naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Re: Noise Pollution

Subject: Re: Re: Noise Pollution
From: Klas Strandberg <>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 03:06:18 +0100
At 11:12 2002-02-12 -0500, you wrote:
>I think you're correct for headphone listening, but for speakers so few
>people actually use them correctly that they rarely appreciate the stereo
>effect. But, you're right . . . if listened to correctly using a
>conventional stereo speaker setup, a stereo recording is more forgiving of
>background noise.

>As for listening at "too high a volume", you're absolutely correct. Nearly
>everyone does this and it makes traffic or airplane noise more of a problem
>than it really is. However, the flip side is that if you use real good mikes
>(like my MKH 20s) and record under calm and quiet conditions where there is
>little background rumble (such as a dawn chorus on a calm morning in a
>remote location), then your microphones will have plenty of "reach",
>allowing you to play back the chorus at a higher-than-normal volume for
>improved discrimination and greater enjoyment.

Agree.
>
>There is nothing inherently wrong with playing a recording back at a higher
>volume that what you might have heard while actually standing there,

Agree, I just wanted to point this out, as it is an important part of
"understanding wildlife recording". It is important to understand that there
are limits for what mic's can do, and high volume listening often reveal
those limits. I suggested "a more self-forgiving recordist" also giving his
equipment a fair chance.
 
>especially if you wish you were closer to a particular subject or
>soundstage. A parabola basically does this for you . . . allowing for a much
>louder and cleaner recording than what you'd get with an omni mike where
>you're standing. A parabola allows you to "snatch your subject from the busy
>background", much like a good stereo mike setup allows you to "reach out for
>greater appreciation and discrimination". 

Yes, the parabol creates a forgiving illusion for high volume listening. 

But if you're going to "zoom-in"
>using your mike setup, it should be a good mike and background noise should
>be minimal. 

Yes - minimal. 
>
>As most of you know, I go to great lengths with my SASS setup to get
>pristine recordings free of background noise, which gives the listener the
>option of turning the volume up as far as is comfortable.
>
>Lang
>
>
>> No, Lang, it does make a difference, especially when played back to
>> "ordinary" people. When stereo, they often use words like "natural, cute,
>> beautiful, alive" etc. And many times you can see a beginning smile on their
>> lips. They don't comment on distant traffic, for example. People like us
>> tend more to seek for "clinically" noise-free recordings.
>> 
>> When traffic for example cannot be avoided, the best way is to make it as
>> "natural" as possible. Actually, I don't mind at all recording robins,
>> starlings and thrushes in the middle of London. But then the traffic noise
>> has to sound "live and natural".
>> 
>> But what Syd is saying "...at all the noise there is which I just hadn't
>> noticed.." is probably something else. Mic's are not ears, that is one fact
>> - and we also tend to replay our recordings much louder than in reality. I
>> very often put an open stereo mic in my garden, and monitor with headphones
>> inside the house. Without thinking, I ALWAYS set the replay level louder
>> than reality. It might have to do with that "the impression of reality" -
>> when being there, is soooo much bigger than what you get with headphones or
>> loudspeaker. This we try to compensate, perhaps, by playing louder.
>> 
>> Please - all - do this, just for learning: Put the mic's on a tripod. Start
>> a recording. Take the headphones on and off and set the output level so that
>> it sounds "the same" with and without headphones. Remember which setting you
>> used. Then use the same setting again, back home. Enjoy! Much less inherent
>> noise and traffic noise than what you (probably) are used to.
>> 
>> Then it is another thing that we want! the recordins with such a quality
>> that they can be replayed at a high volume level. That is another thing!
>> That is where manipulation comes in, because when you listen to something
>> too loud, "everything" changes, the whole sound picture changes - and you
>> have to look for a totally different "balance" between the sounds.
>> 
>> You can also do another experiment: record a warbler in your garden, mono.
>> Put a broadband loudspeaker in the tree where the warbler was, when
>> recorded. Enjoy! All the errors which you usually suffer from, are gone. The
>> garden is made for bird song, your living room is not.
>> 
>> Klas
>> 
>> At 08:20 2002-02-12 -0500, you wrote:
>>> While stereo may sound better when played-back properly on a stereo system,
>>> I doubt that a stereo signal allows for that much more "mental processing"
>>> than monaural, simply because most of the noise pollution will be in both
>>> channels anyway.
>>> 
>>> Lang
>>> 
>>>> Walter wrote (in part):
>>>> 
>>>>> From: Walter Knapp <>
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I consider the stereo parabolic to be the biggest advantage when I moved
>>>>> from my previous mono parabolic. You then allow people to use the very
>>>>> best filter of all, their own internal sound processing. Far more
>>>>> capable than any filter we might apply.
>>>> 
>>>> What a very important point!  I had forgotten, but am now reminded, of how
>>>> amazed I was, when first I started recording (in '68) at all the noise
there
>>>> is which I just hadn't noticed.  If stereo recording can let the listener
>>>> apply their own mental filtering, that surely is a tremendous step forward.
>>>> 
>>>> I've never advanced past mono.  Maybe I should!
>>>> 
>>>> Syd Curtis in Australia
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> This outgoing e-mail is scanned for viruses with Norton 2002
>> 
>> Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
>> S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
>> Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
>> email: 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
> 
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
>
>
>
This outgoing e-mail is scanned for viruses with Norton 2002

Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email: 
       



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU