Mixing Bluegrass and Old Time string band music (Reinforcing Folk Instruments)

Hey folks,

In the world of ensemble folk music, here in America, the most common genre is bluegrass music. The instrumentation is most often some combination of: bass, guitar, fiddle, mandolin, dobro, banjo, and vocals. I will go over the best way to mic up these instruments. Once again the use of direct inputs is discouraged unless you have truly amazing pick-ups and pre-amps. Even in this case the sound can still sound really fake and plugged in. Some people actually like that modern sound. There is no accounting for taste. I have heard a few pick-ups that sound great, but on average I don't care for them.

Firstly, the most natural way to mix this type of music can be to use one large diaphragm condenser. In many situations it is far preferable to close mic all instruments and vocals, especially in cases where gain before feedback is an issue, and or the band wants monitors to be loud. This method requires that the musician know how to do the the dance required to mix themselves. If you are a newbie band, DO NOT run out and start doing this with out first practicing the dance. You could set-up a PA in your rehearsal space, and preferably choreograph your mix, until the mix is second nature. Watch videos of good bands working their mic. The "mix" is put in the hands of the musicians. This can be quite scary for an engineer. I generally high pass the mic up to 100hz or so, dial down the subs (or turn them off, or run them on an aux,) and reinforce the bass separately to deal with any potential low end feedback. Very little monitor is possible for the single LDC method. Any high quality large diaphragm condenser mic will work for this. The Audio-Techinica 4033 seems to be the industry standard, though I have had good luck with the Shure KSM32 and the AKG 414. Del McCoury uses what might be described as "exploded area micing, " a method using four mics. Here is a link to my blog post regarding his set-up.

If you want to close mic each instrument, here are my suggestions. I have already covered bass and fiddle in previous posts. My preference for close micing an instrument is to use a small diaphragm condenser. My favorite is the Neumann KM184. Any high quality SDC will do the trick however. In all cases you should allow that the musicians can "work" their mics, moving in for solos and back for rhythm playing.



Guitar:

The mic should be aimed between the sound hole and the neck joint. The sound AT the sound hole can be very woofy. I find that the key to a good guitar sound is reconciling 200hz. Too much of it and the guitar will sound too boomy, not enough and it will sound too thin.

Mandolin:

The best place to mic a mando is between the f-hole and the strings. The sound of the mando can easily be quite strong in the high-mids. You should EQ is such a way that the sound isn't brittle, yet you can hear every string clearly.

Banjos:

Some banjos are really loud especially the ones with resonators. For the most part these are the types of banjos used for bluegrass. The best place for the mic is right about in the middle between the edge of the drum head and the strings. They can sound kind of tinny if you aren't careful. Sometimes a dynamic mic works better, depending on how they play.

Dobros (or other resonator guitars):

Dobros may well be the hardest instrument in the bluegrass sound to get right. They have a lot of weird overtones, some of which sound a little wrong, or a bit like feedback. Dobros are the only instrument in bluegrass where I prefer a large diaphragm condenser. I recently put a Beyer M160 ribbon mic on one, and really like the results.

The Mix:

So now you've got all the instruments miced up, line checked, and EQed. The most important part of the mix for traditional bluegrass is the vocals. They should reside slightly on top of everything else. Harmonies are a very important part of the sound of bluegrass. The songs also tell stories, so make sure that everything is intelligible.

The instruments should all be heard equally, except when they step in for solos and move up on top. If you set everything up properly, you shouldn't have to be chasing solos. If you have never mixed bluegrass before, do yourself a favor, go out and buy some CDs by the greats. Bill Monroe, Lester Flat, Del McCoury, etc. Study the dynamics, tone and feel of the music. There are also many regional differences if you really want to dive into it. North Carolina music sounds different than Tennessee. What is the band going for stylistically? Do they want to sound like Bill Monroe from the 40s or Allison Krauss from the 90s? As with all music, the more YOU as the engineer listen to, the more educated you are.

With Old Time music (and most bluegrass), the key is to make them sound like they are playing in their living room. They are looking for the most realistic sound possible. Don't mix too much, give the musicians space in the mix. Don't use compressors, very much reverb, or turn it up too loud.

This post is being discussed on PSW: here.

