Wild Sanctuary wrote:
>>Wild Sanctuary wrote:
>>
>>> We've got plenty of experience with this type of system, Walt.
>>> Although every system has its own limitations, this type (MS) offers,
>>> for us, many more options on the post-production end than any other
>>> we've found so far. But we're always looking...
>>>
>>> Bernie
>>
>>Your praise of M/S is one of the reasons why I'm into it, that's part of
>> what got me looking into it. I'm impressed with what I've managed to
>>fumble through so far. I may not, in the end, cart around so many
>>versions routinely, but M/S is definitely well settled into my kit.
>
> M/S just gives us more options, Walt. It ain't a panacea by any
> means. We also record some sites in good ol' XY, and binaural
> occasionally. It all depends on what you want your audio to sound
> like and in what format it's ultimately intended to be heard
> (headphones, stereo, stereo-surround, 5.1 surround, etc.). For me (my
> opinion, only), M/S provides a much more robust post-production
> result and is more compatible with various kinds of surround formats
> and analysis.
I'm not putting all my eggs in the M/S basket either. The SASS is also
well settled in my kit. And probably some XY when I get to making the
support and windscreening. And you can be sure the Telinga is still in
there too.
At the moment I'm primarily aiming at headphones and speaker stereo and
ignoring surround. Learn that well before considering the others.
>>One question comes to mind. My M/S decoding software has settings for
>>the contributions of the two mics in percent. It defaults to a setting
>>of 100% for both, I assume that's the equal mix from the two. It has
>>settings that range from 0 to 200%, both positive and negative, allowing
>>considerable latitude. In terms of mix what sort of range of ratios do
>>you find work well?
>
>
> I usually crank the setting just past 50% to bet. 50 and 60%
> depending on the data and what sounds best...always the criteria for
> that setting. Listen to your signal through headphones and then to a
> well-calibrated pair of stereo speakers and determine what you like
> best. If you like it, chances are that others will, too.
I figured it was going to be like that.
>>The pan settings I have no real problem with. They are fairly obvious.
>>But the mix is like a kid in a candy store. So many choices.
>>
>>A related question is when you record. Do you try to get the metering
>>readings for the Mid and Side the same, or just keep the gain the same
>>for both?
>
> Unless you're mixing into stereo on site in the field, I would
> recommend setting the input levels equal to one another since you
> want to be sure to capture data that will create the illusion of
> moving through "space" when you mix...much as you experienced in the
> field. Although M/S is somewhat forgiving, you want to try to keep
> the input levels more or less even to retain the super imaging
> possible when you take care to do that.
For these samples, I just kept the gain together. And with the noisy
subjects front and center that results in the MKH-30 channel reading
lower. I'll try it the other way next time.
While I'm using the M/S direct to the Portadisc I don't have decoding
available. Even when I do, with the MP2, I'll just be decoding for the
headphones and taking whatever mix the gain settings give me. Mostly
checking I'm aiming right.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|