Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

How often do we need a gazillion mic positions?

I've noticed sooo many people on this forum have a fundamental misunderstanding of this topic. You're not meant to use 20 mics simultaneously for all your instruments. Depending on available mics, picking a different set can sometimes yield a radically different sound than the default. Not everyone wants the same sound or works in the same genre. Just because you don't want or need options doesn't mean other people don't. And in the case of Orchestral Tools, if you don't want certain mics, you don't have to download them. I recall recently seeing posts here about how "nobody wants" the Pop Close mic option in the Abbey Road percussion libraries, while that's literally one of the top selling points for me. And the funniest thing is while many people don't want to mess with mics, they'll process their orchestral samples to death when they could have taken a few minutes to choose more contextually appropriate mics to begin with and then basically leave them alone.
 
Alex Niedt said:
I've noticed sooo many people on this forum have a fundamental misunderstanding of this topic. You're not meant to use 20 mics simultaneously for all your instruments. Depending on available mics, picking a different set can sometimes yield a radically different sound than the default. Not everyone wants the same sound or works in the same genre. Just because you don't want or need options doesn't mean other people don't. And in the case of Orchestral Tools, if you don't want certain mics, you don't have to download them. I recall recently seeing posts here about how "nobody wants" the Pop Close mic option in the Abbey Road percussion libraries, while that's literally one of the top selling points for me. And the funniest thing is while many people don't want to mess with mics, they'll process their orchestral samples to death when they could have taken a few minutes to choose more contextually appropriate mics to begin with and then basically leave them alone.
Click to expand...
Wouldn’t be so sure about your assumption. Who even has the resources to run a rig with 20 mics? Many Cinesample libraries include a Dennis Sands mix. HZ percussion has various mic positions plus artist mixes. Vsl has mix presets. Sure it’s great to experiment with mic options. Yes mic merge is a great feature. Why wouldn’t you want to at least check out a full brass mix from Tom H.? Or a full string mix from BW. Especially since they went to the trouble to mix all the individual mic placements
 
Alex Niedt said:
And in the case of Orchestral Tools, if you don't want certain mics, you don't have to download them.
Click to expand...
Amount of MICs = sound shaping capabilities, this and only this. But for me the biggest issue is that even if I don't need that mic I still need to pay for it. For example I'm pretty sure BBC Core with one mix mic would be to limiting for me (close should be mandatory, like VSL did with Prime), but PRO is huge overkill. But it's either or. So I got none ;)

I also feel that lately it's going towards absurdities like 15 mics+. And in my opinion this is a part of bigger issue, and that issue is the fact that "big players" mostly have no clue how to innovate. Up bow / down bow? EastWest did this in 2010. 13 years ago. With script to alterate bow movement as far as I remember ;) SA Appassionata legato and AR series? Evolution, not revolution. And meanwhile Pulse Audio releases a string library with 3 MICs and scripted legato and people seems to love it.

But I also feel that this market is getting more and more hobbyist market hence we hear a lot of voices of people with much lower needs (I'm one of them). Anyways, for me when I see 10mics plus I chuckle a bit and move on as this is clearly not catered towards my needs. I'm happy that there are people who actually find a value in it but I truly wish devs would focus on innovation, sound modeling and scripting to improve workflow instead of editing 15 MICs+ for years.
 
I kinda go out of my way to not get any library that has more than 3 to 5 mic positions. I don't have the space nor the patience to mess around with that stuff. Generally I find one or two mixes I like, save presets for it, and be done with it. I now use Berlin Studio, anyway.

I'm sure there's some people who like the freedom of being to mix a whole bunch of mics but I don't think I'll ever be one of them.
 
The mics help to place the instrument properly in a mix with many other instruments, so it can be heard or pushed back if needed, depending on the part and the role you’d like to assign it in the overall arrangement. I find that mic posisitions is a very helpful tool for that, much better than using reverbs, because the mics doesn’t blur or wash out the fundamental sound of the instrument. I’ve found that the libraries that has a lot of options, is way more useful than the ones that only has 2 or 3. Everything helps for sure, but with BBC Pro for example, you can tweak a classical orchestra to sit well with very different types of music like orchestral, hybrid, pop, rock and much more. That is amazing and not something you can do with many libraries, even when using other processing.

The mic positions can enable you to achieve a more balanced and defined mix, and gives you a lot of creative control. It is more complex, yes, so it requires you to understand the why, how, when and where of mixing a little more - but then again, diving into mixing with mic positions can be a good learning tool.

How often do we need it was the q - for me, almost every time I use the library. My ears are not happy untill they hear exactly what they want. Opposed to real life, that is a creative treat with music.

So, go for it, it’s fun.
 
Last edited:
I think it's good to have several options, but not as many as in some of the libraries mentioned here. The thing would be to get microphone positions that are very representative of the behavior of the room where the samples were captured. And I think that could be done with 3 to 5 mics.

For example, EWQLSO had 3: Close (directly in front of the instrument), Stage (at the front of the stage) and Surround (near the back of the hall and far above the floor).

