"Mike Coatham" wrote in message
...
On 16/02/2010 11:20 a.m., Keith G wrote:
snip

"The analogy even extends to the recordings. In early 1953, Paray and
the DSO cut their first records for Mercury, which had startled the
hi-fi world in 1951 with the unprecedented clarity and musicality of an
acclaimed series of albums using a single microphone and no
equalization, filtering, mixing or compression.

Isn't that basically what Dave Plowman stated in regard to single
microphone recordings of big bands?? Which (if I also recall
correctly)was immediately poo poo'd by God's gift to recording engineers -
Mr Churches and supported by your good self?
I could be wrong, ..... (snip)

Yes. You are wrong, in that you are trying to compare
two totally different genres requiring very different
recording techniques. You cannot compare single
mic classical recordings of Paray/Detroit Symphony
in mono, with multi close mic hard hitting big
band recordings in stereo, any more than you can
compare a recording of a Bach solo clavicord work
with a recording of ZZ Top:-)


If you listen to the finest live or studio big band
recordings from the mid fifties onwards, Ellington,
Basie, Kenton,Woody Herman Ted Heath etc,
(Ellington At Newport 1956 is a perfect example)
you will find they are all multi mic. Ask yourself
why, if a simple pair alone would suffice.


When people listen at home to big band music,
whether concert or studio recording, they expect
contrast, immediacy, and impact of a driving
rhythm section, four trumpets, four trombones and
five saxophones. The Buddy Rich big band is a
splendid example, and the Hilversum recordings
illustrate the point perfectly.

I have worked on a large number of jazz ensemble
and big band projects and never met anyone in that
time, producer, client, engineer, musician, critic or
listener who thought that a better result could be
achieved with just a pair. I asked Dave to post a
link to an example to substantiate his assertion.
He was unable to do so.


In haste
Regards,

Iain