This is a very didgeridooistic didgeridoo article, a technical construction,  that I believe only the bravest of the long didgeridoo seekers can go through However, if you do, you will gain yourself a brand new honour in the eyes of the deep didgeridoos.

I see it has become sort of a trend in didgeridoo world (at least in certain parts of world) to make longer and longer tube to play. It is a nice change, after the era of phobia of long didgeridoos that are “slow” and “low” and only for “meditative” playing. However it is maybe now good time to take a good look at it again, not to go far with a broken car..
I would like to reflect upon three different aspects of longest didgeridoo family. They come from three different periods. First one is from playing practice, second is from solo recording, third is from recording with a band – Druyd.

1. Days of solo practice. When I first started to play longer and longest didgeridoo instruments, I did that with normal didgeridoos, taped together. I joined everything that could be joined, and found only very few combinations that actually made sense. I used PVC tubes only to prolong further the long didgeridoos… I found that cylindrical extensions in the beginning worked quite well. Later, I have built only PVC didgeridoos so I can get a feeling how 10+ meter didges behave and sound like. Problem was that cylindrical structure of PVC, even if carefully assembled in progression of width, was too rough to feel the true nature of long didgeridoo. I believe it was for two reasons.

First is that consecutive cylindrical parts of half a meter or one meter are not working acoustically close enough, and in a way efficient enough – the way conical tubes do.
Second reason might be that thin PVC material cannot withstand the power and frequency of big long didgeridoo drone, and it gets dissipated through the instrument walls.
It resulted so that these didgeridoos never excelled in playability or tone quality… I could have probably found some interesting toot relations, but I wasn’t motivated at that time doing it like that…

I know it is difficult to find long didgeridoos, or ones that can be assembled, but it is really worth it if you look for the wonders of deep didgeridoo world.

2.I discovered problems the first time I wanted to put live sound to a higher level during my performance “This illusion”. It was one year after “Storytellingstories”. I got some nice preamps to use as outboard of mixing desk and I brought many nice condenser microphones. The only instrument giving me real questions was the longest didgeridoo, 7 meter with a horn. I had two really good sound engineers with me, on a sound check in a great theatre hall that lasted for half of the day. It seemed in the beginning that we had problem because of the end horn, the sound was muddy, and not punchy enough. But it turned out to be more of a transient problem.  It is partly concerning micing positions and number of microphones, and it is partly in the essence of every long didgeridoo. Sound waves have to bounce long way back and forth until they reach stable position of a standing wave, and that lasts longer than in normally sized instruments. Also the sustain of these instruments is really big.

In a way it is like driving a truck. If you have a good truck, with strong engine, it will go fast, but everything you do affects big mass. So it is more difficult to accelerate, more difficult to break, and when it gets carried away a bit, you have different ways of manouvering it, you have to use the momentum smartly to get it back on track. This is relatively ok when you are alone in the road, but what happens when there are other vehicles around you?

3. Now we come to the most recent story – from recording of Druyd’s first album (soon to be out:-). There is one song “Daorson” which includes a 4,3 meter D didge. Lately I’ve been changing it with a B didge for convenience of rehearsals… B is the first toot of the long D didgeridoo, so it made sense. And so we practiced with shorter instrument for some time, so the song got new inside rules, and curves… On the recording, I recorded both didgeridoos. With B didgeridoo I had no problem. But when I recorded D didgeridoo, I noticed a very peculiar phenomena when I listened to the recording. Everything sounded as if played with latency/delay. It is due to the fact that it takes longer time for longer didgeridoo to generate sound, it creates a larger mass, and then the sustain keeps it alive for a long time – relatively speaking. In solo performance it can go unnoticed, but in tight rhythmic playing with other instruments, even higher didgeridoos, it is revealed.

What is the conclusion? One has to be aware of this. With practice it is possible to acquire enough skills to be able to play “forward” just right to compensate the latency of a long didgeridoo. It has a certain charm of its own, and one can not regard it as simply positive or negative issue. It also makes playing long tubes more challenging. Just when you thought you got it,

you understood

that deeper inside wood

you must reach,

and with invisible tentacles

feel and navigate

the massive vessel

of deepest sounds…

Enjoy your sound sea journey!

Microphone placement!

If I had to point out only one chapter about recording, this would be it!  It refers to recording didgeridoo, as well as any other instrument. I cannot stress enough how important role microphone placement played in recording Kosmopterix. Let me give you an example. For Lake of Awareness I was searching for didgeridoo and microphone placement for one week. I could do around 70 test recordings in one day. It takes a bit more than eight hours, breaks not included. After this one week of search, Lake was recorded in 7 takes, I think. That is one hour.
Another perspective is that buying expensive equipment is nonsense if you won’t take time to find the sound. Why? Because microphone placement changes sound so drastically that it can make a single mic singing like a shiny star or murmur like a mud – we don’t discuss tastes now – it is up to your vision what you look for. When you have more mics, then this effect is amplified.
We will go through this process in two steps.

Step 1 – Placing the didgeridoo.

It now goes without saying that your recording room is treated in some way, prepared for the incoming sound. As mentioned before, you can record didgeridoo in relatively small rooms if they are treated well – frequency and reverb-wise.  But if you have a small room, your sound will be very sensitive to any movements. You will be able to notice the difference from even few centimeters of change in didgeridoo placement.

First, lift your didgeridoo off the floor. The sound will be much clearer. When we recorded, bell of the didgeridoo was some 35cm elevated.
Second, put some absorption underneath the bell of didgeridoo and, if possible, the mics. We had 10cm thick 60X60cm square of rockwool for absorption. Notice the difference of sound.
Third, most complicated, get some help of great ears for didgeridoo. This person has a very demanding task in both physical and mental way. This brave person needs to:
- take the bell of the the didgeridoo while you play some characteristic part of the song to record
- lift it of the ground on the height where stands hold the didgeridoo,
- put his/her ear on the distance which is similar to the distance of the “main” mic – for me it was around 35cm
- move it, at the same time with the absorption underneath the didgeridoo, around the room to find a sweet spot
What is a sweet spot? Well if you like bitter, it might be a bitter spot for you, anyway it is the spot where your didgeridoo sounds the “best”. By “best” we could say it is a perfect blend of articulation, clearness, kick- bass, fullness… Once you decide which spot it is, try to stick to it unless you realize you can’t place the microphones properly.

Step 2 – Placing the microphones.

At this point I had some troubles which we will try to shortcut for you. My situation was that my didgeridoo was dancing a little bit after I thought I have put it firmly to my didgeridoo holder made of chairs, boxes and other stuff. If the didgeridoo moves between the points in time when you measured your microphone distances and recorded the sound, you are certainly doing something, but it is hard to name what, and it is most surely not finding the best microphone positions. When I realized it was happening to me, I got to the nearby railway station – in the department for repairs. I kindly asked, and kindly got, two steel plates heavy enough to anchor a house. I had arms the length of orangutan after I brought them home, and it was only for a few hundred of meters. I welded the bars with half circular holder for the didgeridoo, on screws, and I welded some bolts on the plates so that I have didgeridoo anchors that I can dismantle and put in 2D world. This really helped a lot, as now didgeridoo had no chance to move. This is how the stands look like;

I have a new method of making stands, which is simpler and lighter, but not as stable, I use it for live performances. This method is based on common microphone stand;

These stands really helped me and I finally managed to make good test recordings.
What I realized to be my biggest thing to solve is phase problems.  I wanted to record with more mics on different distances so I can get more sound, in all senses, but this is what can cause cancellation due to different phases in which sound reaches microphone.  It is especially problematic with basses. The usual three to one (ratio of mic distances – read more for example at http://www.roadogz.com/stories/downunder/speakerstostage3.htm ) did not help me  a lot, and I trusted mostly my ears  all the way through the recording.
It is a bit difficult to describe how phase problems sound, it is like a strange hushing in the recording which you hear as difference between one microphone sound and more microphone sounds at once.  It can reflect in lack of clarity, power… but you will hear it and you will know. I put here two examples from tests before recording.

Lake-phases_not_so_good
Lake-phases_better

It is from a song Lake of Awareness. Mix of three channels, one front microphone and two stereo behind. I did more test songs and sounds, but I chose this now, and the reason is that on the faster parts I could hear better how clarity and articulation were kept, and still there is enough kick to hear what happened to it. These are not two most drastic examples, however they suit our needs fine. Notice how it seems that there is much greater loudness difference between the two than it actually is. RMS loudness difference between the two files is only about 0.3 dB.
What I also looked for in this recording was to get a bit of an end bell sound, which in a way is didgeridoo sustain, and I got it to a certain extent. This recording was done with only three microphones. Royer R122V (via Thermionic Culture Earlybird) at around 32cm distance, and a pair of Schoeps MK2 AB stereo position, via Forsell SMP-2,  at around 57 cm from end of didgeridoo. Conversion was PrismSound.

Now three microphones with a didgeridoo can already give you a quite a hassle, but what about 8 microphones and where to place them? How to start?  Look at this beautiful picture.
First. Start with one mic. Try to capture full detail from didge, but also with nice bass. You can’t do everything, but try to capture the most!  For me it was usually around 35 cm, right in front of the didge. For me articulation is more important than bass. For me it was always ribbon mic, but LDC or SDC could also work. But for you something else might work =)
Second. We make a triangle. Two more microphones, stereo pair, around 65cm distance, half a meter apart.  For me those were SDC mics-Schoeps MK2.
Second – variation – I recorded some of the songs with NOS technique (same as ORTF, only right angle between the mics)

-          Here we have three mics and it is time to adjust their phases

Third. Deltoid. One more microphone in the middle of the stereo pair, at the same distance from the didge as the two of those- so we don’t have to think about phases here, only adjust it a little bit if we don’t put it precisely enough for the first time.
Fourth. Bass microphone- 5 cm, or less, close to the opening. Ribbon or ldc or sdc, but so that it doesn’t disturb the sound. I’ve put my microphones always a bit down… –this one can also mess up phases, but it is easier to adjust than upper „deltoid“.
Fifth. Nose/mouth microphone – sdc od ldc, not very important, but better that it is a little higher than the nose so no direct air stream goes in it. This one does not mess up phases a lot, because it has quite weak signal from the didge, because nose/mouth is much more dominant here. If it is not so, put the microphone closer.

-          We’re now at 6 microphones, so let’s presume you have two more channels on your 8 channel converter/mixer

Sixth. Sound effect microphones – in a tube, or in a bottle, or in any acoustically interesting object. This object should change the sound so drastically that it is distinctly heard when mixed over „regular“ microphones. Try using PVC tubes that are in same note as your didgeridoo, or a fifth above/below, and hear what happens. You can also have many tubes and mix if you have enough channels available.
Seventh. Ambient microphones- omni polar pattern, one or two, placed in interesting rooms… far from the source. On Kosmopterix, only twice was reverb recorded. Once in the stone big hall next to the room where piano was in Kostrena, and the other time in huge Kino SC hall.

It is not essential to have all of these microphones, but if you have the possibility to do it, it definitely makes sense. What you can do here, and it is a time consuming but possibly rewarding thing, is to check on the rough mixes how different positions sound in different mixing proportions. That means that when you make a „cocktail“ from your sound maybe you can compensate the bass from the main microphone fully by bass microphone, and  maybe you don’t even need detail because you can extract them from stereo pair, and then you can concentrate on some special colour you’re trying to get. But  now this goes into the field of mixing. Funny thing about this process of making album is that all these phases (including microphone ones) are so interconnected, that in the end, in the mastering phase you can realize that you should have done something different in the beginning, like treated your room better. Acoustically.

What I would encourage you is to experiment, and give as much time needed as it takes until you are satisfied. To be really satisfied  first asks of you to get to know the situation. That means you can be satisfied with the first tested sound, but you might stop being satisfied after you hear the second tested sound. Comparison is the greatest tool of advancing here. But when it gets to the point that you are not sure of the difference, then it is probably not so important anymore. Keep yourself sane!

Good luck, and let me know about your results!

P.S. See how it went for us while recording 7 meter didgeridoo, with 8 microphones, in a 1000 seats hall.

Microphone and preamp sound tests with examples

Here I would now like to give some examples of recording didgeridoo so that words being used gain some meaning. I will try to keep myself from commenting these sound and less sound didgeridoo sound examples, so you can make your own judgment.

I want to point out some things before the show begins.

1. When I recorded these files, they were for my needs only. At that time I did not think about posting them on the Internet so everyone can have benefit of it. They were made to satisfy me, and not any other condition. I say that because tests weren’t laboratoric with high level of quality control, but you can still get a lot out of them if you want to.
2. I do this test/review/tutorial more for didgeridoo freaks than for gear freaks. Simply because I myself fall more in the first category, and because first category is lacking tests as this. With that in mind, I elaborate further these tests.
3. It is VERY IMPORTANT that you adjust levels of the sound files if you want to compare properly. Otherwise, almost always louder clip will sound better, and that could be a really strange taste of sound… It is just a little adjustment in your player/DAW, but it means a world of a difference.
4. I have recorded uncountable (well for computer it is countable and it is 1463) sound files before I started real recording, only for tests. I have tried to have an appropriate documentation – in my notebook and in my file names, but it is possible that I have made some mistakes. I have made a choice which I thought is not too big and not too useless.