EWQL HO had a few more, but still were clearly differentiated:

CLOSE Position microphones: a cluster of AKG C12, Neumann U47, Neumann U67 and Nordic Audio Labs NU-47 microphones.

MID Position microphones: a cluster of Neumann KMi, Neumann KM 254, Sony C37A and Neumann U-47 microphones.

MAIN Position microphones :3 Neumann M50’s in a Decca tree configuration and Brauner VM1 KHE (Klaus Heyne Edition) for the outriggers.

SURROUND Position microphones: unspecified number of Neumann KM 83’s microphones.

VINTAGE microphones: unspecified number of RCA 44 ribbon microphones.

STAGE Position microphones [OPUS Expansion]:• 2 outrigger microphones

The close option also included a divisi microphone, and the solo strings had the vintage mics in the close and mid positions.
 
Last edited:
lgchess2 said:
It's option paralysis at best. Give me a close, mid, far and wide capture to the best of your ability and call it a day. Anything more is BS talking points.
Click to expand...
lgchess2 said:
Wouldn’t be so sure about your assumption. Who even has the resources to run a rig with 20 mics?
Click to expand...
@Alex Niedt and @GtrString are absolutely correct in their assumptions. As for the resources, that's not an issue because disc space is dirt cheap, and you DO NOT use all the mics simultaneously. Maybe it's all BS for you. Maybe CTA is all you need. Maybe you miss a lot. Who knows.
 
InsomniaEmperor said:
With the recent release of Benjamin Wallfisch Strings and some of Spitfire's new offerings, there's one thing I find really striking with a lot of new releases: the gazillion mic positions. A lot of libraries go with the standard CTA approach then maybe some AB or ORTF or Outriggers. But then you got BBC Pro with 10+ mics and Benjamin Wallfish Strings with a whopping 18 mics. If you thought that was ridiculous, BBC Piano Pro has 15 freaking mics for just a piano library and Hans Zimmer Strings has 26 mics like what.

Most of the marketing I hear about libraries overloaded with all these mics is that they allow you to shape the sound the way you want and grant you a lot of sonic flexibility with it. But then how much of a difference does turning 10 mics on make as opposed to just the basic CTA? Do I get a more realistic sound the more types of mics I have? It feels like diminishing returns especially since the more mics you have, the more storage and RAM it consumes. I can't imagine the amount of RAM needed to run all the mics on BW Strings or HZ Strings.

I'm speaking as a hobbyist and someone who hasn't even been into VIs for a year so maybe real pros need all those options. Maybe real pros need the distinction among Immersive F, Immersive M, Raw Immersive F, and Raw Immersive M. Maybe after fiddling more with the Berlin series I can learn the purpose and usage of the mics other than the standard CTA.

Tho I wish they had a more proper core version that has the basics then the ability to upgrade into versions that have more mics. What I find baffling is Spitfire Symphony Orchestra did it right where the core version has the basic CTA then you have the option to upgrade to the pro version if you want more sonic flexibility but Spitfire Studio Orchestra and BBC fumbled it by locking you into just a single mix on the core then jumping to a gazillion mic positions on the pro version. Maybe I should have started with the SSO series for this reason but that ship has sailed after OT beat it to the punch this BF. VSL Synchron Series got it right where there's the standard edition with the basic mics and the full edition with more of the outriggers and 3D mics. I wish OT had the option for lite versions with the basic mics. 800 Euros for Berlin Brass seems like too much but a CTA only version that goes for 400 or 450 euros would have been a lot more reasonable to get your feet into it and puts it closer to Synchron Brass Standard or Cinematic Studio Brass. SINE Player also allows a la carte purchase of instruments and downloading only the instruments and mics you need so it shouldn't be hard to implement a lite version that has only CTA mics.
Click to expand...
What's even funnier is that Berlin Studio makes all these mic options moot by allowing you to recreate different mics from just the close ones; and it does it in a much more coherent way if you want to blend different libraries🤣. It's also easier on CPU, RAM and disks.

The only other mic position I blend ever so slightly these days is the main/decca ones for perhaps just a tiny smidge of body if the close mics sound thin. But this too can be mitigated by using the per-impulse equalizers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AEF
I wonder how many signals are used during typical orchestra session. For simplicity let's say I want to record piece for strings only in a big studio. How many mics are used on average during commercial session? Close, leader, decca, more ambient one and what's next? I'm asking about the standard setup, not Hans Zimmer recording strings in Air from outer space ;)
 
Last edited:
I'm getting mighty tired of people claiming how cheap things are. SSD's are not 'dirt cheap'. Must be nice to be in a position where a $100 is peanuts but for some of us this stuff requires saving up for purchases. And if you need to save up for your storage, an over-abundance of mic positions is decadence you just can't afford.
 
Crowe said:
I'm getting mighty tired of people claiming how cheap things are. SSD's are not 'dirt cheap'. Must be nice to be in a position where a $100 is peanuts but for some of us this stuff requires saving up for purchases.
Click to expand...
@Crowe I didn't intend to imply that one can afford what others can. With "dirt cheap", I refer to the difference in price to what it was only four years ago. I've recently bought a 4TB SSD for €180.-
You can store a lot of extensive libraries on 4TB, so, back to what was commented initially, storage costs are not very relevant anymore.
 
