What frequency should I use for bass roll off filter?

[Bullet1979]

Ok... so I finally got tired of recording shows and getting a pretty decent recording minus the fact that the bass is WAY too overpowering and bottoms out any headphones/speakers I play them through - so I use high pass filters that I can usually never find a happy medium with (either takes out too much or not enough).... So I purchased a battery box w/bass rolloff that has 7 different settings.

My question is: What setting have you guys gotten the best results from? I'm talking about going to small to medium sized clubs/venues where the sound is normally very loud.

To give an example of such recordings, here is a link to a song from a show I recorded recently: http://download.yousendit.com/E78B40566AB7AB81

The settings I have as options are: 16hz, 69hz, 95hz, 107hz, 160hz, 195hz, 888hz.

[Strungup]

The settings I have as options are: 16hz, 69hz, 95hz, 107hz, 160hz, 195hz, 888hz.

16 will only take care of Subsonic rumbles ( stuff you dont hear anyway)

69 is the help eliminate AC hum ( which is actually doubled at 120 hz and that is what you really hear)

95 depending on its slope would probably be the best bet

195 will thin out a really bassy sound systen where they are using sub sonic generators like BBE proccessors to get the extra "Thump "

888 is for a Mid bass cut , ( getting close to 1khz puts you in the Midrange area of the sound spectrum )

[A440]

Just listened to your Ludo song. Do you really think it's that bad? I mean, yes, the bass is a bit hefty but it's probably a pretty good reproduction of what was in the room--way more balanced than some hip-hop shows I've been to. I'm using very good headphones, Grado SR125, and the bass doesn't overwhelm them at all.

Using a high-pass filter on playback isn't your best option, because then you get zero bottom--it's a sharp cutoff, not the more subtle de-emphasis that you need. What you want is an EQ curve that slopes gently downward under, say, 100 Hz. (Winamp has an equalizer you could try, and so do sound-editing programs like Audacity.) Ideally, that's what your bass roll-off will give you--a slope, as Guitarfxr says, not a cutoff.

The lowest note on a bass guitar, the E, is about 41 Hz. If I were you, I would try the bass rolloff at both 69 and 95, and I wouldn't go above that because then you're not just getting into bass but guitars (top string on a guitar is 330 Hz) and vocals. 888 Hz is nearly two octaves above middle C, up where sopranos sing.

Check this out: all the notes on a piano with their frequencies:

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/notes.html

Edited August 17, 2007 by A440

[Bullet1979]

Thanks for all of your replies so far - everyone is always a very valuable wealth of information here. And no, the Ludo recording definitely isn't near as bad as what I have recorded from shows in bigger venues - it was simply the most easily accessible set of files I had that would sort of represent what I was wanting to remedy. I've had recordings where there's almost a cloud of fuzz in the recording from the bass drum/bass.

A440 - I hate to come off as an extreme noob, but I just started using Audacity and I just couldn't wrap my head around any EQ functionality in that software. What's the best technique using said software to add a nice curve to get a better mix from such recordings? I had always used Adobe Audition/Cool Edit Pro with Steinberg's Freefilter, but somehow I don't have Freefilter any more after switching computers and OS's.

[Strungup]

with Audacity are you on a Mac or Windoze , The AU units in Mac Core Audio show up in Audacity , and it will give you a 31 band EQ

first load the file into Audacity as a Wave file , (That means if you have to ecord real time into Audacity then that is what you do )

once the file is loaded , go up to Edit , in the drop down go to Select ,another drop , then select All

the file will now be Highlighted , then go up to Effects at the top of the window , and a Drop down will show a Buttload of effects, Play around , and use your Undo feature in Edit , you will get used to things pretty quickly .

Have fun

[Bullet1979]

with Audacity are you on a Mac or Windoze , The AU units in Mac Core Audio show up in Audacity , and it will give you a 31 band EQ

first load the file into Audacity as a Wave file , (That means if you have to ecord real time into Audacity then that is what you do )

once the file is loaded , go up to Edit , in the drop down go to Select ,another drop , then select All

the file will now be Highlighted , then go up to Effects at the top of the window , and a Drop down will show a Buttload of effects, Play around , and use your Undo feature in Edit , you will get used to things pretty quickly .