How I recorded

I recorded a C didgeridoo I use very often, and which I used on 3 songs on Kosmopterix. I “know” the sound of this didgeridoo, and the test sounds I could repeat relatively similarly each time. I did test also on other didges and other songs, but it would take the focus out of this text. Recording was done in the room described at Chapter 3, always at the same spot. Didgeridoo was lifted about 35 cm from the ground and it had absorber underneath. More about that next time. I recorded at various distances, but chose to present 23cm distance as it is between the worlds of huge bass and clearness.  I am aware that not all of these mics sound the best on this distance, and to get the “best” results distances would probably have to be different for every mic, but then we are in too big story. So we keep it as simple as possible, and we go to the gear list.

Gear list

Microphones

- Large diaphragm condensers: Rode K2, Rode Classic 2, Violet – The wedge

- Ribbons: Royer R121, Royer R122V

- Dynamic: ElectroVoice ND 468

Preamps: Impact II – in-built mic preamps in TC Electronic StudioKonnekt 48, Universal Audio LA 610 signature edition, Rupert Neve Designs Portico 5032, Thermionic Culture Earlybird 1.2, Forssell Technologies SMP-2

Conversion: TC Electronic StudioKonnekt 48

Samples

There are not samples of every mic on every preamp, because I did not have all at the same time, but I believe you can follow the comparison anyway. Just one comment, because now is a good chance not to forget. I am often asked why I don’t  use dynamic microphone on didge. Here you can find the answer. If not, then maybe it is not your answer. I know the price difference here is very big, but even so, you can get a condenser mic sounding relatively similar to these (in opposition to dynamic mics) for much less money. And I still do use dynamic mic sometimes live, but we’ll discuss it later.

OK, here is the box with peculiar treasure – left click to play or right click and save link as(s) to download;

• EV468_Rupert_Neve_Designs_Portico_5032_23_cm_mic_distance
• Violet_the_wedge_ua_LA610_sig_23cm_mic_distance
• Violet_The_Wedge_TCElectronic_StudioKonnekt_48_23_cm-mic_distance
• Royer_R_122V-Forsell_smp2_23_cm_mic_distance
• Royer_R122V-Termionic_Culture_Earlybird12_23_cm_mic_distance
• Royer_R122_TCElectronic_StudioKonnekt_48_23_cm-mic_distance
• Royer_R121_ua_LA610_sig_23cm_mic_distance
• Royer_R121_Rupert_Neve_Designs_Portico_5032_23_cm_mic_distance
• RodeK2-Forsell_smp2_23_cm_mic_distance
• Rode_K2-Termionic_Culture_Earlybird12_23_cm_mic_distance
• Rode_K2_ua_LA610_sig_23cm_mic_distance
• Rode_K2_TCElectronic_StudioKonnekt_48_23_cm-mic_distance
• Rode_K2-_Rupert_Neve_Designs_Portico_5032_23_cm_mic_distance
• Rode_Classic2_ua_LA610_sig_23cm_mic_distance
• Rode_Classic2_TCElectronic_StudioKonnekt_48_23_cm-mic_distance
• Rode_Classic2-_Rupert_Neve_Designs_Portico_5032_23_cm_mic_distance

Enjoy your listening!

Du

Gear choices for didgeridoo recording

This is one tricky chapter, as I am not really commercial person, and yet I would like to share this aspect. So some names will inevitably show up and be aware that I am in no connection to them, apart that I use equipment of some of the names. And some I enjoy very much.

BASSics

Since I don’t know the level of recording knowledge – didgeridoo related or not – of the reader of this text, I would start with some very basic explanations. If you are an experienced recording engineer, just skip this part, and if you are very experienced, skip the whole text =)

This is a rough scheme of how di(d)gital recording and post recording process go.

Sound source in our case is didgeridoo.

