naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Shotgun microphone

Subject: Re: Shotgun microphone
From: Walter Knapp <>
Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2003 16:20:41 -0400
Raimund Specht wrote:
> Walt wrote:
> 
>>Several years of using the Telinga has given me a very good 
>>working knowledge for what it can and can't do. At least as far as 
> 
> the 
> 
>>frequency range of frogs we have (200hz - 7500hz) I'm extremely 
> 
> familiar 
> 
>>with those.
> 
> 
> I agree. A parabola is still very useful for recording distant 
> sounds (especially in situations where it is impossible to get 
> closer to the subject). You simply have to live with it's 
> limitations (but you should know them). The alternative of using a 
> bare microphone (even a shotgun) might be worse, because the sound 
> you are interested in will be buried in the inherent noise of the 
> microphone.

I do know the limitations. I know pretty much what sort of reach I have. 
That's way farther at the low frequencies than the official theory 
predicts. Just as the wild gyrations in gain theory predicts are also 
not evident and should be in many of the frogcalls. Why, we could 
agonize over for a very long time, I more take it as it comes. It's a 
tool I know very well how to use.

In the survey work, probably 90% of my stuff could not be done with any 
bare mic, or done extremely poorly. This is a combination of it's reach 
ability and it's selective ability. I do take advantage of times I can 
get close enough for the other mics, as I did with the recent samples I 
put up. And note how poor the Telinga sounds next to them in the 
Spadefoot Toad recordings. Not because of frequency concerns, I'm just 
so close it only gets a small slice out of the middle of the chorus. And 
as Klas noted none of the reflected sound off the surroundings. Maybe 
much better for science, but not for listening. Each setup has it's 
uses, best determined by going out and trying it with a open mind. 
Sometimes theory is pretty predictive, sometimes not.

I often deliberately ignore established theory. Some such experiments 
work and improve my recording ability, some don't. That's one of the 
ways to expand our abilities.

I've been working with parabolic mics since the 50's, though that one 
was to pick up the return from my pulsed sonar. I have some new designs 
I'm working on now. Some of which definitely would not be kosher. I 
don't think I've yet found all the abilities of this system.

Walt






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU