Recommended microphones for recording organs.

Hi all,

I've been planning for a while to do some sampling of organs for use with applications like Hauptwerk. I've purchased some recording equipment but am not entirely sure if it's going to "cut the cheese" anymore from what i've been reading.

I've got an Edirol FA101 which I intend to record straight to my laptop with (I'm not concerned about noise from the laptop, it's very quiet and i'll also use something to dampen it when I do the recordings). I also purchased a Rode NT4 microphone (Rode microphones are priced very competitively in Australia). Does anyone have experience recording an organ with a stereo co-incident XY pair? The organ I intend to sample is not very wide (about 4 or 5 metres). I've been thinking that I might be better off investing in 2 NT2A's which have a selectable cardoid, figure 8 or omni polar pattern, that way i'd be able to pick between masses of different recording techniques?

I'm just totally new and want to get it right the first time (which might or might not be unrealistic).

As I said, the organ is not incredibly wide (about 4 or 5 metres) and is positioned in the left-front corner of the church (which is not that big either). It's definately deeper than it is wide. Does anyone have something they can recommend? Should I proceed to make the recordings with the NT4 or is it likely that it will just perform poorly?

I intend to release this organ 100% free of charge when it is completed along with any other organs I sample in future as a tool for all those wanting to learn to play the king of all instruments.

Thanks a lot!
Nick.

The Rode NT4 is a decent microphone. But the positioning of the two coincident cardioid capsules at 90 degrees is sub-optimal for stereo recording*, and will give a rather narrow image. Whether I would suggest an alternative technique depends rather strongly on both the nature of the acoustic of the church and what degree of stereo imaging you are looking for.

Paul (a recording engineer, but with no experience of sampling)

* 120 degrees is optimal in this case - see here.

Thanks for the reply.

Despite the church being rather large, the room acoustic is definately not wet, but it's also not 100% dry. The reverberation time would be below 1.5 seconds but you can definately tell that there is some reflections of the sound present. As I said, the organ isn't that large either so there isn't much stereo spread to capture. Or am I looking at this the wrong way? I am new to recording.

I did read about the ORTF 120 degree method... but it just didn't make sense to me how it could capture my organ with any great detail (i.e. I would have to have the setup within 1 metre from the pipe facade for any direct sound to actually hit the microphones head on). Wouldn't it leave a hole in the middle? I've read lots about microphones not "hearing" the same way our ears work and I have heard that ORTF is great on large organs, but the organ I intend to sample isn't that huge.

ORTF is not just the angle of the mics (110 degress in that case), but having the capsules spaced by 17cm as well. I have used it successfully, but I only used it on that occasion because I was required to; I prefer other techniques in general, but this is not the place to go into the theory about it*. Incidentally, having the sound go "straight" into a microphone is not necessarily important.

Using the NT4 I would start experimenting only about 4-5 metres back from the organ (or more if the sound doesn't feel sufficiently integrated at that point). In my experience, if a venue is somewhat dry it is counterproductive to go further back to try to capture more ambience - a closer recording sits better with the drier sound.

Using my own kit I would have an MS setup - this is a cardioid facing forward and a figure of eight facing sideways immediately above it; the left and right signals are generated as the sum and difference of these, and the width of the stereo is varied by changing the level of the sideways (S) mic relative to the mid (M) mic - but this is only practical if you have either a preamp with the MS processing matrix built in, or the confidence to do the summing in software in the laptop (as I do).

If you are particularly concerned to capture the very low frequencies of the organ accurately, then you are more likely to do this with omnidirectional mics unless you go for the expensive large-diaphragm mics like the AKG C414 (this is a feature of the physics of directional mics, not merely a defect). For stereo, omnis would need to be spaced apart, but the imaging will be less precise, and I'm not the person to ask for recommendations on using this technique, as I dislike it.

Without the benefit of experience of sampling, I would expect that a position that gives a recording of the whole instrument that you are satisfied with will be good for wet sampling also, as the sounds will combine the same.

Paul

* Yes, I could write a lot more!

I was considering MS configuration and I would be quite happy doing the summation using the laptop.

I'm not overly concerned about bass. The organ I intend to sample has a lowest pipe of 16ft. I would like the bass to be clear, but am more concerned about missing clarity in the high end.

Does anyone have any info on NT2A's? If they are appropriate?

Thanks very much for your input. It's very appreciated.

Nick.

I would not be unhappy with using those Rodes for an MS setup. The main trouble is fiddling around getting a suitable stand arrangement that is not too fiddly. My AKG C404s look like this in MS arrangement (the rigging behind is not pictured, but is something like this but with the C404s).

If you want suggestions for doing MS recording in software, perhaps you could PM me with details of what software you already have. I think that this part of the discussion would be a distraction here on the board.

Paul

Greetings NicholasA
I have used a pair of Rode NT3s but gave up the whole excercise in the end. Mics were good but organ was poor. I tried the NT3s in ORTF about 5m from the front of the organ but the blower noise was just too great. It was an amazing learning experience for me too. I play the organ every week but had not noticed the extreme differences in pipe levels/voicings that I found with the note for note recordings.
The background noise from passing cars was also very high and seeing the church was on a main road it was not a viable option to record at 2am in the morning. Well not viable for me any rate.
In summary, your microphones and their placement may in fact be the least of your concerns when you get into the actual recording.
Good luck.
Brenton

Hi Brenton!

I did my recordings two weeks ago with the NT4. They sounded fantastic at first, but now that i've actually got a few of the ranks to a "playable" state, i've found that the single oboe reed stop has some strange tonal qualities and seems to be substantially louder in the bottom octave's whilst almost inaudible with any other stops engaged in the upper octaves. I'm still experimenting and very much hope that it's not something to do with the noise reduction. I'll experiment next time I have a go on the organ to see if this in-fact happens when i'm playing and it's just poorly voiced.

I will probably end up doing the recordings again as I am unhappy with quite a lot of the samples (I will still release the set once it's complete and I think that I have done the absolute best that I can). The organ specifications are up on my website now anyway at http://www.appletonit.com.au/nickspage/

Toodles!

Nick.