Mics are really straight forward devices. Mics can be dynamic or condenser, or ribbon. Some basic knowledge about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microphone

More about difference of LDC (large diaphragm condenser) and SDC (small diaphragm condenser), dynamic and condenser mics, sensitivity, polar patterns and much more, in this highly recommended text: http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Microphone-University/Lite.aspx

Preamps in short serve the purpose of amplifying level of mic to be appropriate for further processing, for example recording. They have their own character(istics) and that is a very strong point.

AD (analogue-> digital) converter converts the analogue electric signal into series of 0s and 1s which are understandable to the machines known as computers. And computer is a computer. Lazy robot that doesn’t walk, but constantly calculates something.

There can be more options in the chain of didgeridoo recording, but this is the most basic one, and this is the one we had constantly.

In the post recording process one wants to tailor the sound of didgeridoo to a certain measure. Compressors adjust dynamic level, EQs adjust frequencies, summing mixer puts many channels into two, DA converter puts the sound from 0s and 1s into analogue cable…feel free to google it if you are interested.

My personal recording history

To get the real idea what was going on in the background of Kosmopterix (my2009 solo didgeridoo album), our story has to go few years back.

My demo CD was recorded with one vocal dynamic microphone and, I think, a Creative soundcard, something like e-mu 0404. I also had some no-high-end (euphemism) Alesis mixer I half used. At that time it was all another world to me that I did not understand. I almost did not want to take any part in it – now I close my eyes and play – and you do the buttons. But soon after it was recorded, and I listened to it, I realized I will have to get involved. I don’t use this equipment anymore, well, I do use mixer for the rehearsals, but I do not consider this equipment as a waste of money. I look at that as sort of paying a didgeridoo sound school.

The next step was a better microphone. Best buy at that time in that area was Rode K2. So I took my chances with it. And I was amazed at the difference. On Rode K2, and a Tascam card, almost whole album „Iz dubina besvjesnih“ was recorded. So I found K2 to be useful, but it alone could not bring in The Sound. I was still only very little involved in the sound making – still I think this was another logical step in my school of didgeridoo recording. Total investment around 1000€. Good for amateur recordings, demo CDs etc…

But now things grew bigger and bigger, I was playing more and more, what you would call „professionally“ – earning for life, feeding the family, so the next jump was exponential in a way.  I was feeling frustrated how I can’t get it sound right.  I record and expect the rhinoceros running out from the speakers, and a little mouse comes out. Squeaks and goes back in. For Kosmopterix I really wanted to make a difference, so I cleared a large space for it and started. From scratch, with big willingness to learn.

I borrowed every piece of equipment that made sense and tested it. I have made not hundreds, but thousands of recordings. It took me months to do. I have read about it before, in books, on forums, about microphones, preamps, converters, EQs, compressors, summing mixers…  but  only after trying them things started to make sense.

The GEAR LIST

Here I want to mention gear I have chosen for recording, and I would give some useful links. If I find an appropriate way, I will attach some gear test so you can make judgment for yourself. I was looking in vain for a list like this before recording Kosmopterix, so I hope it will make somebody happy as it would make me happy if I had found it when I needed it.

MICs

My main mic was inspired by the new Calexico album (Carried to Dust). Sound was so good, rich, warm, juicy, that I had to ask for advice a recording artist from Wavelab studio. He proposed a ribbon microphone, and in the end it was a ribbon mic by Royer, model R122V.

I also needed stereo microphones to give „wings“ to the recording.  After a lot of research, and many listenings, my choice was Schoeps Mk2.

I was still using Rode K2 for some detail or mouth/nose sounds capturing.

Other than that, I was also using Neumann KM 184 for same/similar purpose.

I was using Oktava’s m12s for many purposes, from close up „bass“ mic to acoustic object micing. Or even as „wing“ microphones when the Schoeps would go to Yr for guitar or to Ritosha for piano. Royer R122 was another great „bass“ mic. I used Blue’s „Mouse“, Rode’s NT 55s, some Geffell mic  I don’t remember the model, some AKGs… But those were not really up front.

PREAMPs

I have had a long search for preamps…

The two main preamps were Thermionic Culture Earlybird 1.2 and Forssell Technologies Smp-2 . I realized how good preamps (like these) can make your mic sound as it was a class better. Other preamps we used were Presonus ADL 600, Focusrite red 6, and preamps found in Prismsound Orpheus.