Really vintage audio equipment

This image comes from a site devoted to really cool old tech. This is a pneumatic amplifier.


This one is an electro-mechanical amplifier.

A Metaphysics of Sound Engineering: YOU are in the Signal Path

One of the most basic concepts that any sound engineer needs to understand is that of the signal path. For this example let us assume the use of an analog console used just for FOH. From the source, a small amount of information is created for every input, it flows through the snake, to the console, where it can be tweaked, amplified, and sent on through outboard gear, to the crossover or DSP, and then to amps and finally to the speakers. You have probably seen this charted.

When the audio leaves the speakers, or rather INFORMATION leaves the speakers, where does it go? How does it effect our model of a sound system? What happens when we add the human element to our signal path?

Humans create the information, such as music, at the source. Unfortunately, humans are by their nature not perfect. Because of this very basic fact, the information they create is in a state of flux. As the real-time flow of info passes through the musicians they adapt and change it according to need. The first of many informational feedback loops happens here. Their music flows through the PA system and after is is amplified creates the next set of nested info feedback loops.

When the sound leaves the speakers, it is then perceived by the engineer. The amplified sound is also mixed with the sound from the stage and any room artifacts (reverb, reflexions, noise floor, etc.) This constant flow of information goes into his/her brain filters both through the engineer's technical knowledge, as well as their aesthetic senses, and is communicated to the hands, which tweak EQ, level of emphasis, etc. The signal is then changed (or not.)

This critical listening and decision making process goes on for as long as there is signal to feed the system. Even the decision to stop making changes is a constant and fluid one. Anywhere in the physical signal path where decisions can be made or variables weighed, one of these informational loops is created. So every decision made, from the placement of mics, to changes in delay at the DSP, creates nested possibilities for informational feedback loops.

What every engineer does on a subconscious level is to constantly explore these loops. What we do involves critical listening on an epic scale. For each and every variable in the system (each channel, each effect, dynamics, effects, delay, etc.) there is an individual decision to be made. We do this in microseconds. "Is the snare sounding right? What is the issue? Does it need to be EQed? Emphasized? Deemphasized? It is fine, move on. Now, how about the vocal?" Questions like these are constantly flowing through our brains. What we need to do is listen to the whole, while also paying attention to all the details. We create a triage in our heads to filter through all the variables, create hierarchies, put out fires, and eventually fine tune the mix.

So why should we care about all of this? I believe that the dynamism of systems is important to understand as it speaks to the need for true critical listening. Because all systems dependent on humans are in flux, we need to remember to always be on our toes.

OTROS AIRES " Chicago Summer Dance Fest"

I am somewhere under that white EZ-UP. So this is what it sounds like from the Javier the drummer's perspective! Thanks for sending this to me Javier, you guys were great!

Reinforcing Folk Instruments - Is it a fiddle or a violin? Mics for strings.

This is a continuation of a series of articles concerning my preferred methods for reinforcing, various common folk instruments. Today I'd like to discuss the fiddle or violin. I have previously covered the double bass here.

Those of you who are familiar with my blog, know that I have a preference for using mics rather than pick-ups in most folk music situations. If you haven't read this post concerning this subject in general, check it out.

So, the fiddle:

First off, what is the difference between a violin and a fiddle? In general I think those terms describe not the instrument itself, but the style of play. A violin is a classical instrument, while a fiddle is used in traditional music (or the musics that have "evolved" from folk music.)

When someone describes their instrument as a fiddle how does one reinforce it. Hopefully the musician has a nice mic installed on their instrument, such as a DPA system.



If this is not the case a decent small diaphragm condenser can be used quite effectively, if the stage volume is low enough to allow it. The microphone needs to be quite close to the bridge of the instrument, hopefully ending up between the f-holes and the bridge on the low frequency side. For folk music I want the microphone in front of the musician. The player can then "work" the mic, moving in a bit for solos, backing off for rhythm playing. The back of the mic should be pointed toward the monitor as much as possible. As Art Welter points out here, "pointing the back portion of the mic away from the monitors as much as possible will help get a cleaner instrument sound. Many players tend to point the mic down at such a steep angle that they end up picking up a lot of whatever is going through the wedges."

