Aaron Ximm wrote:
> As a novice to real field techniques, I find this (and the other
> cross-mic) samples invaluable ~ thanks again, Walt, for the work that went
> into these.
>
> I would be very interested in hearing people's "ratings" or rankings of
> these and the other same-site sets Walt's posted -- especially the
> reasoning/intuition behind them. I find I have my own aesthetic
> preferences but I don't really know if I have the "right" opinions.
>
> I understand that for different applications different aspects of each
> recording might be desirable ... but in fact, I'd love to hear comments
> fleshing that exactly that!
>
> Anyone mind sharing?
There are no "right" opinions. Except maybe, whatever works. Or which
one suits a particular person's ideas and ears.
It's more a case of which mic to use where than of one being "better"
than another. Any of these setups will do a nice job if used
appropriately. Their coverage does vary, and this will influence which
one to use.
Note though how each mic setup has a character. Sounds may be more
precisely defined in one than another. One may do a better job with low
frequencies than another. I tried to get as much of that to show as
possible in the mp3's. It's even more evident listening to the mics
directly. Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to pass the headphones around.
I am slowly developing a ranking for my own use, based on what I like.
Out of the series, for me, the MS MKH30/40 is the weakest performer. The
MS MKH80/80 is in these samples running the same mic patterns, and
generally doing a nicer job. This is probably explained in that the
MKH80 has much greater sensitivity and less self noise than either the
MKH30 or MKH40. And has nothing to do with the problems I had with the
MS MKH30/40 in the first set of samples.
The down side to my current MS MKH80/80 is that it's mounted in a 6"
diameter suspension and zeppelin designed for MS. The others are mounted
in smaller diameter mono setups. I don't think this is making a
difference to the sound, but it's certainly making the MS MKH80/80
bulkier and harder to store and transport. I may be able to fit this in
a mono setup too, but don't have enough mono parts so would have to
start machining. I may want to do that anyway because the MKH80 is a
side pickup, so a custom suspension would be better.
I should probably try to get up a set of samples with just the MS
MKH80/80 where I record with each of the different mic patterns available.
In the two SASS, the MKH110 is holding it's own against the more modern
MKH20. It's sound is a little crisper than the MKH20, and a much better
low end. If I listen for a while with the MKH110 SASS and then switch to
the MKH20 SASS, it sounds a little soft and poorly defined. And the
MKH20 is a excellent mic that gives excellent recordings. This is not a
fault, it's a difference. I'm thinking there that the character of the
two is distinct enough I'll end up carrying both as much as I can. It's
probably going to come down to different frogs work better with one or
the other. Same with birds, or whatever. Only one I know for sure is
that the SASS/MKH110 is definitely the one for recording thunderstorms.
The MS MKH30/60 I really like. Because the MKH60 is more directional
it's character is different. It's not as good at really wide frog chorus
work. And it can give you a better closeup of the distant center frogs.
The MKH60 is very low noise and high sensitivity, so the sound off it
resembles the MKH80, the same well focused definition. (and the same
ability to suck in truck noises etc. from great distances)
You might also note that so far I'm running direct into the Portadisc.
It's a whole new set of characters if the MP2 pre is added in. Not a
major difference, but there is a difference.
I spent a good part of yesterday evening from sunset to 2AM sitting in
my nice folding chair surrounded by these mics at the edge of a pond I'd
gone to hoping to find gopher frogs calling, Lang will know the one I'm
talking about. Only a couple called, and only after long intervals of
silence. But there were a whole bunch of other frogs calling. I amused
myself with two hours of wading the pond in hip boots trying to find
those two frogs for photography. And the rest of the time listening
through one mic or another.
There won't be samples, I recorded a little bit, but a industrial plant
a couple miles away had some machinery going, trains on the tracks a
mile away, trucks on the highway next to the train tracks and so on. I
got almost no good recording out of the evening. Take off the
headphones, and all you hear is the frogs, put them on and the other
things intrude. Away from the pond this sounds like a pretty quiet area.
That is one thing about these wide field stereo setups made with
sensitive mics. You need much better recording sites if you are trying
for stuff needing minimum filtering.
The main purpose of my trip this time was actually to deliver the two
Brimley's I'd caught for my photography to the DNR. They have no photos
either. For the next week or so they will be photographed, taken to
meetings to show off (one meeting is in Kentucky), and then finally
returned to their home by one of the Savannah DNR people. Many of
Georgia's DNR folks have never seen this species.
>
> PS Walt, I'd be happy to host these series in a private subdirectory for
> you on my own site ~ I currently have a lucky hosting situation, at least
> for a while, and a few MB one way or the other won't hurt!
Might should check with Doug if he wants to put them in the
Naturerecordists binary area. Since these are recordings where I'm
learning the mics, they probably still have a ways to go to really show
them off. There's 8 megs in total so far, including the SavannahNWR
Telinga recording.
I used to have all the space I wanted to buy disks for on Chris's
server, but when he died I was back to the whim of my ISP. I can have
any amount there if I want to pay extra. I'm working on what comes free
with my account. I did realize a couple days ago I've got some more
accessible I'm not using, so can put up some more yet.
My biggest problem is throughput. The frog website generates quite a lot
of traffic. I have to carefully balance it between several server
allotments to not exceed it's monthly limit on any of them. My ISP has a
interesting system where I get my space in split up chunks with
different domain addresses, not one big lump. Makes for interesting file
juggling.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|