Mixing Recordings

I carried out the mixing of the Dukes Corner and Rhuari Campbell recordings in Abertay University's recording studio:

During the mixing process i was creating two different mixes, one utilising the 5.1 microphone array tracks and the other a stereo version that is upmixed to 5.1. The tasks associated with mixing the 5.1 array mix included panning and mixing gain levels: i do not want to add any effects to the recordings as it will create an unwanted variable between the two mixes, the only variable should be the fact that one is recorded using 5.1 microphone array and the other an upmixed stereo version and it is for this reason the recordings are dry. The panning of the IRT cross microphone array are as follows:

• Front Left mic = panned 100 front left speaker
• Front Right mic = panned 100 front right speaker
• Back Left mic = panned 100 back left speaker
• Back Right mic = panned 100 back right speaker

Each song required the same panning process however the gain level mix changed for each song.

To create the upmixed versions of the dukes corner recordings i muted the rear information of the IRT Cross, only keeping the line outs and front left and right microphones of the array. I then duplicated the front left and right channels of microphone array and also the line out of the decks and then panned these to the back speakers and added a 15ms delay. I also made the tracks 180 degrees out of phase from one another to create a greater sense of space. I used a mono sum of the front left and right microphone for the centre information and EQ'd out some of the bottom end.

Upmixed

5.1 Array

 The Upmixed versions of Rhuari's recordings were slightly different, i muted the rear information from the IRT Cross and duplicated the front left and right channels panning them to the rear then adding a 15ms delay and making them 180 degrees out of phase the same as the Dukes recordings. The difference was that Rhuari's recording contained a close mic with mic pre and not line outs like the dukes recordings; i panned this close mic in the centre and then made a duplicate which was panned to the rear with added EQ and 15ms delay.

Evaluation:

I encountered a few issues while in the mixing stage, the first being that the studio mac wouldn't start up so i had to shut down and restart the mac a few times till it would start up properly. The other issue i had was that the centre and right monitor of the speaker arrangement seemed to have swapped, so the right monitor was the centre and the centre was the right. To rectify this i contacted one of the creative sound production lecturers and discussed it with him and we ended up just swapping the speakers round so they were in the correct place, it seemed this the issue was the input and output set-up of the 5.1 pro tools session. Although i encountered a few problems in the mixing stage i managed to produce both 5.1 array and upmixed versions of a variety of music played at an event in Dukes Corner and also of the recordings i carried out with Rhuari Campbell. 

Recording Rhuari Campbell

Another set of recordings i carried out was with a solo artists from Dundee called Rhuari Campbell who plays folk music and folk/rock with his band Get Tay Folk. We were supposed to be carrying out the recordings in a venue however due to lack of preparation and time to find a venue we carried out the recordings in my living room. Although this is not an ideal representation of a gig, we continued to carry out the recordings on the basis that some live events do not contain crowds for instance live performances on radio stations.

Recording Equipment:

• Digidesign 003 rack plus
• Macbook pro with pro tools le 8
• 3 x Earthworks DK25/L microphones
• 2 x Neumann KM 184 microphones 
• Sony MDR-V500 headphones 
• KRK RP8 Monitors
• Focusrite ISA one mic pre
• Appropriate cabling and stands

Track List:

1. Earthwork with mic pre
2. Front left
3. Front right
4. Back left
5. Back right

Unfortunately due to wiring issues with Rhuari's guitar we were not able to recording a DI track of his acoustic. The following Pictures show the microphone placement, the Earthworks with the mic pre was placed around 6-9 inches in front of the IRT Cross:

Evaluation:

The whole recording process went fairly well, however there are a few things that could of been improved. I noticed after Rhuari had left, that two of the tracks we recorded contained slight interference from a mobile phone. Unfortunately there is nothing i can do about this except re-record the tracks that contain the interference but we were unable to because of busy schedules, so it is important to remember for future recordings to switch off all mobile phones within the recording space. Another issue i mentioned earlier was that Rhuari had some wiring issues with his guitar so we were unable to record a DI track, again there is nothing i could do about this except to ensure for future recordings that all equipment is working properly and if not get it fixed!