COMPRESSORs

Thermionic Culture Phoenix MC

Groove Tubes Glory Comp

Universal Audio LA-2A

Audio Design Recording Scamp, I think these ones

EQUALIZERs

Some old Neumann equalizers… I forgot which… Then Red Focusrite, Blue Focusrite…the rest I don’t remember…=)

CONVERTER

Prismsound Orpheus – Very very nice sound. I was amazed how it lifted everything to a new level- the clarity, the depth, the airiness…

SUMMING MIXER

Thermionic Culture Fat Bustard was a right choice of name in every aspect.

Reverbs, sound FX

Main reverb on whole album is old EMT plate reverb

Sound FX came from two Ursa Major; Space Station and 626 I think.

AKG BX-15 Spring reverb

AKG BX-20 Spring reverb

It might be that I forgot, or deliberately didn’t go into details to make this readable, but I believe you get the picture.

But, I was not alone.

I had really tremendous help from guys at Mercenary Audio.  These guys are unbelievably knowledgeable and helpful.

I got great help from fellow Slavic Man, Mr Ivo Sedlaček of Velvet Mastering and Velvetstore – specialized in fine acoustic recording/production and offering adequate high end equipment.

I got local support from dear people at Audio Pro in terms of mics, preamps, cables, converters, and general support…  -thank you Sven, Jaki and Zoki.

And the one who put his back for me the most, my dear friend Igor from ZI Lighting;

You are very determined people reading to this point – do you know that?

In the next chapter; how you can add or subtract few thousand Euros of the value of your equipment just by centimeter movements of microphones.

Be happy!

Du

Part 3 –Room & Studio treatments and extra treatments…
Before I had an emphasized intention to record didgeridoo CD, I wanted to make myself a room where I can practice didgeridoo playing as much as I want, and record decently in it.
We encounter two „problems“ here: one is to make room soundproof- meaning no sound in or out. The other one is to make it nice to record in, in acoustical sense. One aspect of this is to make your recording room with as flat frequency response as possible. Due to reflections from floor, ceiling and walls, respective to dimensions of the room, some frequency  are boosted, some are squashed. Didgeridoo playing  it means that for example your drone sounds fine, but your first toot shakes the room and the recording. Second aspect is to lower the reverberation. Even though reverb can often sound better than dry (no reverb) recording, it is an uncontrollable factor which blurs the sound picture. In most cases you want to add it afterwards, and there are many many (many many) ways to do it.
So, being a student in various forms for a long time, first I bought myself a book. It was „Acoustic design for the home studio“ by Mitch Gallagher. Why?  It had good reviews on Amazon. It is simply written and has lots of practical advices/examples. Useful, and even more useful if you can read between the lines. Good to begin with.
What I found out inside of the book, is that  I will need a program which measures room frequency response. Thanks to Rumski forum I found out about a free programme RoomEQ – http://www.hometheatershack.com/roomeq/
Two or three professional programs were mentioned in the book, but at that time I had reasoning to go cheap while I was still learning. I did not know what kind of influence room treatment really has. I’ve listened to treated and untreated rooms, but never experienced both in one room.
You can also measure your room „manually“, but it takes much more time, and doesn’t seem like very very fun thing to do.
The other thing you need, weather you use the program or do it yourself is SPL meter. One recommended in the book  is this one:  http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=210366
With little e-bay magic, we could even get it to Croatia!
About the insulation I would only mention dense rockwool for floor and walls (I didn’t need to do anything with my ceiling because the room is on the highest floor in the building), double gypsum-cardboard and OSB boards on top of it on the floor. Double door heavy as hell (and by now hell should be rather heavy I suppose). The room is not really big, but has some good properties – no equal dimensions of more than two walls. And floor and ceiling are not parallel.
The first thing about absorption was to put 8 broadband absorbers to the ceiling, made with rockwool, separated 15cm from the wall. It made a big difference in the reeeveeerb, and helped to flatten the room response, but was far from superb.
Then to the room came one of the most expensive diffusers in the world, a stand with around 30 didgeridoos. There is also variation for zero (0) money- you bring some branches from the wood. Diffusers make the sound reflect not only in one direction and therefore weaken those frequencies that would boost by reflection between the walls. There are many  diffusers built for that purpose and they probably work much better than didgeridoos, but it was necessary to put them in the room.
Then we added 4 bass traps to 2 corners. They were made by triangles made of rockwool. Some big speakers ended up in one corner, turned to the corner. Another two big broadband absorbers were put  to the wall. And another bass trap.
When I had no more power and energy, Danka came, brought the happiness, carpets, one mattress we had for guests (1×2m), another mattress we had for ourselves (1.6×2m) and a Fatboy.
And voila! After few days of work we had something that can bear with sounds of didgeridoo. Moderately sized.
Here is the picture of frequency responce before and after.

