Hi!
But I agree with you!?
One in particular was a
>recording of a nightingale singing in southern England on the night of
>19th May 1942, as a group of bombers set out for a raid on Mannheim, in
>Germany. As a wildlife recording it suffers badly from mechanical
>background noise. But also as a wildlife recording, with documentation of
>the context, it is a profoundly moving recording, of which the
>nightingale is an integral part.
Of course!
But there is a technical debate which - in my opinion - is taking far too
much space. DAT vs. MD for example, or the possible artifacts of ATRAC.
That was my only point.
Stupid "myths" which I hear almost weekly:
"Impedance matching means that the input impedance of an amplifier must be
the same as the output impedance of the microphone."
Nonsense! But I still hear it. Also from very experienced recordists.
"Balanced inputs always have better noise figures than unbalanced."
This is also wrong. But I have heard for over 50 years. Still today.
"You can't record birds with a MiniDisc, because of the compression."
Why do people believe such nonsense? It isn't true!
Even modern researchers use cassette machines because of this false statement!
The world is round. It is not a matter of opinion.
Klas.
Klas.
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:
org. no SE440130067001
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|