One issue that can arise is with singing fiddle players. A phasing problem can arrise from having a vocal mic near an instrument mic, both mics picking up the same source at the same time. Putting one of the mics out of polarity might help with this issue. Recently I worked with the Claire Lynch Band at the Old Town School of Folk Music. Her fiddle player, Jason Thomas, has come up with a fairly ingenious way to deal with this issue. He clamps a Neumann KM 184 to his mic stand, just below the vocal mic.


One other option for the singing fiddle player is to use a condenser vocal mic for both instrument and vocal.

So what if the fiddler shows up with a pick-up, and insists on using it? Sometimes they are going for that plugged in sound. They are playing through an amp, using effects, etc. This is common with louder music such as modern country, world music, Americana or Alternative rock. My favorite plugged in sound come from Andrew Bird, who I have unfortunately never worked with. He uses multiple effects, looping and plays through some beautiful rotating speakers. See the image I took at Andrews last concert at Millenium Park. In the case that the musician is playing through an amp, mic the amp like an electric guitar and move on.



If they are looking for a realistic sound, and they are plugged into a DI, you might be in for some work. IF they have a nice pick-up, and quality instrument and a decent DI or pre-amp, it shouldn't be that hard to get it to sound real. You might need to roll off some high end and or some high mids. Scott Helmke suggested to me on Facebook that I add this:

"One thing I'd mention about pickups is that oftentimes they need a very high impedance DI to sound good - a Baggs or Fishman DI will have this, or a Countryman 85. A piezo pickup that's not happy with the impedance it's feeding will have weak bottom and weird mids."



When micing a "violin" one needs to keep in mind the fact that they are looking for an EXACT representation of their sound. One of the DPA mics or a comparable system will work, but barring that they will want a high quality condenser mic. In general violin is miced from behind the seated player. They like to have some distance between the microphone and the instrument. Most classical musicians HATE microphones. The don't want to even know that the mic is even there. This image is from a concert I describe here, where I mixed both fiddles AND violins:


discussion at PSW

The history of Concert Sound

Posting a lot today! This page is an amazing look at the history of live sound. We have come so far, yet somehow physics has not changed.

Acoustic Radar

This page is where I got my profile picture that have been using for most of my social networking sites. Fascinating stuff.

Art Vs. Science II

This post comes from this discussion on Pro Sound Web.

It starts with this question:
How much of what you/we do is determined by science as opposed to art? At what point do you stop being a mechanic/technician and become a performer making decisions based on subjective aspects of the gig?

I sometimes feel that we spend so much time thinking about the nuts and bolts of our business (specs, meters, technical widgets) that we lose sight of the true goal, which is to make it sound "good", which is purely subjective.

Maybe it's just me getting old...

---

Duane Massey
Houston, Texas, USA



Every decision that you make after the system is set up properly is an aesthetic decision. This means that you are at LEAST a designer, a craftsmen. The best of us ARE artists. The decision to mix in such a way as to please the band, and sound as much like themselves as possible is an aesthetic or artistic decision. Hooking up a mic might not make you a scientist, but picking out the right mic and positioning it is a mixture between craft and technical knowledge. Choosing and placement of microphones is the first and maybe the most important artistic decision an sound engineer makes. Every other aspect of your sound is based on these things. Putting a 57 on an acoustic guitar vs. putting a high quality condenser on it is as much an aesthetic choice as it is one based on physics and your on personal experience.

Any EQ applied that isn't for feedback reduction is an aesthetic decision. It could be compared to an artist shading an image, polishing a statue.

Last night I mixed an old timey honkytonk country band. There was really only time for a line check. I'd never heard this band before. I made sure the vocals were on top, that there wasn't too much sizzle on anything and dialed in a nice "sun Records" slapback delay for the faster numbers and a spring reverb for the slower numbers. No one from the band told me to do this, they trusted me to mix them appropriately.

By stating that I am both an artist as well as a scientist, I'm not implying that I do anything that is inappropriate. To do this job successfully you need a sense of aesthetics as keen as any designer or artist.

OK, how is a sound engineer like an artist, where the other tradespeople are not? We work with a subjective creative medium. There is no aesthetic quality to what an electrician or a plumber does. There is nothing subjective about electricity. A mason or a carpenter however creates something that can be observed as beautiful, can be perceived on a subjective level. They also create things that last. Our art is more like a Buddhist sand painting. It is impermanent. If there was no subjective aesthetic quality to what we do, one that has a visceral effect on the audience, then every concert would sound perfect to everyone.

