From: Curt Olson <>
> I failed to acknowledge the modified SASS. I know that others here use
> them too. You've reminded me to put the SASS on my list of things to
> experiment with when I get the chance.
What some seem to fail to realize is that while the SASS/MKH-20 is
probably the ultimate modification of the SASS, it's possible to mount
other mics in the SASS. Any mic with a exposed diaphragm can probably be
fitted. What I mean by that is that the diaphragm is not buried down
inside a solid housing but just behind a grill so it can be close
coupled to the boundary. As a example the first SASS I fitted uses the
MKH-110, which is a antique, and a lot less money than a MKH-20 when you
find one. The results you get will be dependent on the characteristics
of the mics you use, of course.
The SASS is also a boundary mic, and that type of mic has not been
sufficiently explored for nature recording potential. It is unfortunate
that Crown has dominated boundary mics, and they don't have a philosophy
of improving mic capsule sound quality. They use the same lower quality
capsules that were used in the first experiments on boundary mics. A
problem for nature recording. Why it was necessary to come up with a
modified SASS.
> Yup. That's why I referred to Klaus' wise reminder. I like your term
> "cognitive scene analysis apparatus." That's exactly what's lacking
> with mics. On the other hand, as you said later in your comments, the
> listener does apply some scene analysis even to recordings. The other
> day my children and their spouses were at the house and I played some
> field recordings for them. The daughter-in-law was under headphones
> when I played a recording I made on a United 727 flight to Chicago a
> few years ago. As the plane accelerated down the runway and lifted off,
> there she was, pressed back in the chair as if she were right there.
> Her scene analysis apparatus was working overtime to paint a very vivid
> image for her. It was fun to observe.
The term cognitive scene analysis is a standard one in modern
psychoacoustics. I think the vision folks also use the same term. I
added the word apparatus. We could also call it a massively parallel
computer. In any case I wanted to emphasize that it's a piece of
equipment, just as much as a mic. More so actually.
Yes, the designer of the mic, the recordist, and the listener all apply
their own scene analysis. And those are often not in agreement.
There is a nice little book that can help explain the current
understanding of this sort of stuff, though it's far from complete. I'm
on my second read through it:
"Ecological Psychoacoustics" Edited by John G. Neuhoff
Psychoacoustics is undergoing some significant changes, the two main
lines are merging. When the traditional lab sample psychoacoustics was
taken out of the lab and used for predictive purposes in the natural
world it turned out to be pretty poor. (it's a big issue if you are
building a human like robot) We don't process small sets of samples in
isolation when hearing the natural world. We process rapidly changing
large sets of unrelated sounds, and our processing of those interacts.
It's a important issue as it relates to both equipment design and how we
record. And how we listen for that matter.
> Sorry I was unclear on this. I, too, am quite a purist with respect to
> field recordings. I do a lot of cosmetic editing to clean things up and
> condense them, but almost no mixing. The mixed/panned multi-mono
> recordings I've done have been in my studio work -- original music for
> media, albums for recording artists and big live broadcasts. Even in
> those settings, I prefer to work with stereo pairs whenever possible.
Nature recording is one of the few areas where a lot of straight
recording is done. As folks move in from other areas I hear more and
more thinking that the mixing shortcut will get what they want. But,
it's not at all like the small number of voices and instruments in
music, the space in between has it's own content too. Stitching nature
recording mixes together to form a natural scene is going to be far
tougher than music, which is artificial to start with. Most folks come
to realize this as they become more in tune with the natural audio
scene. A natural sounding recording will have the many, many layers of
sound typical of nature. With no breaks or divides. All the locational
cues will be continuous across the entire scene. Just hearing all that
out there is part of what gaining experience in nature recording is all
about.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|