diffuse field) grills on the 4006s for this kind of work. The extra
    brightness can be very advantageous. Another great mic for recording organ
    is the Neumann 582 with the gold omni capsules... Provides diffuse field
    "dig" and a great low end...

    --Ben

    --
    Benjamin Maas
    Fifth Circle Audio
    Los Angeles, CA
    http://www.fifthcircle.com
  11. James Boyk

    James Boyk Guest

    I think Sennheiser offers custom-modified mikes of the FM type (not wireless mikes, but ones that use the variable capacitance of the condenser to change the frequency of an FM circuit) that go down to 7 Hz. I've always wanted to record a locomotive out at
    Orange Empire Railway Museum with a couple of these; but you can't rent the mikes; have to buy them.

    James Boyk
  12. James Boyk wrote:
    > I think Sennheiser offers custom-modified mikes of the FM type (not
    > wireless mikes, but ones that use the variable capacitance of the
    > condenser to change the frequency of an FM circuit) that go down to 7
    > Hz. I've always wanted to record a locomotive out at Orange Empire
    > Railway Museum with a couple of these; but you can't rent the mikes;
    > have to buy them.


    Schoeps also offers amplifier bodies with cutoffs as low as 3 Hz on
    special order.
  13. Scott Dorsey

    Scott Dorsey Guest

    James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu> wrote:
    >I think Sennheiser offers custom-modified mikes of the FM type (not wireless mikes, but ones that use the variable capacitance of the condenser to change the frequency of an FM circuit) that go down to 7 Hz. I've always wanted to record a locomotive out a

    t Orange Empire Railway Museum with a couple of these; but you can't rent the mikes; have to buy them.

    I can rent you a set of B&K 2615s that go down to 2 Hz. Actually a pain in
    the neck because air currents from candles and air conditioning ducts can
    blow the hell out of your headroom. But they can sound amazing on organ.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  14. kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:<bi37gg$j0i$1@panix2.panix.com>...
    > James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu> wrote:
    > >I think Sennheiser offers custom-modified mikes of the FM type (not wireless mikes, but ones that use the variable capacitance of the condenser to change the frequency of an FM circuit) that go down to 7 Hz. I've always wanted to record a locomotive out

    at Orange Empire Railway Museum with a couple of these; but you can't rent the mikes; have to buy them.
    >
    > I can rent you a set of B&K 2615s that go down to 2 Hz. Actually a pain in
    > the neck because air currents from candles and air conditioning ducts can
    > blow the hell out of your headroom. But they can sound amazing on organ.
    > --scott


    I'm curious what kind of playback system can take advantage of these
    types of frequencies? Or does it work like the high end where normal
    range frequencies are in some way (supposedly) affected by what is
    going on at 30kHz or 40kHz?

    As a bass player who used to own every type of bass amp imaginable, I
    once hooked up a signal generator to each of my rigs just to see what
    happened in the world below 40Hz. (I've never owned anything but
    standard 4 string basses, so 40Hz has always been my lower limit).
    Even though a couple of my hi-tech hybrid amp rigs could reproduce
    signals down below 20Hz, I only knew this by sight - I could watch the
    cone vibrating at around 12Hz, but I couldn't hear ANYTHING below 16Hz
    or so. (and its debatable what I could "hear" between 16Hz and around
    24Hz versus what I could somehow sense - feel, maybe?) So, would a
    recording with 7Hz information sound any different than an identical
    recording without 7Hz info?

    steve
    www.lexington125.com
    lex125.com
  15. Scott Dorsey

    Scott Dorsey Guest

    hollywood_steve <sjp@soca.com> wrote:
    >kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message news:<bi37gg$j0i$1@panix2.panix.com>...
    >> I can rent you a set of B&K 2615s that go down to 2 Hz. Actually a pain in
    >> the neck because air currents from candles and air conditioning ducts can
    >> blow the hell out of your headroom. But they can sound amazing on organ.

    >
    >I'm curious what kind of playback system can take advantage of these
    >types of frequencies? Or does it work like the high end where normal
    >range frequencies are in some way (supposedly) affected by what is
    >going on at 30kHz or 40kHz?


    Mostly for the really low stuff, you can watch the woofers move in and
    out (or in the case of the Maggies, you can watch the mylar sheets slowly
    wave back and forth) but without any actual output being generated.

    Having response below 20 Hz doesn't really buy you much, except in that
    if you have your frequency response reasonably good down to 10 Hz, you
    know you have good phase response down to 20 Hz. (If you assume that the
    low end rolloff is first order, which in the case of the B&Ks isn't a good
    assumption anyway).

    >As a bass player who used to own every type of bass amp imaginable, I
    >once hooked up a signal generator to each of my rigs just to see what
    >happened in the world below 40Hz. (I've never owned anything but
    >standard 4 string basses, so 40Hz has always been my lower limit).
    >Even though a couple of my hi-tech hybrid amp rigs could reproduce
    >signals down below 20Hz, I only knew this by sight - I could watch the
    >cone vibrating at around 12Hz, but I couldn't hear ANYTHING below 16Hz
    >or so. (and its debatable what I could "hear" between 16Hz and around
    >24Hz versus what I could somehow sense - feel, maybe?) So, would a
    >recording with 7Hz information sound any different than an identical
    >recording without 7Hz info?


    Not on most playback systems. I think about the only thing that will
    really go down that low is the ServoDrive. And it really WILL reproduce
    subsonics accurately. The effect is very eerie.

    DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CUT VINYL THIS WAY....
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  16. Carey Carlan

    Carey Carlan Guest

    sjp@soca.com (hollywood_steve) wrote in
    news:55147cb4.0308211945.43322a56@posting.google.com:

    > Even though a couple of my hi-tech hybrid amp rigs could reproduce
    > signals down below 20Hz, I only knew this by sight - I could watch the
    > cone vibrating at around 12Hz, but I couldn't hear ANYTHING below 16Hz
    > or so. (and its debatable what I could "hear" between 16Hz and around
    > 24Hz versus what I could somehow sense - feel, maybe?) So, would a
    > recording with 7Hz information sound any different than an identical
    > recording without 7Hz info?


    The best I can think of is that it shakes the room. You feel thunder as
    much as hear it.
  17. Arny Krueger

    Arny Krueger Guest

    "hollywood_steve" <sjp@soca.com> wrote in message
    news:55147cb4.0308211945.43322a56@posting.google.com
    > kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in message
    > news:<bi37gg$j0i$1@panix2.panix.com>...
    >> James Boyk <boyk@caltech.edu> wrote:
    >>> I think Sennheiser offers custom-modified mikes of the FM type (not
    >>> wireless mikes, but ones that use the variable capacitance of the
    >>> condenser to change the frequency of an FM circuit) that go down to
    >>> 7 Hz. I've always wanted to record a locomotive out at Orange
    >>> Empire Railway Museum with a couple of these; but you can't rent
    >>> the mikes; have to buy them.

    >>
    >> I can rent you a set of B&K 2615s that go down to 2 Hz. Actually a
    >> pain in the neck because air currents from candles and air
    >> conditioning ducts can blow the hell out of your headroom. But they
    >> can sound amazing on organ.
    >> --scott


    > I'm curious what kind of playback system can take advantage of these
    > types of frequencies?


    Goal: 10 Hz @ 120 dB with less than 10% THD. This may incidentally yield
    useable response maybe -3 dB at 5 Hz, with something clearly perceptible
    still happening in the 2-3 Hz range.

    Plan "A":

    Take 4-8 long-stroke 15 or 18 inchers (please see JL Audio, Adire, JBL,
    etc.) and mount them on robust plenums sunk into a critical spot in your
    listening room's floor. (often turns out to be a corner) Power with a
    kilowatt or 5... Equalization may or may not be required.

    Plan "B":

    Take pairs of the same speakers and mount them in the smallest (stout!) box
    that they can fit into, back-to-back. Power and equalize accordingly. You
    will have to equalize because naturally, they start rolling off in the 30-50
    Hz range.
  18. Analogeezer

    Analogeezer Guest

    sjp@soca.com (hollywood_steve) wrote in message news:<55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com>...
    > Has anyone out there had the chance to record the incredibly large
    > pipe organ at the FCC in LA? (please...no large organ jokes) They
    > have informal weekly lunchtime performances and I thought it might be
    > interesting to try recording something that awesome (a rare example of
    > something which deserves to be called "awesome"). How are church
    > organs usually mic'd? The way that the entire building literally
    > shakes with each note, I'm guessing that it isn't too hard to find a
    > decent location for a stereo pair - its not like a few inches either
    > way is gonna matter. But is there a typical method used for these
    > types of recordings?
    >
    > thanks.
    >
    > steve
    > lex125@pacbell.net


    Kind of tangetially related, but I read this story about Rick Wakeman
    when they recorded the Yes album "Going for the One".

    The album was recorded in Switzerland (circa 1976) and they decided
    they wanted to use a large Pipe Organ located where they were
    recording (Zurich I think) on a song called "Parallels".

    The band had resigned themselves to getting a remote unit out to
    record the organ, but the studio staff said "oh no, no need for that
    we'll just rent a phone line for the day".

    Apparently the phone lines in Switzerland, even in the 1970's were
    full bandwidth and fully capable of recording anything with studio
    quality levels of fidelity.

    I'm not sure of the mechanics of how they did it (was it an overdub or
    just a part they flew in later) but the organ on that song is way
    cool.


    Analogeezer
  19. dt king

    dt king Guest

    "Analogeezer" <analogeezer@aerosolkings.com> wrote in message
    news:bfb37ea9.0308220609.6af006ac@posting.google.com...
    > sjp@soca.com (hollywood_steve) wrote in message

    news:<55147cb4.0308191504.70069127@posting.google.com>...

    > The band had resigned themselves to getting a remote unit out to
    > record the organ, but the studio staff said "oh no, no need for that
    > we'll just rent a phone line for the day".
    >
    > Apparently the phone lines in Switzerland, even in the 1970's were
    > full bandwidth and fully capable of recording anything with studio
    > quality levels of fidelity.


    Well, now I'm curious. Say you have two studios -- NYC and LA -- with a
    phone line between them, a vocalist in one and a guitarist in the other.
    They're both recording the tracks locally, but the phone line is plugged
    into earphones so the performers can hear what's happening it the other
    studio. Is there a latency issue?

    dtk
  20. Carey Carlan

    Carey Carlan Guest

    "dt king" <usenet@leztoys.com> wrote in
    news:dHq1b.384$O03.314@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net:

    > Well, now I'm curious. Say you have two studios -- NYC and LA -- with a
    > phone line between them, a vocalist in one and a guitarist in the other.
    > They're both recording the tracks locally, but the phone line is plugged
    > into earphones so the performers can hear what's happening it the other
    > studio. Is there a latency issue?


    Not unless they're linked by satellite.

Share This Page