From: "Greg Winterflood" <>
>
> Sorry people, I didn't mean to start up WW3 with my comments about
> the 'perfect recorder!
You did the guaranteed method of getting WW3 started, mentioning MD and
perfect recorder in the same post. There are those that the mere
mentioning of MD is like waving a red flag at the bull and to say
perfect as well... They just have to think up something negative to say.
> Methinks, there must be something to having the ability to hear with
> two ears - if one is lucky enough to have kept them both on.
>
> If you've got a big head, like mine, there is probably a lot of
> difference between what the right and left ear hears, especially in
> a pub!
>
> I don't know if that difference is referred to as a phase
> difference, or some other kind of acoustic difference, but I would
> like to know how to describe it, and would be interested to hear -
> oops - from someone who knows.
I've barely gotten the training wheels off my stereo recording. But a
book I like a lot for explaining it is to be found here:
http://www.stereosoundbook.com/
Reasonably non-techy in it's approach, can be read by mere mortals. If
you want to get into recording stereo it's a good one to have.
Stereo is different than mono. Whereas in mono you try to focus closer
and closer on a single hapless calling animal excluding all else, in
stereo you toss him into his environment and try to make him still stand
out in the recording. Or record the whole choir of animals. Both
approaches work, but we are hard wired for interpreting a stereo field
and for picking that caller out of one. Except for those unfortunates
(like my wife's father) who loose all hearing in one ear and have to
function in mono.
> I'm currently working on setting up a website so that I can post
> some of my backyard 'in the field' recordings. I feel they are duds
> but given the conversation over the past few days, I can see that a
> bit of ambience is allowed.
>
> I'm having trouble setting up my URL - my ISP hit a brick wall this
> past week with overload, or spam, or virus, or something that went
> wrong. The ISP people told me to wait 24 hours and try again. (The
> didn't say: Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.)
Keep at it, I really loved the sounds out there. And a few pictures of
ghost gums would not go amiss either.
Sound takes lots of space for it's files. This translates into lots of
download time and load for your server. The mp3 format was originally
invented for the passing of sound through the internet, before it got
sidetracked into a format to steal music. Currently it's the best
choice, but you still have to fine tune the files to keep size down.
Huge files are simply not going to be tolerated by very many of your
potential listeners.
The one somewhat hidden problem with using mp3 is that it's often banned
by some organizations and their servers won't let it through. In the
onward march of "progress" mp3 has been officially replaced in the new
mpeg standards with AAC format, which makes smaller files for the same
quality level than mp3. If it manages to take hold then hopefully will
be accepted by more organizations.
> I went to the Links section of the Group site this week and got to
> listen to Syd Curtis's Lyrebird symphony. Magic stuff. I've even
> played the lute Lyrebird selection to a couple of patients during
> consultations!! This appeared to work better than aspirin!
>
> That new mike pre-amp with the jam-in-easily-replacebable 9V battery
> sounds like a nice bit of gear. Watching what has been talked about
> on this list, I guess the 'holy grail' is to go to field proof high-
> bit solid state internally noiseless recording device , with the
> input transducer and output transducer being the only flaws in the
> system for 'perfect' reproduction?
Oh, no flaws at all, weighs nothing, tiny enough not to be seen with a
microscope, runs for a lifetime on one watch battery. And what's worse
is that someone will come up with a way to use a higher number in one of
the specs and there will be a new holy grail. Just after you plunked
down your life savings on the current one.
But, the down to earth truth is that recordings are not made by
recorders. That's the least of our worries. You have not gotten into
mics yet. And then there is that strange thing clutching the mic and
recorder. And you have already discovered the environment itself is not
always cooperative.
> Oh, no WW4...
That one never ends, there is always some bleeding edge thing to go off
and get cut by. It's easy to get sucked in by some spec you like and not
notice what else you have to live with. Or if the spec even has any
meaning to your own recording quality.
> Greg
>
> Went to work today...in Alice Springs, NT, Oztralia
Compared to a lot of places people work, it's more like heaven.
> PS: They tell me 'Dubya' is in Canberra, but there was nothing that
> the PMD222 and the AT-815b were able to pick from this distance.
Tell them to crank up the volume a little. And hold the mic out a little
farther ;-)
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|