Have fun

No, sir, I am running Windows Vista so no such EQ... Any other plugins that you would recommend as far as a multi-band EQ for Audacity or Audition?

[Strungup]

No, sir, I am running Windows Vista so no such EQ... Any other plugins that you would recommend as far as a multi-band EQ for Audacity or Audition?

well you do have a basic Equalisation in Audacity , it should be the 10th down in the List , you can also downloadc Nyquist plugins , or Go to Audacity site and get the VST enabler , then find a VST plugin

[greenmachine]

You could just use the parametric EQ built into Audacity (Menu - Effect - Equalization...). Make that window as large as possible to get a detailed view. Set (at least) two markers, one at the extreme left of the line, one to your desired roll-off frequency (probably somewhere between 100 and 200 Hz, at 0dB). Drag the left marker downwards and use the preview button to determine if it sounds good, otherwise correct.

There is noticeable distortion in your sample though, which are probably the mics themselves not being able to handle the extreme levels since the levels hardly reach the 0dB mark. A battery box roll-off filter unfortunately can't improve the mics' high SPL handling, so if you want to get rid of that "fuzz", you would need to invest in some mics that can handle higher SPLs.

[A440]

Audition doesn't have a built-in multiband EQ? It's got to be there somewhere.

As guitarfxr says, once you Select all or part of the waveform in Audacity, you have many choices under the Effects menu, including Equalization. I don't see EQ in Windows Media Player, but as I said it is in Winamp and possibly in other music players as well.

I wanted to ask: what MD unit, mics, battery module (or attenuator?) and settings did you use on your recording?

The battery module does give mics the ability to handle higher SPL (sound pressure level, or volume) than they would have without it. But only up to a certain point, depending on the mic. That's one advantage of using the battery module, which opens up the mics, over an attenuator, which sends less power to the mics and can make them more prone to distortion.

[Bullet1979]

For the recordings for which I have this issue, the microphones are the SP-TFB-2's into this battery box to the line in on my Sony MZ-RH910 HI-MD recorder.

Otherwise, I use core-sound's stealthy cardioid microphones with the brick of a battery box they make (which cost $250 altogether) into the line-in of same recorder as above. I don't ever have the bass problem with recordings from this set of microphones, but it doesn't recreate the sound as well or as dynamically as the soundprofessional mics.

[A440]

You've got the classic trade-off: too much bass because live bands want that oomph--and overdo it--or too little because of the bass roll-off.

The TFB-2 mics use the same capsule (or at least one with the same specs) as my BMC-2: frequency response of 20-20,000 Hz, same sensitivity. You're getting the full spectrum, slightly affected by the shape of your ears.

[EDIT: You might want to test recording with the TFB-2 outside your ears, clipped onto your clothes somehow, to see if your ears are funneling more bass into the mics than necessary. (Try recording something from your stereo.) But that Ludo recording didn't seem more bass-heavy than it probably was live. ]

This is from Core Sound's stealthy cardioids specs:

http://www.core-sound.com/cardioid/3.php

"The Core Sound Stealthy Cardioid microphones have a frequency response of from 40 Hz to 18 kiloHertz. They have a slightly rising frequency response over that range with the exception of a slight (2 dB) peak between 9 kHz and 12 kiloHertz and a bass response fall off of roughly 6 dB per octave starting at 100 Hertz. (The bass response is very similar to our Core Sound Binaural microphones' with the bass roll-off filter)."

So although they go down to 40 (still not the very lowest bass you can hear, but pretty low), they pick up less and less bass under 100 Hz. (They may also handle superloud music a little better than the TFB-2.) It's probably what you'll get with the TFB-2 and the bass roll-off box at 96 Hz. So with the TFB-2, I'd suggest, at least for the first attempt, that you set the roll-off box to 69, which should give you a bit more bottom end.

I mostly use binaurals, though I've played around a little bit with some of the lower-priced cardioids. Some people just love cardioids--a Sound Professionals FAQ says if you have just one set of mics, get cardioids. Jam-band recorders, who seem to be the core of the concert-recording market, may need cardioids because those jam-band audiences are real chatterboxes, and a cardioid won't pick up the conversations all around. But to me, usually listening through headphones, cardioids can have an unnatural sound, as if there's a silence behind you--they're not picking up those 360-degree spatial cues that your ears decode so well. For all I know, cardioids and speakers are a better combination. But for me, binaurals are more enveloping and realistic.