Is a graphic designer an an artist? A lot of people sure think they are. They take clip art, other people's content, fonts they didn't design, and place them together into a pleasing package. Sure they are trying to please the client, but often times they are completely independent. We are much like them. Is someone how makes collages not an artist? We make collages out of sound. How about a film editor?

James Drake posted another example in the discussion on PSW: "if a painter is commissioned to make a painting which includes "something blue", does that make him less of an artist because that decision was not made by him but by his client?" Is the Sistine Chapel a lesser artwork because it was a commissioned piece.

In Jamaica both recording and live engineers are considered to be musicians in their own right. Is this wrong? The bands I work with consider me to be part of the band, even if just for the night. We don't have a pre-show conference where they tell me how to mix them.


As far as science goes, we use science all the time. We must understand at least the basics of Physics. How sound travels, acoustics, how an opamp effects the signal, the effect of humidity on sound waves, how to set delay times etc. We use the scientific method every time we troubleshoot, every time we hunt down hums, buzzes, and any other technical issue we run into. Those of us that are better at these things become systems techs.

It is absolutely essential that an engineer understand signal flow, gain structure, feedback reduction, acoustics, electricity, Ohm's law, and the scientific method (troubleshooting.) Does this make us scientists? I guess it depends on your definition of "scientist."

Does anyone think that a recording producer is not an artist/ craftsmen/ scientist?

The only difference between a record producer and a live FOH engineer is they they have days or weeks to do their job, a sterile environment (anechoic or nearly so), more toys, mixing engineers at their call, and they don't need to worry about feedback. We have to work on the fly, have to work with whatever soundcheck we can negotiate, have to deal with being in a reverberant space and the possibility of feedback. We are expected to create something that is just as perfect as a record and we only get one shot at it.

I don't understand how Eno and Lanois can be artists, yet when U2's engineer replicates that mix on the fly in a different city every day, he is not equal to them. I would guess he also gets a decent paycheck. Quincy Jones gets more money because of his name, which carries with a perceived level of quality and experience. I'll bet Big Mick, Dave Rat and other well known band engineers get a decent day rate comparable to many record producers.

I am not a studio guy. I like the fact I only have to hear any song once a night, rather than listening to it over and over. Although we don't pick the songs, or arrange the tunes, we do take what the musicians give us and create a mix. To me a mix is more than a sum of it's parts. It is something above and beyond the individual parts. This is really where we are similar to a record producer. We work to create that greater big picture mix out of the disparate parts that are the individual inputs.

We are very much like an arranger or conductor, taking the source material through the filter that is our aesthetic sense, and presenting it in such a way as to keep everyone happy. We arrange the sound all the time. It is called mixing. We decide to mix the vocals higher or to boost that guitar solo. No one is whispering in my ear that they really want that gated tom sound, or that the predelay on the verb needs to be tweeked a bit. Just by emphasizing a specific instrument we are "arranging." I have heard sound guys who are musos as well subconsciously mixing their own instrument louder than it "should be."




I mostly work one-offs. I don't have a band member standing over me while I mix (other than a few Indian Classical acts that work without monitors and call out every level and EQ change.) I am essentially producing a record every night. Then it disappears the second I zero the console. All that is left is a board dub which is just a shadow of the work that is my mix.

If we are doing our job no one knows that we are there. Except other engineers, musicians and industry types. I am not a Red Hot Chili Peppers fan, but I would attend one of their shows just to hear what Dave Rat does with their sound. When I am at a show I might as well be working because, unless the sound is perfect to my ears (one show in ten, at best) I am constantly analyzing it. I might be there to hear the band, but I am hyper aware of the mix.

If you haven't read it this is Art Vs. Science I.

Robbie Fulks' keen observations

I've been lucky to work a few times with Robbie Fulks. He is one funny, smart and quality musician. I just read this list and felt the need to post a link.

how to be miserable as a professional musician: a ten-step guide

Free Music Archive

This site is really cool. It is a curated collection of free music.

This is my favorite collection on the site. It includes a bunch of old 78s of old time music, from all over the world. Very cool!