the microphone and your low D whistle

[CHasR]

ok 6777 search results. obviously this has been...discussed.. before.

well I now that I have one of these low d whistle things (im not telling, so dont ask..one firestorm at a time)...

how do I play to the mic? hole by hole, or up at the fipple?
(assume a cardioid dynamic is already on the pole)

what kind of mic do YOU like? ...or; do you prefer a transducer?

when resopnding; pls indicate if you're referring to -

1.)sound reinforcement/ live application
or
2.)recording studio situations

Your input is greatly appreciated Thanks.
OH, ps: that bottom hole IS quite a stretch! owie, ow ow!

[Peter Duggan]

Try Phil Hardy's video at http://www.kerrywhistles.com/movies/LowDMicTest.wmv (also accessible through Movies > Pro-files > Low D Mic Test)...

But mic pointing at the window's probably the standard way, and I generally like condensers (eg AKG C1000) for both applications.

[Peter Duggan]

Might just add that, watching that again, he's working a little close to the C1000 for my taste (so I'd probably go that close to most dynamic mics, but back off a bit for the condenser).

For the interested, he's got five whistles there (old-style plastic-headed Kerry, wooden-headed Reyburn, MK, Kerry Pro and Chieftain V3).

[Feadoggie]

do you prefer a transducer?

By strict definition, all microphones are transducers meaning they change one form of energy into another. So I do not know what you might mean there.

Any good mic will work. Placement depends on what type of sound you intend to capture (air, breath, finger pops, etc.) and what sounds you might want to reject (live situation). I generally treat the whistle as it were a human singing voice.

For live situations I've used head-worn mics as well as a lavaliere mounted with Velcro to the whistle tube (allow you to move about) but in most cases a regular hand held type of mic works (but you have to drop anchor and stay put). I like the mic to be mounted on a boom in front of the whistle by about a foot and above the whistle window by eight inches to a foot (closer if the venue requires it). If it has a directional pickup pattern then, as has already been suggested, face the whistle window towards the microphone's element but just slightly off axis. But more often than not I find myself using a dynamic mic set up for singing. You go with what the venue provides and make it work.

I prefer condenser microphones, small diaphragm cardioid for most live situations and large diaphragm models for recording but dynamic mics work in most situations too. Sometimes extreme circumstances call for different solutions.

You might want to describe the circumstance for which you are micing the whistle. What are the issues you face? It might lead to better and more specific suggestions

Feadoggie

[MTGuru]

up at the fipple?

Yep. You go where the sound (mostly) is. Try mic'ing at different locations along the tube, and you'll see. Also, less finger noise.

OH, ps: that bottom hole IS quite a stretch! owie, ow ow!

There is no stretch. There is only do.

[MTGuru]

By strict definition, all microphones are transducers meaning they change one form of energy into another. So I do not know what you might mean there.

Well, if you take a transducer by looser definition as sensing a vibrating solid rather than sound in air, it's hard to see how that could work on a wind instrument anyway. It's not the tube or instrument body that's vibrating, at least not that you want to pick up or amplify. The only clip-ons I've ever seen are microphones, located near the interface of the air column and the ambient air.

[Feadoggie]

Yes, I see what you are getting at. Still many engineers will refer to the capsule element of any microphone as a transducer. A loudspeaker is also a transducer.

I have never tried to use a "contact" type of mic on a low whistle. I guess I could rig one up tomorrow and see what happens. I don't expect great results though. I'm not sure what it would be sensing, it's the air that's vibrating, right?

But that reminds me, I have tried the classic pressure zone mic set-up for flute. Should work for low whistle as well. It's kind of like playing the flute into a corner of a shower stall.

Feadoggie

[MTGuru]

But that reminds me, I have tried the classic pressure zone mic set-up for flute. Should work for low whistle as well. It's kind of like playing the flute into a corner of a shower stall.

The local piper's club here has used a PZM for mic'ing the tionól concerts, and that seems to have worked well.

[JTC111]

When talking about types of microphones, the only terms I've heard used are dynamic, condenser, or ribbon.

For the majority of studio recording applications, people will use a condenser but for the uninitiated, condenser mics will require a source of phantom power. If you're recording directly into a computer, a usb condenser solves the problem of a phantom power supply. There are plenty of options on that front today. For a studio application, I'd go with a non-usb condenser. I'd want a mic with a silky upper frequency response to catch the breathiness of the whistle.

Dynamic mics record less detail than condensers but don't require phantom power. They're also pretty damn sturdy. This might be a good option for live performance, but others can speak better about playing live through a mic than I can.

Ribbon mics are wonderful for some applications, but while I haven't tried one on a whistle, my instinct tells me it wouldn't be the best fit. Plus, ribbon mics are expensive and a bit more fragile when compared to the others.

ChasR, what specific application did you have in mind?

[CHasR]

Try Phil Hardy's video at http://www.kerrywhistles.com/movies/LowDMicTest.wmv

thats totally helpful Peter, thanks. [although his idea of "#11 on the marshall's " a wee bit diferent than mine:) ]

MtGuru, thanks, but my synovial tendon sheaths are truly impervious to motivational psychology. But now I m hip re: play from the fipple. Bit of a crash course, but it'll do, & thats exactly what I was looking for. (being a reed guy, our 'fipple-equivalent' is always safely housed inside something )

your right Feadoggie, I ought to have been more precise with the term transducer: (what i was asking; is does anyone actually prefer to attach a mic to the inst); & Jim theres both live & studio needs; 'playing from the fipple' is the ticket

[Feadoggie]

what i was asking; is does anyone actually prefer to attach a mic to the inst

Ok, yes that is done, especially if you want to move around while you play. What I have used in that manner is a small Audio Technica lapel mic. I place a small piece of closed cell foam on the whistle tube maybe an inch below the window, then place the mic on the foam and wrap a piece of Velcro (velcro cable ties work) around the mic and foam. You may have to use tape keep the wire out of the way of your fingers but it works. You will pick-up some handling noise with this rig but if you are careful it's no big deal.

You'll get similar sonic results with a headset mic. I wear glasses so I don't enjoy headsets much they always seem to conflict with each other.

Plus, ribbon mics are expensive and a bit more fragile when compared to the others.

Depends on the mic in question. As for cost, these used to be cheap as dirt (1960's) because no one wanted them. They were viewed as technical dinosaurs. I used an RCA branded ribbon for years, rugged as all get out. The ribbons themselves need to be protected though, maybe that's what you meant. Now of course everyone wants the "vintage" sound, so ribbons came back into fashion. And of course folks started making them again. The Royer is superb. There are many ribbon mics available now from the usual import brands like MXL and Nady. They can be purchased for less than $100. I haven't had the chance to use one in my own studio yet but the MXL looks like it may be worth a try, YMMV.

Feadoggie

[JTC111]

Plus, ribbon mics are expensive and a bit more fragile when compared to the others.

Depends on the mic in question. As for cost, these used to be cheap as dirt (1960's) because no one wanted them. They were viewed as technical dinosaurs. I used an RCA branded ribbon for years, rugged as all get out. The ribbons themselves need to be protected though, maybe that's what you meant. Now of course everyone wants the "vintage" sound, so ribbons came back into fashion. And of course folks started making them again. The Royer is superb. There are many ribbon mics available now from the usual import brands like MXL and Nady. They can be purchased for less than $100. I haven't had the chance to use one in my own studio yet but the MXL looks like it may be worth a try, YMMV.

Feadoggie

I had two things in mind when I wrote that... ribbon sag which can happen if the mic is not protected from the kazillion accidents that happen in studios all the time, and the danger that someone will plug run phantom power to a ribbon and damage it. I know today there's less chance of that and there are even ribbon mics that use phantom power (one being the BLUE Woodpecker which I own and love) but the OP sounds like he's a mic novice and I'd steer any novice towards a condenser before I'd ever recommend a ribbon even because the former offers much more versatility. Also, ribbons record in a figure-8 pattern, so unless you have a well-treated room (and I don't mean egg cartons on the walls), you're going to get some nasty artifacts on your recordings while condensers can give you a much narrower range of focus thereby eliminating much room noise.

I have no experience with Nadys but the MXL mics aren't too bad for the pricepoint. I own a few that I'd like to get modded out one of these days. In their stock condition, I avoid using them on anything that matters, but I've heard some shootouts of modded MXL mics that have stood up pretty well against some high end competition. The Royers, of course, are lovely but now you're in the $1000-$4000 range. Damage one of those doing something stupid and it can really ruin your day. I have a BLUE Kiwi that took a header when a stand got knocked over. The rear grill got mashed but the mic was fine. I'm not sure a ribbon would have done as well.

[Feadoggie]

Yes. I see what you are saying. I've never damaged a ribbon. We're probably taking this thread where it needs not go.

Also, ribbons record in a figure-8 pattern, so unless you have a well-treated room (and I don't mean egg cartons on the walls), you're going to get some nasty artifacts on your recordings while condensers can give you a much narrower range of focus thereby eliminating much room noise.

The figure eight pattern is one of the hallmarks of ribbons. You just need to care for reflections hitting the rear. But dual diaphragm condensers do the same. So that's not limited to ribbons is it?

It's nice to hear that you like the Blue Woodpecker, JTC111. Have you tried any of the Cascade ribbons? I am looking for something to better pick up the high-end sparkle of my resonator and other acoustic lap guitars.

I'm not recommending Nady or MXL's in general but I have had success with a couple particular MXL's. I've been told that the ribbon motor in both MXL and Nady's are the same (or have been the same in the past). The MXL R150 is the one I want to try. It apparently solves the housing design issue of the R144. And if you pop the ribbon on one it's no great loss.

Feadoggie

[JTC111]

The figure eight pattern is one of the hallmarks of ribbons. You just need to care for reflections hitting the rear.

Right but what I said wasn't a criticism of ribbons. I should have been more clear if you read it that way. I was just pointing out the pitfalls for someone new to them.

But dual diaphragm condensers do the same. So that's not limited to ribbons is it?

Actually, the polar patterns are quite different. Dual diaphragm condensers pick up a lot of sound from the side whereas a ribbon picks up sound mostly back and front.

Take a look at these:

The first is an AT4047/SV dual diaphragm; the second a Royer R-121 ribbon. At 180, you can see the 4047 is barely getting a signal while the 121 is taking in about as much from the back as it does from the front.

It's nice to hear that you like the Blue Woodpecker, JTC111. Have you tried any of the Cascade ribbons? I am looking for something to better pick up the high-end sparkle of my resonator and other acoustic lap guitars.

The Woodpecker would be very nice for that purpose. What are you using now?
I mix things up on guitar tracks depending on what I'm looking for, but it's usually some combination of these:
a pair of ADK A6 (cheap as chips at $250 each and really nice on acoustic guitar if you want a natural sound)
Earthworks SR30 (another good choice for high end sparkle)
BLUE Woodpecker

Run them through a John Hardy M1 mic pre and you're golden.

I've never used a Cascade but from what I've read about them, they benefit from some modding. IIRC, some folks were putting Lundahl transformers in the Fatheads and swapping out the ribbons for something thinner, after which they raved about them.

[James_Alto]

Can anyone whose got a Shure SM57 say whether it falls short of the ones discussed here, or is it a worthwhile alternative?