Rob Danielson wrote:
>
> 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
> transparent mics. I found the below website handy when trying to
> weigh self noise and sensitivity at once. Note you can change the
> sorting criteria.
> http://www.microphonereview.com/miclist.asp?F_Sensitivity=&F_Noise=&F_SPL=&F_LLF=&F_ULF=&order=Microphones.%5BNoise+Level%5D%2C+
That looks like a useful website, it's certainly going to be in my
bookmarks. Not sure how I've missed it.
Lang pointed out what amounts to another "spec" that's probably on a
similar weight. That's just what sort of sound a mic's noise floor
makes. For a lot of our recordings the noise floor is on the bottom of
audible, a noise floor that's a nice smooth hiss is going to be less of
a problem and can be approached closer than one that sputters and
crackles. I know Lang's choice of mic for his SASS setup was somewhat
influenced by this. In that case it was the DPA (B&K) mics that lost out.
> Wouldn't it be great to see a spec list ranking mics by transparency
> and cost-- the best mics for nature recording under $200, $500, $800?
> Of course, they'd have to be ear tested but one might be able to
> narrow it down to a couple dozen mics with the numbers.
> Rob D.
It's one of the things that the folks on this list could begin to put
together. A mic guide for naturerecordists. We frequently discuss the
higher end, but probably neglect the lower cost end a bit. Those
beginning and not sure how far they are going to go need options that
are less costly. And they are the ones with the least experience for
making their choices. And some guidance as to what choosing a lower
quality or cheaper mic may mean would certainly be good.
If we were all in one town we would probably just get together from time
to time and try out various mics with everybody getting a listen. Doing
it when we are all over the world is more tricky. I've been thinking
about how to come up with some samples on the internet. Even with mp3
they can't be very long. And I tend to think they need to be of our
actual subjects. Little samples like the one I put up for the Marshall
MXL 2001 is the sort of thing I have in mind. If it covered very much it
would have to be where a lot of webspace was available.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|