Edited August 19, 2007 by A440

[Bullet1979]

Ok, so I went to a show on Sunday night and recorded with both setups at the same time - with my binaural mics (the ones I'm having this issue with), I used a cutoff of 95hz as recommended by Guitarfxr. The recording still has a blown sound to it, which is making me think that Greenmachine is correct in that this problem is because the microphones themselves cannot handle the SPL of such loud concerts.

If this is the case, does anyone have any recommendations as far as stealthy binaural microphones that are hopefully in a reasonable price range that can handle higher SPLs? I really like the natural and dynamic sound of the binaural microphones.

I have uploaded a song from the show from both microphone recordings, and I'd really appreciate if you guys would have a listen and give your input on what the problem could be. Like I said, the binaural recording is much more dynamic and natural sounding (especially with headphones) but the bottoming out/blown sound takes a lot from the recording.

Also, I recorded two other sets that night with just the binaural microphones and they have this same low-end problem - I would be so so very appreciative if one of you guys who are established in Audacity to maybe take a stab at 'mastering' the song I uploaded and give me a crash course in what effects and settings you used. Sorry if I'm annoying but this literally is the best resource for people like me who really want to know how to record shows with the best possible results.

Anyway, without furhter ado...

Core-Sound Cardioid microphone -> battery box -> line in

SoundProfessionals Binaural ->battery box w/95hz cutoff ->line in

I chose this song because there are different levels at different timings, usually around each minute mark of the song. Full band enters around the 2 minute mark, which is where the problems are most evident. Thank you to anyone who takes the time to listen and give input - it is greatly appreciated!

[A440]

Wow, what a difference between microphones. You really point up the contrast between the binaurals and the cardioids--which I find horribly tinny and overly biased toward the midrange, where the vocals are. Through headphones, the spatial feeling of the cardioids is also annoying--it's all upfront, like a sonic migraine. Since you have binaural recordings, personally I would just delete the cardioid version. Maybe it sounds better through speakers, but...

There's really nothing complex about Audacity. Open up the mp3 file in Audacity, highlight that loud part at about 3:02 and look at the Effects menu. You'll see Equalization, and there's a curve you can play with, pulling up or pushing down various frequencies, and a Preview to listen to what it sounds like. When you've figured out what kind of EQ you want, highlight the whole file, apply that EQ curve, and Export Selection as .mp3. The settings are all going to depend on your ears and what you're listening through.

Maybe I'm too used to my own recordings using similar gear, but I wouldn't change much. Unfortunately, you can't un-distort anything. You could push the bass frequencies down a bit if they're bothering you.

But frankly, I'm not overwhelmed or even distracted by distortion when I listen to your file. Part of the problem may be in your playback equipment. When I listened with my little Sennheiser PX100 phones, which are good portables but can be flabby in the bass, it sounded distorted. But when I switched to my Grado SR125, which are bigger, need a little more power and are much clearer through the frequency spectrum, the bass and bass drum sounded far less distorted--well within tolerable, for me at least. Concerts aren't recording studios--some of that thud may be what was in the room.

Another thought--are you using Manual Volume? I ask because when the full band kicks in, the whole level seems to drop a little bit and the instruments seem to scrunch together--though not at all as abruptly as it did when I tried Automatic in older units. I gave up on Automatic long ago, so it may well have been improved. If you are using Automatic, then using Manual instead at a conservative level--13/30 to 15/30, maybe lower if you're right next to the speakers--would capture more of the dynamics without distorting.

Core Sound (despite those cardioids) claims that its microphones are specially tweaked to handle louder sounds. You could try their binaurals. Sound Professionals now has a long selection of mics I've never tried with various degrees of sensitivity--you could seek out lower-sensitivity mics. Sensitivity is measured in negative numbers, so -30 is more sensitive than -40, etc. Both companies have a 30-day trial, so if you time it right you could field-test them at another concert...

One more question: How did you do the simultaneous recording?

[Bullet1979]

I had a MZ-RH910 in my left pocket connected to the core-sound cardoids mounted in a two separate slits I cut in a baseball cap and then I had a MZ-R55 in my right pocket connected to the binaurals in my ears. I did have them both on automatic as far as input level goes - I'll have to try manual next time.

By the way... with Audacity when I use the preview function, it only plays about 2-5 seconds - is this normal? The reason I ask is when I use Adobe Audition it processes while playing back so you could listen to the entire song or however much you choose. I suppose I'll have to noodle around with it and see what kind of results I get.

I don't have anything super fancy as far as speakers go, but they're decent at least. I have a Logitech 2.1 speaker system that has always sounded excellent on studio stuff and a lot of other live recordings... I've only recently started to get experimental like this making recordings with two setups at one show to cross-reference. I think I'll definitely have to look in to core-sound's binaural microphones... Thanks for the reply!

[Strungup]

I had a MZ-RH910 in my left pocket connected to the core-sound cardoids mounted in a two separate slits I cut in a baseball cap and then I had a MZ-R55 in my right pocket connected to the binaurals in my ears. I did have them both on automatic as far as input level goes - I'll have to try manual next time.

By the way... with Audacity when I use the preview function, it only plays about 2-5 seconds - is this normal? The reason I ask is when I use Adobe Audition it processes while playing back so you could listen to the entire song or however much you choose. I suppose I'll have to noodle around with it and see what kind of results I get.

I don't have anything super fancy as far as speakers go, but they're decent at least. I have a Logitech 2.1 speaker system that has always sounded excellent on studio stuff and a lot of other live recordings... I've only recently started to get experimental like this making recordings with two setups at one show to cross-reference. I think I'll definitely have to look in to core-sound's binaural microphones... Thanks for the reply!

Audacity preview is a shorty that is just the way it is at the moment , for a free prog the keep it as lite as the can but still strong enough to do stuff on .

Yeah I heard the Auto kik in , the intial part of the song (Just Guitar audience and Singer was right on , good dynamics and the idea is the getting of THOSE dynamics thru the whole song , to do that take the rec levels off of Auto , take them down to where the full band parts (especially "On Beat") where the peaks are so large , take it down to the point where they dont blow it out , then afterwards tweek in Audacity to get some levels up on the weak areas , but not so much that it is unatural. Auto levels are never good on todays gear , progear will have a Limiter built in as well as AGC , but the limiter will just Cap the rec levels instead of pumping them like a compressor does. (Which is what AGC emulates)

Edited August 23, 2007 by Guitarfxr

[A440]

As Guitarfxr said, the preview in Audacity is just a snippet. You really should look through the help file in Adobe Audition, though--it probably has a much better and more precise EQ available to you somewhere.

Do you have a separate volume control on the subwoofer for your Logitechs? How about lowering the bass that way, if it's possible?

I never had as old-school a unit as the R55, but people have posted that the early units were much more forgiving about loud sounds. The Automatic on my R700 and my N707 were useless for music--every bass-drum hit would make a whoosh as you could hear the volume level dropping.

Really, Manual is essential. You have to put the unit in REC/PAUSE with the disc inside and go through menus, but the results are well worth it. You might try Manual recording with the binaurals you have (and the bass roll-off if you think it's necessary) before shelling out for another pair of mics. For loud shows, I sometimes take the level down during the show, just looking at the level meter rather than the number. (I have the RM-MC40ELK remote, which lights up and shows the record level. ) Afterward, even at the loudest shows, I rarely find I have gone below 13/30. And I have essentially your same mics, and the same mini battery module.

By the way, do MDCF a favor and post your recordings in the Gallery, with information on which mics and recorders. (Was the RH910 Hi-SP? Obviously the R55 was SP.) When people want to check out the difference between binaurals and cardioids, you've created an ideal demonstration.

[Bullet1979]

Yeah, I will always record in the highest quality available for the recorder I'm using - so the RH910 was recording in PCM WAV and MZ-R55 in SP. I wouldn't be so scrutinizing with my recordings, but I have a website where I put all of my recordings up for people to download and listen to - so I have to sort of keep in mind that different people will have different set ups so I try to establish a good middle ground with lows and such... All of your help has been soo greatly appreciated. I'm going to another show tomorrow and I'll probably do the same thing, recording with cardioid and binaurals - this time I will try the manual levels. I just wish the damn recorders would retain the manual setting instead of having to re-set it every time you want to record - I hear the RH1 is the only recorder to not have this fault... is that correct? I'm usually trying to be as stealth as possible (I have the bands' permission but not necessarily the venues') so that's why I've always used auto in the past.