I'm not vouching for bloated mic content, but one thing where the variety actually comes useful is when you try to blend different libraries together.
 
Piotrek K. said:
I wonder how many signals are used during typical orchestra session. For simplicity let's say I want to record piece for strings only in a big studio. How many mics are used on average during commercial session? Close, leader, decca, more ambient one and what's next? I'm asking about the standard setup, not Hans Zimmer recording strings in Air from outer space ;)
Click to expand...
Typically it's however the studio wants to configure a "room" setup, and a "close" setup.
Since you specified a "big" studio, it'd normally be made up of:
Tree (LCR),
Wides/Outriggers (LR),
Spots - multiple mono signals, will vary based on size of ensemble. Minimum 1 per section (Vln1, Vln2, Vla, VC, CB)

If the engineer is accommodating for surround sound they might also add any or all of the following:
Rear Surrounds (aka ambient)
Height Mics (aka high ambient)
Mid Room / Sides

All the others like Mid-distance mics, stereo pairs, ribbons etc, will come down to engineer preference. None of them are uncommon these days, but are not always necessary.

...Ok so maybe bottle mics are uncommon
 
Few years ago Mike Verta gave us recordings from one of his song recorded by an symphony orchestra. It had all the microphone mixes that was recorded and we could add them to our daw and mute/unmute different mics and that was eye opening (well ear opening) experience.

Even with all of them on the sound was clear and well defined. Not like with sample libraries when you add a lot of different instruments with multiple mics the sound can be...well not so clear. When using only 2 or 3 instruments with more mics the sound stays clear but adding more instruments sound becomes almost stressful to my ears. Ear fatigue starts sooner.
 
I think having many (different) mic options is great because it does indeed offer a lot of flexibility in crafting the sounds that you want. And I understand why more mic positions would cost *some* more money.

I don't know the expenses that go into making a string library, but it would seem that one of the biggest would be having the players and the venue and the actual recording of the session. Adding mics for that recording seems to be a minimal cost because it only requires the extra mics and whatever recording media is used. There is, of course, more cost in editing those recordings so that they are useable with the library and that is probably not a investment for the developer.

OT has an ala carte option for instruments within a library. Maybe that is a concept that could be applied for mics. It allows the user to decide. The problem with this is that most people will gravitate toward a few mics (e.g. close, decca, ambient/gallery) and fewer people will gravitate toward the more niche mics, and that means that the investment to reward ratio will be different and the more "costly" mics that are used by fewer people could be abandoned as a loss. And that means that nobody gets that option. That's no good either.

Not sure what the solution ought to be. I like flexibility, but if I don't need that for a particular library, having to purchase all of the mics means that the cost is out of my reach, then I don't even consider the library. I think that the core/pro kind of approach like Spitfire SSO and VSL Synchron seems to be the best compromise that we have at the moment.

TL;DR - I'm an American who wants choice yet doesn't want to have to pay for it 😂
 
Henu said:
I'm not vouching for bloated mic content, but one thing where the variety actually comes useful is when you try to blend different libraries together.
Click to expand...
I think Berlin Studio or MIR are much better options for this than mic positions, honestly. Cheaper, easier on CPU, RAM, and honestly, sounds better too to my ears.

It changed the way I mix completely. Game-changer those plugins.
 
Thanks for starting this discussion! This is really helping me.

I’ve had HOD for years and when it comes to the mics, I would just turn them on and off and ask, does it sound better, I guess so, maybe, I don’t know. Turning on close mics for melody lines seems an obvious choice though. But this is making me want to revisit all that with a keener and more focused ear. Learn my mics!

Also, this highlights the need to learn to use your orchestra. There are so many details and angles to these massive orchestral libraries. Learn to use one properly before moving on to buy the next one. If I were to buy an orchestral library every BF, then I don’t think I would ever learn to use each one to its fullest effect.
 
InsomniaEmperor said:
But then how much of a difference does turning 10 mics on make as opposed to just the basic CTA? Do I get a more realistic sound the more types of mics I have?
Click to expand...
I have BBCSO Pro and AROOF (as well as the core version of the ARO Strings). I can speak for myself that if I'm using both BBCSO and AROOF/ARO, some of the mics of BBCSO help to integrate the missing content of AROOF. For example, the harp and perc sound good when using Sides+Balcony. For some bones or other wind instrument, Sides+Ambient. And if you want some definition without beeing too close (to match AROOF wetness) adding Mids is better than Close.

Then, if I use BBCSO winds with Albion Solstice/Sst Core, the Close Wide+Stereo are good match. For the BBC Piano, I still have to set things up, but in general depends of the use of the piano. But having all those mics, can help to give it a sense of beeing further back if it has more of an accompaniment role. Then the Mid/Far works for a more intimate setting to give it some air.

Although if I'm using AROOF or BBCSO just by itself, I just use the mix or some combination of Tree+Out+Cl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom