Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Google

Results:

References: [ akg: 245 ] [ 414: 14 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. Re: AKG 414s outside? (score: 272)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:37:08 +1000
Hi Danny-- I've taken a pair in the field a few time. Of the large diaphragm mics I've used for ambient field recording, they didn't have the clarity I hoped for. I used them as M-S pairs and ORTF. I
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2006-08/msg00073.html (8,055 bytes)

2. AKG 414s outside? (score: 261)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:37:08 +1000
Forgive my many posts today...I am just at home and seeing all this today... Has anyone used AKG 414's outside? Obviously they are a classic utility mic in the studio, but what would they sound like
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2006-08/msg00072.html (7,530 bytes)

3. Re: AKG 414s outside? (score: 261)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:37:08 +1000
Posted by: "Danny Meltzer" I'd think the biggest problem would be in suspension and windscreening, their specs are not the best, but would work for some recording. You have to weigh the cost vs the r
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2006-08/msg00089.html (11,586 bytes)

4. Re: an introduction and request for mic advice (score: 46)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:26 +1000
Hi Alan & welcome to the list! Of the mics you list, the 480's with omni capsules on one of Curt's rigs directly into your 744T should be impressive for ambience. Curt's easy to cobble-up rigs: http:
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-01/msg00431.html (9,333 bytes)

5. Re: RFI re Rode NT4 stereo mic. (score: 28)
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 01:53:41 -0500
Hi Syd-- I've used NT3's in numerous outdoors applications but not the NT4. The specs suggest they're similar. Humidity: not unusually sensitive. Toughness: excellent. Tone: Bright, but definitely st
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2002-06/msg00120.html (11,156 bytes)

6. Re: mbho MBP 648 PZ (score: 20)
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:53:23 +1000
Hi Emil-- Too bad. At least there are no mysteries. Its my understanding that the measurement of mic self-noise _is_ difficult to do, especially in useful, perceptual terms for demanding applications
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2010-07/msg00155.html (11,106 bytes)

7. Re: Do we still love the NT1a? (score: 20)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:35:48 +1000
Actually that' s the ones I own, the 873r - I just forgot the r :) Well, It' s all a matter of taste after all, right ?? Let me state it otherwise, If I had both nt1a and u-87i available, I would def
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2009-09/msg00074.html (12,069 bytes)

8. Re: Blumlein (was Mid-side techinique with studio mics) (score: 20)
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 00:16:59 -0500
Hi Eric-- I wish all manufs produced polar pattern charts like AKG. Wow! I've tried 414's in the field and they did reveal pronounced off-axis warmth as those charts suggest. I understand that actual
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2006-04/msg00265.html (13,195 bytes)

9. Re: Self noise (score: 20)
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 23:10:41 -0500
Walt-- I agree, the measurements may not be ideal for uses where considerable gain (micing distance) is required but putting self noise and sensititivity together does seem to reveal the more transpa
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2002-08/msg00227.html (12,691 bytes)

10. Re: Self noise (score: 20)
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2002 02:33:19 -0400
Just remember it was pretty simplistic, I don't claim to be a expert on mic spec measurements. Just some rough rules I've worked out in trying to read specs. Once I have a mic in hand, I work out dif
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2002-08/msg00219.html (11,092 bytes)

11. Re: Self noise (score: 20)
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2002 23:51:36 -0500
Thanks for the clear explanation Walter! Number-wise, my simplistic understanding is that mics capable of excellent transparency (especially in low sound level environments where high-gain is common)
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2002-08/msg00215.html (14,128 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu