Clip of Oktava MK 012 Overheads

[LSchefman]

Here is a short clip of the Oktava MK-012 matched pair, overheads only.

I did not EQ the track, there are no effects except light compression, and I did not mix in kick and snare. Everything is coming from the two Oktavas.

The drummer is David Taylor. Sonor kit; Dave was playing his new, big, honkin' ride cymbal, a Zildjian Istanbul; when that thing comes in it really has a huge, dark sound. It was exactly what we wanted for this track. The snare is a piccolo snare, we wanted the "crack".

I did not mix in the kick or snare tracks; what you hear is 100% coming from the overheads.

Here is the link:

http://www.nowhereradio.com/artists/album.php?aid=3671&alid=-1

PS - Download the MP3 - it sounds absolutely HORRIBLE on Real Player! The data compression kills the cyms completely.

In fact...this is odd...when I downloaded from the link, it didn't sound as good as my original mp3 either. Weird, huh?

[MichaelK]

It's not allowing me to download... I'm asked to select a player and when I do the same page comes up repeatedly.

About the loss in quality, maybe they do what MP3.com used to do, taking your MP3 and burning their own crappy version even if yours was made to spec.

EDIT: Now it's letting me play it, but not download... I'll have to give a serious listen Friday.

[LSchefman]

I'll just send you the original mp3. Email if interested.

[MichaelK]

Done, thanks. :)

[Bryan T]

I listened to it and thought to myself, "Boy that ride sounds terrible." Then I was looking over Les' edited comments and saw that he thought them cymbals sounded bad. I'd love to hear the original mp3.

What sort of room are the drums recorded in? When my band was recording a demo we couldn't get the drums to sound anywhere near that good.

Thanks,
Bryan

[Supertgtr]

won't let me connect.

[Bassomatic]

I dunno. Not quite what i'm looking for in overheads (although the kit/performance sound top notch). Lower mids strike me as flubby, and i'm not hearing enough high end detail (sticking, etc.).

Lack of beef and sparkle/sheen, here (streaming "hi fi" quicktime from the site).

[Dirge]

I with Basso on this one, also streaming hi-fi quicktime player here.

But nice performace, energetic but not over done. I like that dark ride.

Just curious what kind of compressor are you using?

[Ericsson]

The tom roll in the middle sounded kinda tasty at 0:23 and something similar right at the end. The ride dominates the track a bit for me, sounds kinda cloudy. Might be different with some other instruments on top. Nice groove.

[LSchefman]

As I said, the audio from the site sounds bad; the actual mp3 I have sounds a lot better.

The Zildjian Istanbul ride is very dark, very huge, and does indeed dominate the track; it's a special cym that we wanted to use for creative reasons. It doesn't really give you much "stick". However, when the kick, snare, and hat mics are added, the track hangs together nicely.

Hi Bryan, we recorded in my 11x 14 recording booth. It's treated with 4" thick auralex along the walls, as well as the ceiling, and there are several ASC tube traps we placed at various points in the room.

The only compression I used was a little drawmer 241 on the mix buss.

[Screamer]

Based on this thread, I stopped out at one of the local GCs to grab a pair..and as luck would have it they were sold out. Additionally, I was told by the Assistant Manager that they might stop carrying them due to lack of availability by Octava. So grab 'em while you can if you do want them at that price!

[MichaelK]

All I heard was the MP3 and the sound quality was good.

First of all, that drummer can PLAY. Smooth as silk.

I dug the sound of the OHs, clear and warm but not as crisp as I like. The ride has a delicious tone, but it's not a tone I would want normally because it's so low and thick, very unusual. I feel it masks over everything else, but of course we're only hearing the OHs.

Cool! Thanks!

[LSchefman]

>>First of all, that drummer can PLAY. Smooth as silk.<<

Dave is a wonderful player; not only is he great at rock and roll, he's a terrific jazz drummer, and he is percussionist for the Detroit Symphony when they need a trapset drummer. To add to this, the guy plays in the pit every time a big musical comes to town.

He and I have played quite a few gigs together, and his grooves are so deep, and so wide, that you feel you have room to swim in them. It's very easy to play with Dave!

>>I dug the sound of the OHs, clear and warm but not as crisp as I like.<<

Yeah, they're silky - the lack of crispness could be my miking technique, or it could be the mics themselves. I need to do a few more sessions with them to know for sure.

One of the problems in my studio is that I didn't properly soundproof my booth; I originally only cut vocals there, which leak a very tiny bit into the control room, and I cut with headphones so the monitors don't leak into the booth. Electric guitars aren't a problem, either, because it's just a mic against the grille of the cab, and I know how to set that up really well.

But drums REALLY leak loudly into the control room; even with 'phones it's hard for me to know what I've got with new mics until I play back the track. Of course you're making tiny changes in mic placement each time, and eventually your ears are tired enough that it sounds good to you at some point.

In any event, it's entirely likely that my first session with these mics as overheads isn't representative of what they can do. Nonetheless, I consider them an insane bargain!

More Oktava thoughts:

I really like how they make the Toms sound. When the track is put up, they really cut. Also, the cyms sound really natural and don't dominate the mix when everything's in.

I tried one with my Collings acoustic yesterday; I got a nice sound, that was representative of what the guitar sounds like, but I prefer the Blue Kiwi for the Collings. Still, I liked it better than the 414, which is a good acoustic guitar mic IMHO.

You know, with mics, each one offers something a bit different. If I want a very crisp overhead sound, I'd probably stick with KM 140s or AKG 451s. But when I want a big sound from the toms, I might choose the Oktavas or a set of 414s.

It's all a matter of picking the right tools for creativity.

[MichaelK]

>> It's very easy to play with Dave!

Yeah, I'll bet!

>> I consider them an insane bargain!

Can't argue with that.

>> It's all a matter of picking the right tools for creativity.

Absolutely. Looking forward to hearing more, if you're into it.

[cybership]

Hey Les,
Maybe it's my browser (OS X Safari) but I have never been able to download from nowhereradio.com.


Robert :(

[LSchefman]

Sorry about the nowhere radio thing, guys. I'll send anyone who wants to email me a clip.

[tedm]

Let me know if I can hook you up with some hosting space.

mp3 hosting sites are under a lot of pressure these days. If their revenues (hosting site or download/ad revenues) are ~>$100K, Thomson wants them to have a license. Some player/encoders like music match jukebox are partly owned by Thomson so the technology and royalty may be paid for with that player.

Never cared for real audio or video, it doesn't have the flexibility of mp3 or wma

Have read on tapeop that the Octava 012s can be a good deal, as well as the SP B1s, but haven't used them yet, sound like a bargain.

[TheRealWaldo]

If you are streaming Hi-Fi, it's exactly the mp3 file that was uploaded, no modifications whatsoever. Only lo-fi is down converted (to CBR 24, mono mp3) so people with lower speed connections can listen.

Some players will 'decode' this file differently than others, and that may be where you hear the difference, but if you download, and stream, the same file with the same player, there is absolutely no difference between them.

You may try and encode your file using a better codec, such as LAME, in CBR 128 mode, which is best for streaming over the internet.

W.

[LSchefman]

Thanks, the advice is much appreciated...but...I have no idea how to do that. Any tips for a mac user to do that kind of encoding?

[TheRealWaldo]

Hit: http://lame.sourceforge.net/links.html for a list of software that uses LAME. There is several versions that run on Macs, I think dropMP3 is the best one, but as I no longer run macs, I can't say for sure!

Make sure you encode at 128kbps constant bit rate (CBR), and give it a try.

W.

[tedm]

there's quite a bit of data frames even with straight distorted electric guitar that need 160, 192, and occasionally higher bit rates like 320kbps, or you lose significant audible data.

I recommend either 128 VBR which will average at about 160kbps streaming, yet still capture those occasional 320kbps frames, or if for some reason you want constant bit rate, go to 160 or 192, unless you specifically need to make a clip for someone with dial-up.


Originally posted by TheRealWaldo
Hit: http://lame.sourceforge.net/links.html for a list of software that uses LAME. There is several versions that run on Macs, I think dropMP3 is the best one, but as I no longer run macs, I can't say for sure!

Make sure you encode at 128kbps constant bit rate (CBR), and give it a try.

W.

[TheRealWaldo]

Issues:

1) Most high speed connections are not capable of sustaining more than 128 kbps. Using higher bitrate is great for downloads, but definately NOT for streaming at this time of age.

2) The great majority of audio applications cannot play back VBR properly via. true streaming. DLAPB however is a different story. WMS for example will choke on VBR 99% of the time, the effect being noticeable distortion, skipped frames, and absolute silence. Again, if you are encoding for download, VBR is better, but not for streaming.

3) Dial-up would NEVER be able to stream even 128kbps, in fact it's rare that a modem could even handle 32kbps. To encode for a modem, 24kbps is maximum to stay 'compatible'.

4) If you want to 'not' lose any quality, choose a lossless format, NOT mp3. No matter what bitrate you encode an mp3, you will lose some audible data.

But don't listen to me, I just write the software!

W.

[tedm]

I'm on the lame development team, btw.

Have not had problems with streaming VBR using Winamp and Windows Media Player 9, 2 of the most common mp3 clients over thousands of varying dsl and cable connections.

Disagree with #2, if you encode properly with lame VBR, it will not choke the above clients.

Agree with you on dial up, if you want to stream with dial-up, use some bit rate way < 56kbps.

Agree with you on mp3s, it's a last resort, lossy, and all things bad!!

