Newsgroups: alt.drumcorps
Subject: Re: DCI recordings survey
From: <MHUGHES@MIAMIU.BITNET>
Date: Friday, 28 Aug 1992 13:50:04 EDT
Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service

In article <16390@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu>, matthews@eecs.ucdavis.edu (Thomas W.
Matthews) says:
>
>Readers may recall my posting, "DCI Recordings Survey" last spring. The
>responses were rather sparse, probably due to my asking for way too much
>detail.  However, more than one respondent said that 1984 was a great
>year for the recordings of the finals;  unfortunately I don't have those
>recordings  Another frequent comment was that the pit sound was too
>loud.
 
'84 was among the better years for the recordings since DCI started using
digital recording, but none of the years hold a candle to Ken Kobold's
material from the late 70's to the early 80's.  The reason is simple...
it's not the technology, because the technology is now better.  It's because
Kobold was an infinitely better engineer for drum corps than is Larry Rock.
Even the best equipment won't save a recording from shitty engineering.
 
This is not a knock on Larry Rock's orchestral engineering.  He is doing
the engineering for the classical Erato label with American ensembles.  He
engineered the Corigliano Symphony No. 1 with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra
under Daniel Barenboim, and the sound quality is top notch.  But drum corps
is NOT a controlled environment where you have the freedom over level and
balance control, retakes and acoustics.  I feel Rock is taking this approach
with drum corps and the results have been far less than spectacular.
 
I'm a percussionist, and the major problem with the DCI CDs is one that
affects field percussion more than anything else.  The problem is PHASE
COHERENCY, and it stems directly from the fact that Rock sets up mics on
the 35s, in addition to the center mics on the 50 and shotgun mics used
for pit and soloists.  Sure, the mics on the 35s help convey a wide
stereo image, but the clarity in field percussion that is sacrificed kills
the CDs for me.  When a snare line is playing an intricate roll or rythymic
pattern at some location on the field, the sound from the drum line hits
the mic on one of the 35s before it hits the other.  Anyone who has ever
marched knows about the problems of listening to other performers at
different positions on the field.   This is exactly what you hear on the CDs.
 
A tight snare line being recorded from two different locations will result
in two different sounds, as well as those sounds reaching the respective
microphones at different times.  An open 32nd note roll, being played as
clean as a whistle, will (and does) sound like absolute garbage when these
two channels are mixed together.
 
I could cite endless examples, but the worst from 1991 occurs with the
Santa Clara Vangaurd (listen to the terrible rendition of the helicopter
effect at the start of the show) and the drum solo in *Samson and Dahlila*
by the Phantom Regiment (no clarity at all in the battery...snares are
virtually inaudible, yet they were positioned on the right-hand 30-35
yard line!!  Also notice the timbre of the tenors at this point...this is
NOTHING like the sound of PR's tenors in person.)    I videotaped PR at
some early season rehearsals and the mono sound quality on my little 8mm
camcorder is INFINITELY more coherent than that on the CDs.
 
Kobold's approach was minimalistic by necessity.  His simple microphone setup
consisted of two cardioid mics set up in the standard cross pattern on the
50 yard line.  There were NO mics other than this.  The result was a tight
stable stereo image, and you could hear every single note and nuance in the
percussion.  It is true that nowadays the pit would be up close in the Kobold
mic set-up, but it is in this simplicity that we hear the most detail.
After all, we humans only have two ears, not 6 or 8.
 
Ask any audiophile why Telarc has some of the most natural sounding orchestral
recordings in the US market.  Reason: minimalistic miking.  This is the
reason the Mercury recordings from the 50s and 60s rival most of today digital
recordings for clarity.  It is not so much the technology...it is the people
who are applying the technology.
 
To anyone who doesn't believe me: all you have to do is pick up the *Phantom
Regiment Classics* CD or the *BD-SCV* 3 CD set and listen to the cuts from
the mid to late 70s...I think you'll be astonished at the clarity compared
to what we've had to listen to the past few years on the recordings.
 
 
>IMO, an unrealistically loud pit sound has been a *serious* flaw in many
>drum corps recordings.  That awesome, huge sound of a full sized drum
>corps just cannot come through on a recording where one xylophone or
>one cymbal is audibly equal to fifty horns.  From comments posted about
>the 1992 DCI broadcast, I infer that a loud pit sound is once again a
>problem.  I should point out that the television broadcast audio is not
>exactly the same mix that is put on the compact discs; so the discs may or
>may not have the same problem.
 
The CDs are recorded independently of the broadcast/video production.
The TV broadcast mix is different from the final video mix, even though they
come from the same source recording.  It is interesting to note that the
video production only uses a set-up on the 50 yard line (not unlike Kobold)
and a shotgun mic for soloists.  (You can see two mic set-ups on the 50,
one for the CDs, one for video).  The result is that the audio on the
VideoExpress tapes exceeds that of the CDs with respect to clarity and
phase coherence.  The broadcast mix is another matter, though.
 
>I would like to hear from interested readers what they think about the issue
>of pit sound balance.  As you listen to a recording, imagine yourself at a
>competition and seated in your favorite spot.  Then evaluate whether the
>pit sound is realistic.  If you mail or post a comment, please be sure to
>specify whether its about the television audio or a compact disc, and which
>year.
 
When I sit in my favorite spot, what I hear is the sound of a drum corps
FROM ONE POINT IN SPACE.  This is what the recordings should emulate if one
is interested in a realistic reproduction of the event.
 
With a simple 2-mic set-up, pit balance should be the biggest problem facing
engineers, but the other problems cited are, to me at least, much more
serious and should be addressed first.
 
Granted, recording the event accurately is an enormously difficult undertaking,
but I think all would agree that it could be improved from its current state,
yet I've heard no improvement for the past 5-6 years in the CD sound quality.
 
 
Cheers, Mike Hughes