Doug and all,
Interesting comparison. Maybe the two mics have different frequence
responses? The distant sounds are lower pitched, so maybe the CVX is bette=
r
for low frequencies and drops off at higher frequencies?
I look forward to the next test.
Vicki Powys
Australia
on 7/6/02 4:19 AM, Doug Von Gausig at wrote:
> I've posted a stereo MP3 sample of a comparison between River Forks' CVX
> mic and Sennheiser's ME-62 at
> http://www.naturesongs.com/recordists/CVXvsME62-1.mp3. The two mics were
> about 1 meter apart in my yard, and they were fed to a mono-mono-stereo "=
Y"
> cable from Telinga to a Sony MZ-R50 MiniDisc recorder. The ME-62 is on th=
e
> left channel, the CVX on the right.
>
> The immediate difference is that distant sounds (the coyote, the barking
> dog, the train) are much louder on the CVX track, whereas the closer soun=
ds
> (small birds, mostly) are louder on the ME-62. Interesting. The CVX is
> obviously amplifying distant sounds and the ME-62 is not. I'm unsure why
> the closer sounds are not as loud as the ME-62, though. Should I amplify
> the CVX track so that the close sounds are the same in both mics to get a
> true comparison?
>
> The next test will be ME-62 vs Telinga EM-23.
>
> Doug
> ***************************************
> Doug Von Gausig
> Digitally Recorded Birds Sounds at:
> http://naturesongs.com/birds.html
> Clarkdale, Central Arizona, USA
> 34=B046.34N 112=B003.25W
> e-mail:
> ***************************************
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|