How Do You Record Your Acoustic Piano?

I've been through many revisions of my recording setup over the years. And I do like to keep it simple, since obsessing over recording quality is not something I like to do.

You can't really get better video than an iphone, not without spending a lot of money. So it is the audio that needs to be improved. You are on the right track there I think.

What I currently do is use two external microphones - a pair of Rode M5s, which are not the best and not the worst. They are small diaphragm condenser mics. I run those into a Universal Audio Volt 2, which supplies phantom power to the mics, and connects to the iphone via usb. I use a mic stand for the microphones and position them either pointing into the piano or several feet away pointing at the piano. I use the X-Y configuration, but there are others.

So then you just start the camera on the iphone, and it automatically uses the microphones. You can connect headphones to the Volt to see what it sounds like. It is a very easy way to record without fooling with software. Then you just airdrop the video from the phone to the laptop, trim the ends, and upload to youtube.

Next level up - connect the Volt (or some other audio interface - there are lots available) to a laptop and run software like Logic Pro on the mac. Now you have lots of adjustments to make and can fiddle around with sliders and filters all you want. You can still record the video with the phone, and then use Final Cut Pro (or something similar) to sync audio and video. Final Cut can do that automatically for you. So that is more steps. But if you want to use multiple cameras and play director and get multiple angles then something like Final Cut is needed.

So bottom line: 2 good microphones, a mic stand, mic cables, an audio interface to connect to the phone for recording. That is, in my opinion, a simple setup that works fine, and doesn't involve a lot of tinkering with software.

For an acoustically small room (pretty much any room in a residence), I like to get the mics up close.  Currently using a pair of DPA 4099s with magnetic bases designed to sit on the piano's plate.  The cables fit out the closed lid just fine, and even seem to work fine under a Dawson string cover.  I've also seen these mics in larger live spaces where you don't want to capture other instruments.  If I need video, the simplest way to get it synced is a camera that accepts XLR (Zoom sells one), though I nowadays pull it into an audio console so I can route it elsewhere, including processing and sending back to both the camera and headphones.  

Hi, thank you for your video Mike. It’s lovely to listen to your piano. One of my new year resolution is to get start with YT recording.
I’m curious if anyone is familiar with Zoom Q2n-4k camera? 
I have iPhone but not the newest version. A few times I dropped it on a floor, too
I have been considering if I will rather buy Zoom Q2n-4k Camera for recording purposes, instead of using iPhone. Have not made up my mind yet. It’s quite much cheaper compared to new iPhone. 

Hi, i'm actually a sound engineer. First i'd like to clear a widespread misunderstanding: You don't want to record the strings but rather the soundboard. The strings on their own sound very thin, much like an unplugged e-guitar. But the strings transmit their vibrations via the bridge to the soundboard, which is stimulated to vibrate and resonate and with its large surface broadcasts the vibration patterns into the air. The cover of the grand piano is to reflect and project the soundboard into the room and towards the audience.

As you can imagine, the soundboard sounds different in any given spot, reflecting the individual properties - each spot has its unique set of resonants with certain frequencies, strings, impedance, reflections within the instrument etc. The closer the mic to the soundboard, the more emphasized the individual spot in the recording. This effect is stronger the narrower the directivity of the microphone. Think of the mic as a torch (cardioid) or lantern (omni) and the imaginatively lit area as what the microphone "sees" (hears). 

While you may find certain spots that emit a relatively nice sound, from the previous section it should be clear, why with a little more distance between mic and the soundboard it becomes easier to achieve a rounder and more holistic piano sound as the microphone "sees" more of the vibrating area. This is also true if you tilt it (remember the torch ... or think of the mic as a photogaphy lens). While certain spots might not sound very pleasant on their own, they all contribute and ad up to the sound of the whole instrument that develops with distance. Of course the vibrations also creep into all other parts of the instrument, which, to the extent that they vibrate, also release this into the air and add to the overall sound of the instrument. The soundboard accounts for by far the largest share of this.

So far it should be obvious that you're likely to get a somewhat nice recording of your piano if you position your mics to see most of the sound board. Now the hammers and dampers, the mechanics, the pedals also produce sound when in action. This may be wanted, adding to or even playing a role in certain music. E.g. Jazz often likes the more pronounced attack closer to the hammers and the sound of the mechanics adding a rhythmic element. You can then move or tilt the mics towards the origins of these sounds. In most classical styles a very natural or "realistic" piano sound might be desired. As described, this holistic sound develops with distance and you might find anywhere from just at the curve of the body to several feet or meters away to bring you the most beautiful results. Still it is advisable to chose a spot with direct "view" of the sound board.

Height: Experiment with height. If your mic "sees" the sound board and also the lower surface of the cover, this will produce some comb filter effect which you may or may not find disturbing. This is because by the speed of sound the reflection from the cover comes in just a little later than the sound traveling the shorter distance on the direct line. This yields a blur or a small acoustic double exposure in photographic terms (like you see an edge twice slightly shifted in a wobbled photo). If you experience this, you could place the microphone in the alignment axis of the cover, where it does just not see the cover but sees the overall piano/soundboard. If you don't have an audience to project towards, you might find removing the cover completely and recording from above the piano giving most pleasant results. In any case experiment. 