A440 - do you happen to know what recorders that specific remote is compatible with? Is that the one I've heard of that's usually roughly $50 on ebay?

I'll look in to uploading my recordings to the gallery - do I do full shows or just single songs? And if it's just a song or two, do you think the one I uploaded is a fair representation or should I choose a song that's more consistently loud?

[Strungup]

Yeah, I will always record in the highest quality available for the recorder I'm using - so the RH910 was recording in PCM WAV and MZ-R55 in SP. I wouldn't be so scrutinizing with my recordings, but I have a website where I put all of my recordings up for people to download and listen to - so I have to sort of keep in mind that different people will have different set ups so I try to establish a good middle ground with lows and such... All of your help has been soo greatly appreciated. I'm going to another show tomorrow and I'll probably do the same thing, recording with cardioid and binaurals - this time I will try the manual levels. I just wish the damn recorders would retain the manual setting instead of having to re-set it every time you want to record - I hear the RH1 is the only recorder to not have this fault... is that correct? I'm usually trying to be as stealth as possible (I have the bands' permission but not necessarily the venues') so that's why I've always used auto in the past.

A440 - do you happen to know what recorders that specific remote is compatible with? Is that the one I've heard of that's usually roughly $50 on ebay?

I'll look in to uploading my recordings to the gallery - do I do full shows or just single songs? And if it's just a song or two, do you think the one I uploaded is a fair representation or should I choose a song that's more consistently loud?

The 40 ELK is ONLY compatable with Hi-MD recorders ,and The Hard disk players Sony made, it will function with others , but a lot of the funtions will be unavailable .

[A440]

The RM-MC40ELK should be fine with your RH910. Just search for RM-MC40ELK on Ebay.

Yes, the RH1 finally corrected the Manual Volume stupidity, the only Sony unit that does.

Here's my stealth routine. Outside the venue, I plug in the battery module to line-in and go through the whole Manual Volume setting.

REC/PAUSE, Menu, two clicks up to REC SET, click down to Rec Volume, click down to Manual, Enter. I set the level, usually to 20/30, lower if I expect to get blasted with high volume. Leave it on REC/PAUSE, blinking merrily, and put it on Hold with the switch.

Plug in the remote--the remote that came with it is good enough. Put the unit in a pocket--since it's on hold, the buttons won't turn it off. Inside the venue, I plug the mic jack into the battery module--the battery in the module runs only when the mic is plugged in, so I do that as close to the set as possible. Then I un-PAUSE with the Pause button on the remote when the set starts, and the recording begins. No one sees the unit inside the venue.

Do one song at a time for the Gallery, not whole sets. Those two versions of the Mae song make excellent mic samples because they go through so many dynamic changes.

Edited August 24, 2007 by A440

[Bullet1979]

That's a pretty nice trick there - I take it that the unit does not deplete too much battery blinking on REC/PAUSE? Most of the time I'm wanting to record a band, I have to sit through a few opening bands so it could be a while - I suppose I could set things up during the final opening band. How long is the longest you've had the unit blinking on hold waiting to start recording?

[A440]

I don't think there's much battery drain on Rec/Pause because the record head isn't moving and nothing is getting written to the disc with the laser.

I've gone 20-30 minutes, not hours, but I'm pretty sure it could go much longer. If you're worried there's always the privacy of a bathroom between acts. Or you could sacrifice a battery to an experiment and see how long it would go on Rec-Pause. I'd expect it would last at least overnight.

[greenmachine]

That's a pretty nice trick there - I take it that the unit does not deplete too much battery blinking on REC/PAUSE? Most of the time I'm wanting to record a band, I have to sit through a few opening bands so it could be a while - I suppose I could set things up during the final opening band. How long is the longest you've had the unit blinking on hold waiting to start recording?

I don't own a RH910, but my NH700 consumes about 50 mA in Rec-Pause, which means if I would be using a 2000 mAh battery, half of its capacity would be used up in about 20 hours (in Rec-Pause). The RH910 has a non-backlit LCD just like the NH700, so it shouldn't be using much more power. If you have a multimeter, you could check the consumption for yourself.

[A440]

20 hours of opening acts sounds like a good definition of purgatory.