Making of Dubravko Lapaine’s new didgeridoo solo album Dubokobud. This video deals with basic ideas for the whole album, didgeridoo recording techniques and microphones. See how additional didgeridoos can be used for recording didgeridoo solo.

I just finished recording my new didgeridoo solo album Dubokobud (The Deep Waker). I would like to share a bit of this experience while it is still steaming fresh, and I would like to give some possible valuable and comforting realizations.

The story of Dubokobud

Without knowing, I started recording new didgeridoo solo album when I accidentally played and recorded sketch of  “Duboki oblici oblaci” (Deep Shapes Clouds). This song/creature/entity/movable form showed me how open the frame of a song is. Meaning that one song is not “one song”, it is a flow.

The first song/creature/entity/movable form showed me how open the frame of a song is.

An energy flow which can sound like some “type” of song. The openness of this song and its unusual sound inspired me to record the whole album in this open manner.This means I was less conceptual, less thinking about new songs. I prepared them on the raw side during my long practicing sessions.

The process of recording

I cannot say that I was well prepared when I entered the studio. Because I didn’t really know what I’ll do. I can say I was perfectly prepared as everything was going, flowing, easily and with force to me.  I had no expectations so I wasn’t blocking momentary inspirations. I realized how well I did my homework in the sense of basic preparations I needed. Strength, relaxation and control. I realized how important it was for me to have this continuous work with sound development. In fact, I had many realizations which I think are of essential nature to all humans, so I will list them here.

Realizations:

1. We always have what we have and not what we will have. It is very easy to fall into trap that future will bring us “better Self” who will have more skills, better didgerdoos, better microphones, better songs… But we cannot record the album in the Future. We can only record it in the  Now.

I had many realizations which I think are of essential nature to all humans, so I list them here.

2. Know and accept your performing possibilities. I would like to emphasize this point of first point even more! I find it a great blessing not to go after the performance which overstreches us in the moment. It is much easier to record something on a new level of performance when this new level comes to the whole being. A song out of your reach can only happen by divine intervention sometimes also called luck. This is difficult to force. So accepting your current possibilities will help you keep sane and balanced creature. Which is a big deal in potentially very stressful process.

3. Getting to the new level goes in many small steps. And “new levels” again form steps which lead to “Big new levels”. In practice it means that every practice leads you to a new place. These accumulated make you significantly better player year after year. It is difficult to skip years, much easier to pass through days.

4. Consistent effort is the key! In physics there is a formula for momentum: mass times velocity equals force times time. This means if you want to make a great momentum and you don’t have a great force ( I don’t) – you need a lot of time in which you constantly affect this mass by your force. I realize more and more how everything I do accumulates. And since I am constantly “in the game” – I have little energy loss due to forgetting what everything was all about, and repeating the same mistakes. I hope you get this point in this amount of words.

5. Consistency is a great quality also of your producer/technician. If you are able to explore and grow with one (wo)man in your sound and music ventures – this is a great gift. This means deeper understanding, mutual goals and less energy to explain wishes, situations. I had a great luck to have this!

6. Didgeridoo is still a very unexplored instrument. We still don’t know what hides inside this incredible instrument. It is a corridor to ourselves. Do not underestimate the vastness of unexplored! Do not think you know too much, do not stop to explore the sound, do not judge yours or others’ didgeridoo music/playing and you will be rewarded greatly!

New Dimensions

I was honestly astonished what came out of me in Kramasonik studio. I am astonished in that measure that I don’t feel it was my “own” work. I felt a strong Pulse through which everything was pushed into this world. I observed my body in the process. My body not as “me”, but something I am tied to, an archetypal property of all humans. I noticed it is so much more able than my thoughts could direct it. I noticed I have given it right exercises, right treatment for what I wished it to do. But then it did it all by itself. This body moved the dimensions of what was known didgeridoo sound to me. I would like to motivate you as much as possible to experience it yourself. It is possible on every level. When you first manage circular breathing you will notice your body is doing that “automatically” or by itself. The greatness of this feeling can grow and grow as you accumulate more energy in your cosmical lake. A lake that is always behind you wherever you go.

The greatness of this feeling can grow and grow as you accumulate more energy in your cosmical lake.

Hope this was helpful and comforting for your own recording journey.

- Du

This chapter is about how to combine good use of modern technology  and timeless tube called didgeridoo to get the desired sound.  In our case, we will be shown how to get a good  „kick-didge“. Even more than that, this article will show you how to transform your well gamma radiated „ Dr Bruce Banner sound“ into „The Incredible Hulk sound“, which we will shortly call „THE PULSE“. (For those who are catching up – Didgeridoo Bass Generation Chapter 1 and Chapter 2)

How to uncover your Incredible Hulk didgeridoo power!!!

Global WARNING! Sounds presented here  are based on bass. You will not be able to experience the essence without good enough speakers  and sounds played sufficiently loud. If you don’t have good speakers, try listening on the headphones. If you can’t hear strong differences, try to find a good sound system for reproduction of these sounds.

Reminder is ‘sense finder’

So just to remind ourselves of our great accomplishments we made so far. First we presented the question of getting the different sounds of an orchestra/band in a didgeridoo. We focused on the kick drum. Among 4 quite different didgeridoos and 4 different sounds/techniques we chose the one which is most „bass impressive“. Then we compared two sounds to the real kick drum and found out we somehow miss relatively lots of kick drum quality.

So now what?

Now we can get good inspiration about what to do with the sound to make it closer to the kick drum. We can alter three things:
- Playing
- Way of recording
- Sound in post processing
One quality of the kick drum that comes quite in front is the „kick“ part of it. This part we can sense in strong quick transients, and 100 Hz bass sound.  So what we might be inspired to do is to make stronger tongue/diaphragm attack and make sound as short as possible. Still, there is a factor of time to generate sound/bass in didgeridoo – see next paragraph.
About recording,  I chose not to alter anything as I had a feeling it was already fine. But you can do it for yourself, if you feel there is a hidden catch there.
In post processing, we can do something to balance the frequencies and draw out the most desirable ones.

Something not to forget

We do not want to forget that kick drum is a drum wheras kick didge is a didge. Drum generates sound in a different way than tube and has different laws of physics that apply. Even without understanding physical background, imagine how different these sound  generations are.  Therefore one very important aspect of this research is to have a good overview and therefore not get stuck in the unimportant details. We do not wish to reproduce exactly the drum with the didge. What is underneath all this is finding a way to understand didgeridoo sound and didgeridoo playing possibilities better. So we need to extract the essence from the observed and use it to our best knowledge.

Getting flushed by the sound…

As mentioned, I have noticed two qualities I would like to incorporate into the „kick didge“. First is that I wanted lots of transients. Transients are one strong factor that reveals the instrument.  In this sense transients also give us the power and explosion of the kick sound. Another thing I tried to accomplish is to have my kick didge sound last as short as possible. So as soon as the bass would be generated- which lasts longer than in kick drum –the bass would be diminished, as fast as possible.

So this was the first part of the process, playing part. The post processing part consists of two stages:
- Compression
- Equalization
By compressing the  kick sound I want to get more transients out. By equalization I wanted to adjust especially first harmonic of didgeridoo to be stronger, to give the kick. Apart from that I wanted to draw out more presence, again to have more transients and produce more of „kshsss“ sound.

Flushed by the sound of didgeridoo

In a way it is like approaching this sound in two dimensions. One is glass breaking  of huge water tank which produces high penetrating sound and makes us close our eyes in anticipation of the force. Second is unleashing of this extreme amount of water which pushes us back instantly. So we want to be „flushed by the sound“.

Doing the kicks

My personal choice for kick drum sound was didgeridoo sound 3A. Because to my ears it was the closest to kick drum. But you can try with any of your favorite sounds.

First I tried to play the sound as kick-full as possible. Then I processed it with compressor and EQ. This is what I got:

Improved kick didge sound

Now let’s compare it to the kick drum:

Improved kick didge and kick drum comparison

To my ears it sounds much better than before. I hope we managed to satisfy your ears as well.
Still we did not use „the most bass impressive“ sound. Let us hear what is there for us.

