If I listen to various clips like the ones on online shops and think that I like one more than another, will the same be true if I listen to the whistles in person? How accurate are clips for general sound?
thanks
Ken
Well, speaking from the experience of making lots of clips and putting them on the web…
No recording of a whistle ever sounds like the whistle sounds to the player. There are perfectly good reasons for this, the main one that when you play the whistle’s sound is right there in your face, and you get “bone resonance” from your head, which makes the whistle sound fuller and richer to you than it does to the listener.
This is true for whistles, and even more true for flutes, which also resonate in the chest of the player.
A really good recording can sound reasonably like the whistle does…assuming it gets played back on good speakers and a good system.
I have found recordings of different flutes and whistles fairly useful in comparing one kind to another…with the catch that they will always sound better in person.
Best,
–James
http://www.flutesite.com
On 2002-10-03 20:56, Kendahl wrote:
If I listen to various clips like the ones on online shops and think that I like one more than another, will the same be true if I listen to the whistles in person? How accurate are clips for general sound?
I’m no expert, but that would be hard to say. It depends on how they record the sounds. If they use noise-reduction and echo/reverb it will sound one way, and if not, it will sound another way. Personally, I normally use a Shure SM57 mic in a fairly “dead” room, with no added electronic effects. If this is the environment in which you play the whistle, then it will be useful to you. If not, then it may be worthless.
I think that unless the recording is highly processed, it should give you a very good indication of the real sound of the whistle in most cases.
Of course, you must bear in mind that the same whistle can sound very different in the hands of different players.
Inconsistencies in the craftsmanship can also play a huge role in altering the sound of whistles that have the potential for such inconsistencies.
I bought a Silkstone alloy high D after hearing Mick Woodruff play his, and mine sounds exactly like his.
On the other hand though, I’ve gone through a number of Generations and have yet to get a D that sounds as good as Paddy Moloney’s.
If the recording is of high quality, then you can judge from it (if the reproduction chain is up to task).
However most clips I´ve heard are actually REALLY bad. Mick Woodruffs is some of the exception.
For example, most of the clips in “clips n´snips” are extremly bad.
Don´t mean to hurt anyones feelings, but it sure would be fun if more people used at least decent gears when recording. The mic being the most important factor.
/Peter
Pan,
I am open to suggestions. I’ve been looking for a mic to replace the one that came with my computer. I’ve searched on this topic before and found that most of the mics that people were talking about were over $100 which is out of my league. Can you or anybody else suggest something a little cheaper?
Thanks,
Eric
From what I’ve personally discovered, recording with a mic means that the sound gets a chance to ‘fly’ around, shift like this and that, and somehow reach the mic in a different way.
So usual culprits that affect a recording (as I’ve found out) is (a) a fan (b) the air-conditioner (very low frequency) (c) bad mic connection to whatever recording device. causes static at worse, some noise/buzzing at least.
There’s no better way to judge a whistle than to hear one being played in person AND try it out yourself, preferably in semi-open conditions. A closed room is a no-no - quiet stuff might sound loud, thanks to reverb, etc.
This is a rather big world, which claims to be small.
On 2002-10-04 03:45, vaporlock wrote:
Pan,
I am open to suggestions. I’ve been looking for a mic to replace the one that came with my computer. I’ve searched on this topic before and found that most of the mics that people were talking about were over $100 which is out of my league. Can you or anybody else suggest something a little cheaper?Thanks,
Eric
With mikes you pretty much get what you pay for. (Yeah, I know, that’s just what you didn’t want to hear.) Perhaps, as they get very expensive, you get a little more by paying a lot more. The trick, for those with a strong currency, is to exploit those poor sods like us who don’t. If the chair in front of your computer is in the US, you just might be in luck. So you just might be able to get more than you’re paying for. (That’s what you wanted to hear wasn’t it?)
Don’t know about Shure SM57s. I’ve seen them recommended for quite a few things and might soon check one out. Shure SM 58s are great for in-your-face directional stuff like screamy vocals, kick drums and blues harmonica. For whistles, forget them though. I use Rode NT3s for a lot of things. They’re good condenser mikes that are very cheap for what you get and, since they’re Australian made, might be even cheaper for you. I’m not entirely happy with them for certain instruments but for whistles I’m really pleased. But you do have to experiment with placement and mike levels etc to get the best out of them. If I get placement wrong they can sound terrible but a few small adjustments usually fixes that. If you’re recording for fun, rather than to demonstrate how a whistle sounds, don’t be afraid to use a little bit of reverb; just about every recording engineer does. It just adds a bit of ‘warmth’.
[ This Message was edited by: Wombat on 2002-10-04 12:04 ]
On 2002-10-04 12:02, Wombat wrote:
Don’t know about Shure SM57s. I’ve seen them recommended for quite a few things and might soon check one out. Shure SM 58s are great for in-your-face directional stuff like screamy vocals, kick drums and blues harmonica. For whistles, forget them though.