Recording in Dukes Corner

Recently I carried out a recording of a DJ set in the venue Dukes Corner in Dundee. The DJ set was for a 90's event and a variety of music from different genres was played. This was ideal for my project as it allowed me to record an event that is not concerned with only one genre. It enabled me to gather surround sound recordings of many different styles of music with different instrumentation and musical characteristics and see how they react with the recording techniques without having to locate and record a number of different bands/artists. Although these are not live performances of the artists it still reflects how the genre and characteristic of the music reacts to being played through a PA system at a live event  and then recording utilising the two techniques in this project.

Recording Equipment:

• Digidesign 003 rack plus
• Macbook pro with pro tools le 8
• 2 x Earthworks DK25/L microphones
• 2 x Neumann KM 184 microphones 
• Sony MDR-V500 headphones 
• Appropriate cabling and stands

Track List: 

1. Line out left
2. Line out right
3. Front left
4. Front right
5. Back left
6. Back right

Unfortunately because of a lack of outputs on the mixing desk at Dukes Corner and not a long enough  cable to reach from the DJ decks to the back of the venue, the microphone placement was compromised and i could not place the microphone array where it needed to be (closest to the crowd as possible in order to record the event from the point of view of the crowd). To compensate for this i decided to take the recordings from the perspective of the DJ and placed the microphone array behind him, this also enabled me to get the line outputs from the decks which was causing the problems for microphone placement. The following pictures shows the recording set up on stage:

Evaluation:

The recording process went well and i made sure that there was an optimum gain structure throughout the whole event. One thing i observed while recording was that the gain structure of the microphone array changed through out different genres of music even though the gain on the output from the decks and PA system stayed the same. I believe this is due to the difference in instrumentation, musical character and how different frequencies reverberate differently within a space and may sometimes cause resonant frequencies which can be problematic.
When recording in future one thing that i would improve is the preparation. Next time i need to make sure that i thoroughly check the venue before hand to ensure that everything that is needed to create the best recording possible is available to me.

Development of Project Concept

My first concept for the honours project was derived from reading about how the music industry has changed over the past years, which was very interesting from a sound engineers point of view. With the growing live music industry and falling recorded music industry i wanted to be able to create a project around being able to recreate live events, so that they could be 're-lived' again and again utilising 5.1 Surround Sound. I chose to use surround sound because it is something that interests me and there are many different surround production and recording techniques out there that can reproduce realistic audio. From this i wanted to test different 5.1 recording techniques (thinking only about microphone arrays at this point) and have the public rate the techniques in terms of the level of presence/feeling of being at the event by participating in a subjective listening test. My reasons for using a listening test in the project is because i have read articles and journals by researchers that utilise them and they have produced well formed pieces of research. 

However after researching different surround production techniques and other studies i felt that this concept was ineffective in testing different techniques. The feeling of presence is a completely subjective thing, thus it would hard to rate and define to create an effective listening test. 

Refined Concept:

While researching surround microphone arrays, i saw an article in Sound on Sound on a technique called Upmixing. After reading the article which is discussed in a previous post in November 2012 called "Research into Upmixing" i decided to change the concept of the project and make it a simpler but effective test using two completely different surround techniques:

To create a test to assess the qualities and listener preference between Upmixing techniques and 5.1 Microphone techniques. The test will be created specifically for the techniques applications in recording live events and performances. 

Methodology

I first described one of the methodologies that i will be employing during the project in my research proposal as follows:

Two different methodologies will be applied to achieve the aim of this project, one of which is practice-based research. (the other is discussed in the post 'Subjective Listening Test')  In order to compare the two proposed 5.1 production techniques the researcher will first have to become competent in using both techniques to record live events. This will be achieved through practical research on both techniques. Throughout the project the researcher will be compiling a portfolio filled with live music recordings, utilizing both 5.1 microphone techniques and upmixing techniques. It is important to note that some of the recordings in this portfolio will not be performed in front of a crowd, but are merely for the purpose of research and practicing to become as skilled as possible in using both techniques within the project’s time frame. The final artifacts that will be used in the subjective listening test however will be of music events that the general public can access in order to produce realistic pieces of media.

The creation of this portfolio will allow the researcher to be able to define what is involved during the process of utilizing both techniques. Defining the process of both techniques will enable the researcher to gain and develop the necessary skills to create well-produced media artifacts to test against numerous subjects. Practical based research will be used throughout the duration of this project to gain and develop the necessary skills and knowledge to be able to produce the appropriate pieces of media that enable the testing of two different 5.1 Surround Sound production techniques. 