Turning Dr Banner into The Incredible  Hulk

The most bass impressive sound was voted  to be didgeridoo sound 1B. I did not use it as my first choice of kick didge as it has too much of sub bass compared to kick drum. Still I followed the principle of explosive playing – meaning that I played it with very strong attack and as short as possible.

Now I have two versions of this sound. One with milder (but still strong) sub bass, and one with super-strong sub bass.  This is how it sounds:

1b goes almost Hulk sound

1b turns into the Incredible Hulk sound

Incredible Hulk meets kick drum

Weather you like the Incredible Hulk sound or not,  is a matter of your preference to green;-) This is just a demonstration of what can be achieved if you wish for bass invasion.

The bass invasion

The Didgeridoo Hulk sound has too much of sub bass to compare it properly to kick drum, so I chose another sound to compare it to. It is the sub bass of Minimoog (synthesizer). This is how they sound together:

Didgeridoo Hulk meets Minimoog

Again I am by not trying to get/find  „better“ sound. I only look to understand what qualities didgeridoo bass can have.  At this point I perceive it as a complete, primordial pulse which exists in its own space and no time.

The PULSE

So this is the last bass sound I will offer you.

The Pulse - Primordial Didgeridoo Sound...

The Pulse is similar to “The Hulk” didgeridoo sound, only it is played with no restriction. This means I gave enough time for the bass to generate fully and I played it more relaxed, with less attack. I admit, ThePulse is a didgeridoo sound I enjoy very much. It is simple, with underlying complexity and potential, direct, profound and clear. In a way it is a unit of primordial didgeridoo sound.

The Pulse

Spiraling in and spiraling out

There is nothing special I would conclude about this sound journey. Once we spiraled out it is time to spiral in again. Leaving open space around things we perceive might be crucial in perceiving them in the deepest possible way. Anyway, I hope you had fun reading this. I still have some articles in preparation about which refer both to more general and more specific sound,  with more or less resemblance to other instruments.  It takes lots of time and energy for me  to write articles like this, so know that you can motivate me with your always great comments and insights!

Spiraling out!

Welcome to the next chapter about didgeridoo bass generation, which reveals what were the action didgeridoo heroes from the previous chapter. It also gives us some detail about kick didge, how it is generated frequency-wise and timewise. We are shown how kick didge sounds in comparison to kick drum, and some new questions arise.

Point of view

I would like to stress one very important aspect of this research and that is that observation is prior to conclusion.  A high quality observation is done in mental space, with no noise of mind tendencies. High quality observation gives us facts,  where inductive concluding sometimes is nothing more than another assumption. This research starts with „do not assume anything“  point,  and tends to end there also. It is easy to fall into trap of early conclusion, and miss the real truth.  So let’s try to keep that in mind together with the beautiful cosmic traffic sign:

„Instead of looking for truth, stop cherishing your opinions.“

And we continue to move as light as light.

Results of the Kick-Didge test

On the date 30/10/10 without the original kick drum sound given for direct comparison, and without knowing which didgeridoo is which, the results for the biggest bass impression, comparing different techniques on same didgeridoos were as follows:

Interesting enough,  different techniques were  recognized as most bass impressive for different didgeridoos. B for didgeridoo 1, D for didgeridoo 2, A for didgeridoo 3, and B for didgeridoo 4. In sum of them all, B would be the bassiest sound  and, a bit surprisingly, A – which is in a very strong  first place for didgeridoo 3 – is found to be  the least bass impressive overall.
So it seems without much conclusion that the most bass impressive sound technique varies from didgeridoo to didgeridoo.

The contenders

Let us see now what our contending didgeridoos were and learn a bit more about them.

DIDGERIDOO #1
Our first didgeridoo is somewhat known  „Needle“ didgeridoo in this incarnation called „Iglica III“. A 232cm long F# made of bloodwood eucalyptus. One to be the least noticed in the acoustic playing, due to its low volume. However , it is the didgeridoo I use the most lately. I think that I’ve counted 7 songs that I play on this didgeridoo, which is more than any other didgeridoo that I own.  Here you can find out more about The Needle didgeridoo.