Wombat
You’re the second person I’ve seen say Shure SM58’s weren’t good for whistles, without giving a hint or explanation as to why. Since I use an SM58 with our band, and it seems to work OK, I’d be interested in knowing why some consider it a Bad Thing.
Greg
On 2002-10-04 03:45, vaporlock wrote:
Pan,
I am open to suggestions. I’ve been looking for a mic to replace the one that came with my computer. I’ve searched on this topic before and found that most of the mics that people were talking about were over $100 which is out of my league. Can you or anybody else suggest something a little cheaper?Thanks,
Eric
Eric, all my clips and cds are made with a Sony ECM-MS907 mic. I bought it for about $70 shipped, last winter. It has two recording modes, with different angles. 90 degrees for a more directional setup and 120 degrees for capturing fairly separated left and right tracks. It runs off a AA battery and I use it both with my computer and my minidisc recorder.
On 2002-10-04 12:30, Wandering_Whistler wrote:
On 2002-10-04 12:02, Wombat wrote:
Don’t know about Shure SM57s. I’ve seen them recommended for quite a few things and might soon check one out. Shure SM 58s are great for in-your-face directional stuff like screamy vocals, kick drums and blues harmonica. For whistles, forget them though.Wombat
You’re the second person I’ve seen say Shure SM58’s weren’t good for whistles, without giving a hint or explanation as to why. Since I use an SM58 with our band, and it seems to work OK, I’d be interested in knowing why some consider it a Bad Thing.Greg
Good, let me try. I really hope you can convince me I’m wrong because I’d love to have an alternative.
SM58s are great stage mikes because they are very directional, they only pick up sounds made quite close to them and they tolerate huge changes in volume without popping. This means that you get minimal bleed from other instruments into your mike and the guy at the mixing desk has a relatively easy task adjusting levels to get a nice balance.
In the studio these virtues are sometimes an advantage—I listed a few examples—but mostly not. The reason is basically this. Most instruments produce sound from more than one place so a directional mike will pick up sounds coming from the top of the whistle very well (if that’s where you place it) but not well from the bottom of the whistle. Or vice versa. Saxes are the same—sounds come from the holes as well as the bell. If you stand back from the mike, it’s hard to get a good level and to pick up all the overtones. The SM58 won’t compromise well here.
A mike that’s less directional and which is more sensative when you play further back from it will just pick up faithfully more of what you’re hearing in a balanced way. To put it crudely but vividly (I hope), it’s looking for your sound in more places (up and down) and it has more room to find it (greater distance from the mike.) Bleed isn’t a problem if you are using isolation booths or recording one instrument at a time.
I think you must lose something on stage with the 58s but the obvious advantages greatly outweigh the disadvantages. Since you probably judge how good you’re sounding in part by how well you seem to blend with the others, this would account for why you like the 58s. I don’t gig at the moment but I think I’d try 58s if I did.
By the way, how does low whistle sound on stage? If not as good, that would confirm what I’m saying.
Wombat:
What you say makes sense. One of the reasons I got the mic is because of it’s directional nature. Our guitar player plays with a cheap/hot mic and we already have bleed/buzz/feedback probs from her mic. As I’m the sound guy I rented a few mics, and bought the one that gave me the least hassle.
I can understand losing some overtones and wanting to capture the full dynamic range of the instrument. But I don’t think I lose all of them…I’ve made some recordings with my SM58, and I thought they’ve sounded pretty good (http://www.tinwhistler.com/misc/samples/eanach_dhuin.mp3--Silkstone Alloy D).
I don’t generally play the low whistle, on stage, though. We mostly do pub gigs, and I seem to grab people’s attention better with the high D. The low D is a lot easier to talk over 
[ This Message was edited by: Wandering_Whistler on 2002-10-04 14:51 ]
I’ll give your clip a listen sometime soon if I can make it work. (I need to go home to sleep now.) But I wouldn’t be able to tell how good it is unless you gave me a good condenser mike version of the same thing. But then you wouldn’t need me because you’d hear the difference for yourself.
Like I said, Rodes are I think good for whistles but a bit iffy for, say, accoustic guitar and sax. But it would be hard to get a mike comparable to the NT3 for the same price. (I’m just guessing here, based on my knowledge of the exchange rate. I have intimate knowledge of that. I just ordered two Burke’s and bought David Schulz’s Copeland low D under circumstances that generated a hilarious discussion here about a week ago.)
Since you’re the sound guy, you’ll know exactly what I was talking about in giving the thumbs up to '58’s for stage work. Even pros who could afford much better use them for precisely these reasons.
[ This Message was edited by: Wombat on 2002-10-04 15:07 ]