> From: Gianni Pavan <>
> Subject: Re: Clip Collection
>
> You're perfectly right Walt, though we have to consider both ends: short=
> MP3 files for quick viewing (listening), and reasonably sized linear file=
s
> for those interested in top quality with matching bandwidth.
>
> Gianni
I expect for most folks their method of transfer into the computer and
computer processing may make a difference if getting down to looking at
the lint on the recording. As will the particular recorder they use, no
matter what it is. Particularly the character of the recorder's pre. We
would have to get into examining the changes produced by each system
before we got into the mics themselves.
I think we can get a very good idea of the sound character of a
microphone from mp3 files that are done properly. And it's that sound
character we would be wanting to hear. We are hardly going to be passing
around files for measuring the specs of mics, I doubt that many, if any
of the group have the tools for that sort of work. Or that they would be
standardized enough between different contributors. I'm comfortable
enough with the manufacturer's specs for that. Though I know that
testing individual mic samples will yield variations from that. Specs
don't count except as hints to how a mic will perform, the proof is in
listening to how it performs.
In fact, I strongly suggest that the appropriate samples in a nature
recording group like this are a variety of natural sounds.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|