"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:50:06 +0300, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
Iain, it would help if you provided a reference when quoting - it's the
convention, as well as the polite thing to do.

Sorry Dave. Not intentional.

Valve mics in digital recording

Perhaps a fair percentage of recordings might involve the use of some
valve microphone. As a percentage of mics used in all recordings, it
would
be small.

Neither of us can really what is going on outside our own recording
spheres with accuracy.

I had a message yesterday from a former colleague working at this moment
in LA ( I think the location is Royce Hall)
All mics on the sessions are valve. 47, 49,50, 56, 64

So, that's 100% for that project:-)))

Iain


Do bear in mind though that the signal levels involved in mics are
minute - they don't come anywhere near the voltage swings that cause
all the problems later on in the amplification chain.


And also applying a subtle distortion to a single instrument doesn't
have anything like the same effect as applying that same distortion to
a multi-instrument mix.

Agreed. The problems were not with the mics themselves, or their
valve front ends, but the psu, and mic preamp. As I remember they
used to come from the "box" straight into the desk at line level.
But those old mics do sound absolutely wonderful on large
string sections.

It's horses for courses. I don't think we can be too adamant either
way. I like to see a mix of technology.

I sometimes work in a studio in Stockholm where they record
analogue, Studer A80/24 and then transfer to ProTools (hard disk
multitrack with a Mac front end) for editing. Then a mix onto two tracks
of the hard disk recorder and pass in the digi
domain to DAT for the production master. Their clients are happy,
and it seems a very efficient way to work. Digital editing is like
using a wordprocessor, cut and paste. Wonderful:-))


Iain