Hi Brian--
I used an AT822 for several years and concur with Walter's figures
and with what you describe. It's probably too noisy for low level
sounds and not without considerable muddiness in the low and high
end. When, if, you consider mic options for low level recording, a
quality preamp may be in order too. If you love to record, you won't
regret discovering what higher end equipment can do and it holds its
value if you need the $ for another love or necessity someday.
Best-
Rob D.
=3D =3D=3D
>Does anyone have any experience with the Audio Technica AT822 stereo
>condenser mic? How does it stack up against other mics in terms of
>background noise? It's the only mic I own and I don't really have
>much perspective. I was pleased with the results recording frogs and
>various water sounds this past spring. It seems a little tricker to
>capture lower level sounds like a meadow of insects. Close miking
>helps improve signal relative to noise, but this can also throw
>things out of perspective where I'm really trying to capture a
>broader image.
>
>Datasheet: http://www.audiotechnica.com/prodpro/profiles/AT822.html
>
>Open Circuit Sensitivity: -45 dB (5.6 mV) re 1V at 1 Pa
>Signal to Noise Ratio: 70 dB, 1 kHz at 1 Pa
>
>Reading various manufacturers datasheets and app notes, it appears
>that quiet recordings at low SPLs are related to both Sensitivity and
>SNR. How does one compare two mics, when neither value is equal? Is
>it always subjective?
>
>Another reason I'm asking about noise - I'm thinking of getting into
>one of the more robust stereo imaging techniques like M-S or
>boundry.=20
>
>By the way, I'm recording with a Sony walkman style DAT, and
>presently editing with Magix's Samplitude on a 90 day demo basis. My
>objective is for playback via CD and loudspeakers and of couse for
>optimal imaging, using headphones.
>
>Brian Bystrek
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|