Jeremiah wrote:
> My experiments so far with the Shure 183s have been overall quite
> positive: very high output, relatively low noise floor (id put the
> S/N ratio in the very good to excellent category).
>
> The one serious problem I've had so far is with extreme low
> frequencies causing them to bottom out (the classic example being a
> car drive by where the muffler is resonating at near-subsonic
> frequency). I suspect the problem is actually insufficent powering
> supplied by my mz-r37 minidisc leading to reduced headroom. Want to
> test w/ 9-volt p-i-p adapter but don't have one.
>
> Curious if anyone else has experience with such.
>
> I'm still in a getting-to-know them phase, so I'm not giving them a
> firm recommendation, but they're good and definitely worth checking
> out.
(I'm picking this up via the daily digest, so I might already be late
to the discussion.)
I've experienced the same thing Jeremiah reports: loud, low vehicle
drive-bys, doors closing, etc. can send the 183s into oblivion. Other
than that, I'm impressed by their low noise and high output and wide
frequency response.
I've experimented extensively with many stereo/binaural arrays during
the last three weeks. I've tried spacing the 183s at various distances
and separating them with large and small barriers of several different
types -- and several different combinations of both. (I think my bride
is beginning to tire of it all.)
I'm currently favoring a simple barrier array (183s mounted
side-by-side and facing forward on opposite sides of a plywood
barrier). I like the excellent L/R imaging and rock-solid mono
compatibility. It also seems to deliver noticeably higher gain than the
spaced arrays I've tried, but with a slightly hyped high end depending
on the exact material used. Size of the barrier seems to have a big
effect on L/R imaging, so it gives a lot of room for tweaking. The two
biggest problems I would report are: 1) barrier arrays can get bulky;
2) handling noise can be "off the charts," and foam padding doesn't
seem to help much.
With the 183s separated by distance only, I seem to notice dramatically
inferior (almost confusing) L/R localization and mono compatibility,
along with reduced gain and some serious phase shifting/comb filtering
side effects that I consider to be unacceptable. The one benefit seems
to be a slight improvement in low-end response, but it's so slight that
I figure it's not worth the sacrifice of the other positive factors.
Your reactions?
Curt Olson
Note: This is for capturing overall natural soundscapes and not for
targeting individual callers.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|