naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Field feedback on Senn. 418-S requested

Subject: RE: Field feedback on Senn. 418-S requested
From: "Martyn Stewart" <>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 18:05:25 -0700
I think the very fact that Sennheiser are to look at the mic again with a
view to changing it speaks volumes, I believe they have made a mistake with
the specs Walt, you are dead right, I would rather the basics of the
excellent MKH-60 be used instead of the 416

Martyn

Martyn Stewart
Bird and Animal Sounds Digitally Recorded at:
http://www.naturesound.org
N47.65543   W121.98428
Redmond. Washington. USA
Make every Garden a wildlife Habitat!

When the animals come to us,
Asking for our help,
Will we know what they are saying?

When the plants speak to us
In their delicate, beautiful language,
Will we be able to answer them?

When the planet herself
Sings to us in our dreams,
Will we be able to wake ourselves, and act?

                               -Gary Lawless

-----Original Message-----
From: Walter Knapp 
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 5:56 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Field feedback on Senn. 418-S requested

From: umashankar <>
>
> i have not heard the 418, but have looked at the
> specs, and i think sennheiser came up with a clever
> solution to the side signal.
>
> the side mic does not have the specs of the mid mic
> because it does not have to. i saw the math somewhere,
> but when the m in the ms mic is a shotgun, you need a
> very small contribution from the s mic before the
> image breaks up. and when you need a small signal
> (compared to the m signal) its noise figure can easily
> be much worse without effecting the over all decoded
> left right output.have i got that right?

In the case of my MS MKH-60/30, no, that's not right. A mix up to 50:50
side to mid still gives a good field depending on the circumstances. I
more typically use 60:40 giving the mid a slight increase in emphasis,
but not very significant as far as self noise. Sometimes even a slightly
greater side contribution works. So, the self noise and sound quality of
the side should be as good as the mid.

I don't do math on it, I get out in the field and find out what works.
Then let the math try and catch up. To be fair, maybe they were talking
about studio use, where such a rule might work, though I doubt it.

A MKH-30 limits the sound quality I can get in my MS, and the MKH-418S
uses a side that's much worse than that. I see no reason to be so
limiting. Their side does not even come up to par with their mid or to a
MKH-416. So it's a poor match.

Walt







"Microphones are not ears,
Loudspeakers are not birds,
A listening room is not nature."
Klas Strandberg
Yahoo! Groups Links









________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<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