Glad we could agree on a couple of points. See you on the LAME development lists if you want to get into your points 1 and 2 more.


Originally posted by TheRealWaldo
Issues:

1) Most high speed connections are not capable of sustaining more than 128 kbps. Using higher bitrate is great for downloads, but definately NOT for streaming at this time of age.

2) The great majority of audio applications cannot play back VBR properly via. true streaming. DLAPB however is a different story. WMS for example will choke on VBR 99% of the time, the effect being noticeable distortion, skipped frames, and absolute silence. Again, if you are encoding for download, VBR is better, but not for streaming.

3) Dial-up would NEVER be able to stream even 128kbps, in fact it's rare that a modem could even handle 32kbps. To encode for a modem, 24kbps is maximum to stay 'compatible'.

4) If you want to 'not' lose any quality, choose a lossless format, NOT mp3. No matter what bitrate you encode an mp3, you will lose some audible data.

But don't listen to me, I just write the software!

W.

[TheRealWaldo]

Perhaps you are talking about DLAPB via. Windows Media Player as apposed to actual streaming via. Windows Media Services (as was I)? I have had nothing but problems via. Windows Media Services (and other streaming servers) with anything VBR, even on T1's and above. Also, most users are still on Windows Media Player 6.4 (over 60% of the users hitting NWR) as it has some advantages over 7+.

I run NWR, so would be entirely interested in a 'fix' for this problem (telling the listeners to upgrade/install something is not an option, as you would probably agree), but have found none.

W.

[tedm]

Actually I'm just talking about throwing the properly encoded VBR .mp3s up on any high speeds DS3 connected server in the world, and having the end user click with their browser on the file, and through file associations have either winamp or wmp 9.x render the audio.

there are quite a few technical and audio advantages to 9.x over earlier versions, but I agree with you, lots of folks haven't upgraded even though it's free.

I do have a WS 2003 Streaming Server setup, but have not located it in my datacenter.

Another data point is for streaming videos, I have had no jitter with 384kbps .wmv files, but have had some jitter with a few dsl and cable folks with 512kbps. so I render my videos at 384 for general "broadband" folks, unless I know for sure they have a T1 or some fast ass cable or dsl connection.



Originally posted by TheRealWaldo
Perhaps you are talking about DLAPB via. Windows Media Player as apposed to actual streaming via. Windows Media Services (as was I)? I have had nothing but problems via. Windows Media Services (and other streaming servers) with anything VBR, even on T1's and above. Also, most users are still on Windows Media Player 6.4 (over 60% of the users hitting NWR) as it has some advantages over 7+.

I run NWR, so would be entirely interested in a 'fix' for this problem (telling the listeners to upgrade/install something is not an option, as you would probably agree), but have found none.

W.

[TheRealWaldo]

That'd be DLAPB (download and play back), which as I stated, doesn't commonly have issues, DLAPB is only active on NWR when a user chooses 'anyone can download', as it's harder for a user to capture/download a stream that just an mp3 linked with an m3u.

Also, as we all know, file associations can't be relied on, some people here even believed the files to be RealAudio as they opened in RealPlayer, due to improper association on their machine. Again, do we tell them to fix it? Better just to make the 'source' one consistant form. NWR4 will address many of these issues with auto-detection, forced (hi-quality using lame) encoding of the streams (but not the download), etc...

Give it a shot (VBR) some time through WMS and let me know what you come up with. It never worked properly on any VBR encode, or with any player for me (or for that matter, any of my 3,000 beta testers).

We should probably move this discussion elsewhere, but my recomendations for posting on NWR (as it is now) remain as the person who runs it, and deals with it every day, given there is obvious issues with the current encode! ;)

W.

[tedm]

whatever works for you. I don't post my music on the National Weather Radio, and I'd guess that 128 kbps CBR should be fine for weather broadcasting.


Originally posted by TheRealWaldo
That'd be DLAPB (download and play back), which as I stated, doesn't commonly have issues, DLAPB is only active on NWR when a user chooses 'anyone can download', as it's harder for a user to capture/download a stream that just an mp3 linked with an m3u.


Also, as we all know, file associations can't be relied on, some people here even believed the files to be RealAudio as they opened in RealPlayer, due to improper association on their machine. Again, do we tell them to fix it? Better just to make the 'source' one consistant form. NWR4 will address many of these issues with auto-detection, forced (hi-quality using lame) encoding of the streams (but not the download), etc...

Give it a shot (VBR) some time through WMS and let me know what you come up with. It never worked properly on any VBR encode, or with any player for me (or for that matter, any of my 3,000 beta testers).

We should probably move this discussion elsewhere, but my recomendations for posting on NWR (as it is now) remain as the person who runs it, and deals with it every day, given there is obvious issues with the current encode! ;)

W.

[TheRealWaldo]

Lol, cute. Sorry this took over your thread LSchefman!

W.