Feedback from my lecturer (Robin Sloan) states that this research method is inappropriate for my research project and cannot be defined as a research method:

"The listening test component of the research is appropriate as it addresses the research aim. More problematic is the practice-based aspect of the research. As discussed in the lectures, practice-based research is not 'practice-as-usual' and certainly not concerned with technical skill development. Practice-based research is iterative, creative practice leading to the development of art or design artefacts that explore a topic or theme. Your practice appears to concern the recording of live music - not the iterative composition or experimental design of music. It is not implied that you will seek to develop experimental systems or recording techniques, but to learn how to apply techniques that exist. In this case, this cannot be considered a research method, but the generation of stimlui for your test."

Taking into consideration this feedback i decided to research into the definition of practise based research and i found an article which studies and characterises practise based research:

Linda Candy, CCS Report: 2006-V1.0 November, Practice Based Research: A Guide, University of Technology Sydney

Candy opens the article by defining two different research methods; Practise-based Research and Practice-led Research. She describes that if art/artefacts are the basis of the research then it is practice based:

" Practice-based Research is an original investigation undertaken in order to gain new

knowledge partly by means of practice and the outcomes of that practice. In a doctoral thesis,

claims of originality and contribution to knowledge may be demonstrated through creative

outcomes in the form of designs, music, digital media, performances and exhibitions. Whilst

the significance and context of the claims are described in words, a full understanding can

only be obtained with direct reference to the outcomes." Candy, 2006

She also describes practice-led research as follows:

" Practice-led Research is concerned with the nature of practice and leads to new knowledge that has operational significance for that practice. In a doctoral thesis, the results of practice-led research may be fully described in text form without the inclusion of a creative work. The primary focus of the research is to advance knowledge about practice, or to advance knowledge within practice. Such research includes practice as an integral part of its method and often falls within the general area of action research." Candy, 2006

After reading this it is clear that practice-based research cannot be classed as a research method in this project. My project is based around the comparison of two production techniques, thus is concerned with the process of utilising these techniques or in other words their "operational significance". It is for this reason that in fact my project will not be employing practise-based research methods but practise-led research methods.

2nd Redraft of Aims and Objectives

Project Aim:

This project will be investigating the listener preference between two different 5.1 production techniques, Upmixing and 5.1 microphone arrays. This study will be specifically investigating the techniques applications in recording live events and performances.

Objectives:

1. Research 5.1 microphone arrays and upmixing techniques and their applications in recording live music.

2. Record and mix live events and performances using the 5.1 microphone arrays and upmixing techniques found to be most suitable for application in this project.

3. Compile a listening test from the live events and performances recordings.

4. Analyse the results of the Listening and formulate a conclusion on the basis of those results. 

Project Rationale

Over time many different industries change in the way that the business is modelled, this can be due to new technological advancements or a change in social related factors. Simon Frith describes how recorded music began to lose its “wallet share” in the 1990’s.

“Key dates often cited in the digital period of the British record industry are 1999 when Napster was created, or 2001 when broadband arrived in the UK and peer-to-peer file- sharing began to take off in Britain.”

(Frith 2010)

When peer-to-peer file sharing was created, this began a huge decline in people’s disposable income devoted to buying recorded music, as it was easily accessed for free. However this created a huge rise in the live music sector of the industry with an abundance of new summer music festivals becoming available. 

“In 2008, consumer spending on live music is reported by several sources to overtake spending on recorded music in the UK”

(Frith 2010)

It is this rise in the live music industry that forms the rationale behind the proposed research project. With the rise in summer music festivals, of which some are broadcasted on television such as T In The Park and Rockness, and the availability of High Definition television, there is a need for a better audio experience to accompany these high quality visuals.

This project is based upon the fact that this need for a better audio experience can be achieved through 5.1 Surround Sound. The proposed project aims to investigate whether 5.1 arrays need to be applied during the process of recording music events or whether upmixing the stereo version achieves the same experience. The results of this project will determine whether promotion and recording companies need to go to the trouble of using expensive 5.1 microphone arrays or if they can give the general public the same experience in a much cheaper way and maintain using their current recording techniques.

Frith Simon. 2010.

Analysing Live Music in the UK: Findings One Year into a Three-Year Research Project

Edinburgh, UK