Room: Much like your piano forms an acoustic system that has strings and a soundboard, your room forms another acoustic system system that has your piano. And also every spot in your room has its own unique sound properties, also dependant on where the sound originated and has been reflected (multiple times) from. The further the distance from the piano, the louder the sound of your room on the recording. Do you have a nice room? In acoustics, when the direct sound is dominating, you're in the near field. Further away the room sound dominates, this is the diffuse field. The distance where the contributions of room and instrument are equal is called "critical distance" or "diffuse field radius". Around the latter is the "transitional zone". If you have the possibility experiment not only with the location of the microphones but also of the instrument. Every inch or cm could have an effect how reflections and everything add up and you might find very nice constellations or a golden spot (This is also true for just your own practise and playing/listening position). 

Parallel opposite surfaces: Do you remember, maybe when moving, how unpleasant the acoustics in an empty room and how much better with a few pieces of furniture or even just packets it gets? Parallel opposite walls (or any smooth reflective surfaces) are what causes sound ever bouncing back and forth. It's like an acoustic kaleidoscope. The furniture or just any irregularities help diffuse and shatter the reflections, blurring the room sound. You want one clear direct sound of the instrument but embedded in / surrounded by diffuse reflections / reverberant room sound. Like in a good portrait or object photography, the center of attention is in focus and a depth blurring of the background. 

If possible keep not only the microphones but also the instrument with some distance from nearby walls or reflective surfaces to avoid loud reflections. Every little helps. Also, since every frequency has their corresponding wave length, thus every distance to a surface has a certain set of frequencies that perfectly fit in and resonate at the location - while other frequencies perfectly inhibit themselves (and all other frequencies doing something in between these two extremes). That's also again a comb filter, called such for the shape of the frequency response. 

You can also treat the acoustics of your room by either absorbing or diffusing the sound. There are whole books filled about that and there are special acoustic absorbers and diffusors but even hanging a sheet or placing irregular shaped objects might go a long way for your recording.

Ok, sorry for being so long! This took a few hours to write. If it helps to improve media producers abilities it will lead to greater pleasure for everybody listening ;) If you wish i can ad another post about stereo. If so i'll try to keep it short and essential ;) Much to learn there and i think it's highly interesting with how our brain works to conceive a spatial and three-dimensional auditory experience. 

Marc M thank you too, you're welcome.

The 100% pan is for any spaced pair stereophony, it will yield comb filters and corrupt the stereo image if you pan inwards. In a stereo setup each microphone to a considerable amount is already hearing, what the other one does - but at a slightly different time.  By the speed of sound, every sound originating anywhere but exactly at equal distance from the mics will arrive a little sooner at the closer mic and then a tad later at the other one. The temporal shift is bigger for greater angle of incidence and that information is exactly what our ears need to make our brain conceive the plasticity and depth.

If you're blending the channels you're sending information "crosstalk" vice versa that already was in the other ones but at different points in time. Some earlier, some later - creating the acoustic equivalent to "double edges" in awobbled photograph. Then adding the same but opposite from the other direction (introducing sort of "triple edged silhouettes" of acoustic events). The only area unaffected by this crazy blur is a thin vertical slice in the middle of the acoustic picture, that's by far too little.

Adding to the disaster, since frequencies have wave lengths, some of the time shifted crosstalk will lead certain frequencies (and their multiples) to overlap their peaks in the other channel, thereby exaggerating the volume of said frequencies - while frequencies in between (and their multiples) will overlap a peak and a valley/trough, thereby cancelling themselves out. So again that's the comb shaped frequency response called comb filter. As described in the previous post, you could also yield it in a single microphone through reflections of nearby boundaries, but - hopefully as clear now - also by panning the two channels of spaced pair stereo mic setup not 100% L and R.

If you want your left microphone sound a little bit more like your right microphone and vice versa, just move your mics closer together or go for more distance so each mics "sees" more what the other one does but always keep them in 100% L/R. 

Stereo systems you can pan inwards without sonic damage are XY, MS and Blümlein setups. In these the capsules are as close as possible (theoretically they were in the same spot) so no runtime differences between the mics will occur. I.e. sounds of any origin hit the two capsules at exactly the same time. They do so, but with different volumes due to the directivity of the microphones listening into other directions. These setups are able to yield crisp clear mono-compatible recordings with good directivity and the potential for stereo width manipulation (panning inwards). Mostly that's desirable for post production, when mixing in context of larger ensembles, bands etc. The compromise to that advantage is these are totally lacking the depth and spaciousness of well executed spaced pair (AB) recording. So, if you're recording a solo instrument for an audience, most of whom do not listen on mono radios, you might lean towards a stereo system that integrates a runtime component and stay 100% L/R :)

A second possibility of panning two microphones inwards without sonic damage and strange artefacts is when the mics hear so very different "angles" of the sonic events that they can't be considered a stereo pair anymore but rather form a double mono setup. If you want to do this the rule is to keep at least three times more distance between the mics than the distance between each mic and the instrument ("3:1 rule"). The undesirable artefacts remain inaudible from the 3:1 and beyond scenario. You can achieve good, "round" and "interesting" sounding recordings this way, as you capture two angles that nicely blend. Only they are not able to produce the three dimensional spaciousness of a true stereophonic perspective.

Okay, wow. I always think I'll post a quick, short reply, and then it turns into another chapter. I apologize for that. Now, what we still need to cover is the impact of altering the distance between the pairs and adjusting the angles pointing outward. This is much akin to a photographer choosing a lens with a specific focal length and aperture. I'll leave that for another post soon. Kind regards.