Before is brown/green, after is blue. Should be observed after 50Hz, because speaker that I used for measuring  goes from 40Hz, and here certainly doesn’t have flat response. The higher part is also not really interesing because it doesn’t cause such a problem, especially at 24kHz where the graph ends. In the book a range from 50 to 250 Hz was observed and it was inside 13dB. From this graph you can see that from 50Hz till 1kHz we are inside 10dB. Not bad for  first time. Of course, it is possible that we made some mistake in the process of measuring, but nevertheless, the difference was very hearable and the relative differences present to back that up.
I think all costs did not surpass 500€. There was quite a lot of work. More than I thought.
In the meantime I bought three more books about this matter. From simple to encyclopaedia. I want to develop my  knowledge abou this further. And probably in the future build something interesting and nice to record in.
This room was used for Kosmopterix for recording of some songs. Some extra bass traps were put into. Also an absorber underneath the didge which was levitated…. But more about that later.
For now I just add two photos, of ceiling and didges on the wall.

In the time I made the room i also made two recordings. One is in treated room, and since I was not thoughtful enough to do also one in untreated room, I did one in the hallway which is most similar to this room.
Microphone was Rode K2, 20cm far from the didge, didge is in C, meaning  65Hz, first toot around 130Hz, preamp is Impact II on Studiokonnekt 48 soundcard.
Feel free to comment or contact me if you need anything.
Didge sound test – untreated room
Didge sound test – treated room

Part 2 – Song & didgeridoo instrument choice for Kosmopterix
I planned to record an album just before Storytellingstories in the end of 2007. Good thing I didn’t. First I did not know any time hole in Space to get 6 months in two days, second I still knew very very little about didgeridoo recording. And third – I did not have the songs even if I didn’t know it.
Storytellingstories was done as a theater show. Some of the songs were strong as individual pieces, and some had to be in the incorporated in the whole to gain sense and strength. On the album I wanted to have the first kind of beings.
It took me some time to realize this, and it is so etherical that it is hard to explain. But it was after one concert of Alexander Balanescu in May 2008 when things changed. I always admired Mr. Balanescu’s ability to reach with his violin far in Space to grab beauty and bring it to the present moment. After that concert I was in strong non-mind realization that it is ability of every human being. The ability to reach out and get an idea – beauty – life. I can’t really explain why all of a sudden that made so much sense. And if it is a believe or knowledge, is not really important, what is important that it was a guideline for me.
Since Balanescu’s father was writing an Unfinished Book, I’ve put Unfinished Songs the working title of this album. It made a lot of sense because I finally treated songs as living beings which have life independent of me, able to evolve and change, so they are unfinished always. Like me. It also made a relief of the perfectionism approach. Because if it is „unfinished“ it does not have to be „perfect“ in one captured condition. It already contains all of its states and already is perfect if there is sense in such a term…
What followed is one of the most important processes for me. I listened again all of my songs, and I tried to be separated from them, trying to feel what I hear. I wanted to distinguish which songs are based on technique, and which have some idea that created life in it. I obviously wanted the later of the two. Of course each song has both worlds, but somehow the process went very easily. I guess what was most important was separation and awareness, but these are connected anyway. It was deep realization process. Unfinished.
I had about the half of album. The rest followed quite naturally. No special stress, only constant work on it.
The sound of the album is much affected by my instruments choice for the songs. I followed my choice of instruments from before, when the songs were made. Now when I come to think of it, I’m not sure what to think.
There are many questions that arise here. Do I really know how my didgeridoo sounds? Do I really know how my song sounds? Do I really know how it will sound when properly recorded? How much do I want to change sound after I recorded it? So it is complex overview of the whole process which gives you an answer, and it seems it only comes with experience. But to give some guidelines, I will list the points I found usefull.