See it in action:

DIDGERIDOO #2
Our second test didgeridoo is probably the most famous of all my didgeridoos, father and mother to all didgeridoos that came after it, my white C didgeridoo, prototype of Moytze.  200cm long, relatively acoustically loud, with dark but full spectrum.

Here you can see the original didgeridoo. And see the evolution of Moytze didgeridoo.

See it in action in its days of glory;-):

DIDGERIDOO #3
The third didgeridoo is a new design called “Extreme Dream E”, shortly EDE. It is 190cm long bluegum eucalyptus didgeridoo in E. It is a new logic of didgeridoo that still needs a lot of exploration, but already it gives great results in detail, voice transparency and very interesting toot intervals and colours. Also it is quite loud compared to the C didgeridoo. Learn more about this didgeridoo.

And see it in action here:

DIDGERIDOO #4
Our fourth test didgeridoo is the newest beast of all. It is developed probably on the „superdidg“ technology, known to humankind even years before this article, but kept in relative secret. It is 187cm long Eb bloodwood eucalyptus didgeridoo. Does not have its own web page yet, but soon will. This didgeridoo is extremely loud and has very full bodied sound, coming from his upper bass range, also with lot of detail and very nice and easy toots.

See it in action a bit here:

Didgeridoo comparison results

So how do these tubes compare one to the other, we find out here:

These results are interesting as I witnessed approximately the opposite comments when I played these didgeridoos unamplified, live. Regarding volume they are put in order, 1 being the least loud, 4 being the loudest. In frequencies, they are almost in order, only 3 is a little bit higher in pitch than 4.  Maybe the sheer depth of didgeridoo causes a strong bass impression. But also, maybe there is even stronger reason found in the logic of techniques 1-3 which are  mostly made in the logic of didgeridoo #1, and also the miking technique is what suits didgeridoo #1 most. More about how to make your sound BIG particularly with this kind of didgeridoo, but generally with any kind of didgeridoo can be found in this Microphone Positioning article.

As announced,we will make no more conclusions, but only notice that generally acoustically least impressive didgeridoo was voted as convincingly most bass impressive didgeridoo when miked in a certain way.

Comparison to the „real thing“

Let’s hear now how our action heroes hold against the real kick drum!  This is (more or less) how the kick drum sounds. The ending sound is a bit cut off  hihat which is not important for our story, it reminds of breath sound, doesn’t it?

Now let’s compare it to the didgeridoo sound we found to be most bass impressive. It is 1B sound.

Hmmm… Not quite the same, is it?
It seems to be more than „bass impression“ in the kick drum. Compared to didgeridoo sound it’s somehow shorter and more explosive, sounds higher, has more transients … feel free to continue the sequence for yourself. Let’s try another sound, that has more of this properties, for example 3A.

Still not the same, is it?
Why? The kick drum still kicks harder. Let us examine a bit deeper to find out some new facts about these sounds.  Maybe it will open our ears, eyes and mind about what where and when makes these differences in sound generation.

Looking into the sound

This is what happens in exactly one half of the second.

The upper is didgeridoo sound 1B. The lower sound is the kick drum in the tail of which is a captured sound of hihat. That tail is not important to us, we focus only on the beginning and we see that it takes much less time before this kick drum reaches it’s peak and in a way it is more concrete/direct in the beginning. It also lasts much shorter.

If we take another zoom in we see that kick drum has more sinusoidal shape. This is due to the fact that didgeridoo has a lot of superponed waves (harmonics) on the main (fundamental) wave. We can read that from picture as medium sized shapes, peaks and valleys on big black shapes. If we put our nose closer to the monitor, we can see that both didgerido and  kick drum have small shapes (some higher frequencies), and that kick drum has more of those.

But this kind of observation is already frequency domain, so we can use frequency analyzer to see what’s happening.

This is the frequency analysis of a kick drum:

And this is the frequency analysis of the 1B didgeridoo sound in F#:

If we compare the two we can see that didgeridoo has a dominant sub bass,  around 40Hz, where kick drum has dominant bass around 100Hz and much less of sub bass around  40Hz. Now is a good moment, if it wasn’t already before, to notice that what we call bass actually has (at least) two frequencies. Something below 100Hz and something above 100Hz. Do we know how to recognize them? We’ll come back later here, now let’s see a bit more of the spectrum.

