Hi Lang:
I like the elegance of the four omni strategy too. Do you think
they'd capture enough low end "body" and textural detail when working
a large, exterior space? How about this (dream) micing array: a pair
of opposite facing SASS or four baffled omnis for nearby mid and hi
frequency sources; a pair of wide spread omnis for triangulating the
low end and sounds coming from a distance (send <125Hz through
bi-amped stereo subs) and use 2-4 pinpoint mics for articulating
spots of textural interest? Rob D.
= ==
At 8:28 AM -0400 6/16/04, Lang Elliott wrote:
>Rob:
>
>Interesting article. Of the techniques listed, the SAM, the
>Surround-Atmo-Mikrofon (Surround-Ambience-Microphone) array is the closest
>to what I'm trying to describe. Note that it is designed for ambient hall
>recording and does not define a front and center. Although it uses
>directional microphones, it would preserve binaural cues, which I think are
>critical for what we're trying to accomplish as nature recordists.
>
>My design is similar in that it would utilizes four mikes in a symmetrical
>array, with elements ear-spaced. The big difference is that I would use omni
>mikes and barriers to make them directional, rather than cardioid mikes. I
>would choose a design that firmly adheres to binaural psychoacoustical
>principles, which means that the human brain will be given all the natural
>information it normally uses to image sounds in space.
>
>Lang
>
>At 8:30 PM -0700 6/15/04, <> wrote:
>> > my old idea of mounting 4 mics in a tetrahedral (pyramid shape)
>>
>>Kevin,
>>
>>Such a system was invented and patented by Michael Gerzon and Peter Craven
>>back in the early 1970s, and the microphone is now known as the Soundfield
>>microphone:
>>http://www.soundfieldusa.com/
>>The patent is no longer in force.
>>
>>It was demonstrated by Gerzon that a tetrahedral array of loudspeakers is
>>NOT the best way to reproduce the signals. Although the microphone captures
>>information that includes height information, the height information is
>>almost never reproduced (unfortunately). For practical reasons almost all
>>reproduction systems involve a horizontal circle of loudspeakers, say 6 or
>>8, or even more.
>>
>>I have used a Soundfield microphone, either the commercial one or one
>>assembled out of individual microphones, to make numerous nature recordings
>>and I find it very satisfactory for my purposes. But it is not without
>>flaws. A great deal more information can be found at:
>>http://www.ambisonic.net/
>>and in the more than 100 technical papers on the subject published in the
>>Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, and elsewhere.
>>
>>Eric Benjamin
>
>Enjoyed this discussion. The below website has quite a few 5.1 micing
>diagrams including the soundfield:
>http://www.mtsu.edu/~dsmitche/rim456/Materials/tracking_5_1.html
>Rob D.
>
> = = =
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|