• Composition of the song done both with acoustical playing, and playing to microphone. The first is what I guess every didgerdioo player does, but It was useful for me to follow the process of creation with microphone. Not only to record and listen afterwards, but to play and listen to the headphones – that way I can alter the things in real time. I don’t have to listen, remember, try to change, listen again to find out if I was successful. Also another point here is that I play most of the time through amplification, so it gives me beter insight of what it sounds like, and how I can adapt the sound to the microphone- dynamics, changing microphone distance, reverbs, etc…

• EQ-ing can make instrument sound like another instrument. So if you have a „problem“ in your didgeridoo sound- this could be a solution, but it can also be a problem if you didn’t have it before. So I did not go that far to say – ok this didge has something I really like and also something I really don’t like but I will record it anyway and I will surgically remove what I don’t like later. I can’t say that it is a bad approach, but I just don’t have enough knowledge to anticipate how it will sound in the end. I went with the philosophy that recording must sound as close to final sound as possible. Generally I would say that didge volume does not matter. But the „fullness“ factor matters. It is a combination of colour (spectrum) and dynamics – in the sense of reacting to player’s intentions. Articulation was very important to me – so that didgeridoo does not get messy when speed rises. I think that in technical terms it is a matter of sufficient amount of mids and presence (5K) in spectrum of didge. But take this with reserve, I never actually checked this.

• The opposite approach -switching between didgeridoos of very different sound quality and pitch. That was a nice thing to find out something about a song and its sound. Often it is hard to choose between the small differences, and it gives you less insight of what really is what you’re dealing with. It assumes that you can change between didges easily. I use the kind of technique that does not care much about pitch or length of didg, so I can easily switch between didges separated by half an octave or more. It gives me some precious information. If you can do it, I recommend. If you can’t…then maybe it is not important anyway.

There are still many open questions here, and they fit in the category of fine art of making and recording didgeridoo songs. I guess many will be answered by experience gained from high awareness in the process. And many will be only Unfinished Answers.

I am aware that this text can be written a bit more systematically, and I will rearrange every text once the story is over and put it to a new place.
Next time we deal with strange interior decorations or how to make your room sound good.

In year 2008 I decided to record a new didgeridoo solo cd. It was an easy decision after I was brutally persuaded by my friends that I must do it.
Recording an album can be quite a philosophical quest. Why do I do it? What do I want with it? How should I do it? What songs?…
But I do not want to go into absolute wideness and depth of recording questions. I’d like to keep this as a sort of tutorial/help/directions/thoughts for people who want to record didgeridoo, and also a little story of its own. I will develop it further in time, so I would very much appreciate feedback on how it can be improved. I will be very happy if you find this text helps you make better didgeridoo recording.
I have to make clear what my goal with this didgeridoo  recording was. I devote my life to exploring didgeridoo as a world of possibilities – it terms of technical art, in terms of music making, in terms of instrument making and now in the terms of recording. The last one puts everything before mentioned into one point which can easily be transferred from me to you. During my life I have heard many many many didgeridoo recordings. They were of all kinds. From very bad to very good. However, there were very few of the very good and quite some of the opposite kind. I myself, have never made a recording that I considered to be good. But I had this vision that sound on a recording can go beyond and beyond of what is known, and that it can allow you to express in the ways impossible otherwise. I do not mean only in the terms of overdubbing, „perfect“ playing, digital editing, sound FX or anything like that.
Sound of didgeridoo can be very complex, and can carry a lot of information inside itself. Usually not all information is available when played live/acoustically. Why? You can understand that if you put your ear very close to didgeridoo when somebody plays. You will hear things you never heard, and things you heard before will sound like never before. It is a hidden world. You can make a concert for only one person if you want to give that information. It is like playing for one small man standing on the edge of your tube. Everything you play is really big, and sounds inside the tube are hearable. So one point for me is to drag out all of this sounds of invisible orchestra.
You could also say that recorded didgeridoo sound is generally one dimensional, maybe sometimes two dimensional. I wanted to make it a real 3D experience.
There is also another point that sound of the didgeridoo is very specific in its nature. Usually the recordings I hear are quite „metallic“ in character, to oppose the „wood“ character I wanted to get. The warmth you feel when you hear it acoustically, transfered to electrical signal.
These were my two main points that I wanted to achieve. In the beginning I had almost no clue how. But I had no reserves. I did not care how much energy, money, time, travelling, learning , mistaking it takes. I had to explore and see if this feeling I had, about how didgeridoo can sound is true. In this world. For me.
This journey is long so I divide it in separate chapters. The chapters are about the choices of instruments and songs, room/studio extra treatments, equipment choices, microphones placement, listening recorded material, mixing, little bit of mastering and an overwiew of all. Everything with real life examples I went through in recording Kosmopterix.