When we observe the peaks it is not important to see the absolute value, only the relative position between them is important. This is what describes sound. So we can see that didgeridoo has many frequencies that can compare in loundess to the fundamental one, many more compared to the kick drum case. Are these higher frequencies important for the kick-drum sound?  Generally they seem not to be, but there might be some special ones that could be important.

There is no need to describe now in more detail what is in the picture, you can see for yourself, and most probably we will come back to it again, anyway.

The nonconcluding conclusion

It is a subjective feeling,  but  with this direct comparison we might have noticed that our didgeridoo sounds did not bear a lot of kick drum quality. Also, kick-drum had much more of a kick quality. Is this the end of kick didg and of using didgeridoo as a drum? Should we go back to basic drone and play the didgeridoo how it is „supposed“  to play? Or play it traditionally? Maybe. Maybe not.
Maybe we find out more in the next chapter.
Maybe they are in the forest…

This is the introductory chapter of new didgeridoo generation of sounds, starting with didgeridoo bass generation of „kick-didge“. Didgeridoo players are very welcome to fill in the poll and leave the comment below about the tests presented here.

The Great Motivation…

After recording Kosmopterix many new questions about playing, making didgeridoos and recording didgeridoo arose. Even more so after recording Dronas as my knowledge has somewhat expanded. Now that I consider recording a new album these questions have become very crucial in my didgeridoo evolution.

The Story of Orchestra…

The story goes like this; Now all or most contemporary didgeridoo players that have certain experience in didgeridoo playing and sound will agree on the statement that „didgeridoo is a whole orchestra“. Especially if we apply the principles of parallel playing. But what does it mean? Is it just a fairytale and are we all children who need to grow up? What does it mean in practice? We are obviously speaking with certain dose of metaphor. We do not have to discuss if didgeridoo sounds exactly like string quartet or rock band. It does not. So again and again there is this crucial question „What does whole orchestra mean?“.  What does it mean sound-wise and music-wise?

Intro into the BASS-ics…

This  is a story difficult to unfold as it is difficult to find an anchor to start from. I chose to approach it firstly and primarily sound-wise, while having the playing & technique overview in the background. Since we have to start from the bass-ics, we will start from the famous didgeridoo bass sound.  I was in Kramasonik studio last week and did a few hours of tests about generation of didgeridoo bass,  with special emphasis on the search of the bass drum or kick drum in didgeridoo.  Called the „kick-didge“

About the test…

The concept of the test was to take four different didgeridoos and four different techniques that have bass drum feeling to some extent. Record and compare  these sixteen combinations. I did not put special effort into miking the didgeridoos. I used two microphones, Royer R122V and vintage AKG C12, both going through Forsell SMP-2 preamp and PrismSound converter. First three recordings were done at 4cm distance,the fourth at 8 cm distance as it made more sense. I would not elaborate about the didgeridoos and techniques, as I do not want you to make any mental conclusions, only listening.

About the result…

I will give my comparison observations and conclusions in next chapter, as again, I don’t want to influence you at this point. Now I only give you recordings and kindly ask to fill the holes in the polles below this. Different sounds within every recording are called A, B ,C, D and each sound is played twice.

Didgeridoo Bass drum test – Didgeridoo 1 – Sounds A B C D

Didgeridoo Bass drum test – Didgeridoo 2 – Sounds A B C D

Didgeridoo Bass drum test – Didgeridoo 3 – Sounds A B C D

Didgeridoo Bass drum test – Didgeridoo 4 – Sounds A B C D

Overall biggest bass didgeridoo

Please feel free to drop your comment about anything you have noticed in the recordings. I would especially appreciate if you elaborate a little bit on which sound you find most/least harmonious, most/least powerful, most/least interesting… or whatever comes to your mind.

You will find out which didgeridoo is which, which technique is which, and how they compare to the real kick drum in the next chapter. Soon. Only on the channel of… www.lapaine.com

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 (1x2m), another mattress we had for ourselves (1.6x2m) 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