At 10:31 PM -0800 2/21/05, Ken Durling wrote:
>At 08:44 PM 2/21/2005, you wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>Here's one example. I made a stereo recording with 21" spaced omnis
>>of a large flock of seagulls circling above me about 10-75' feet for
>>about 3 minutes. Listening at home, I noticed that my ability to
>>track the bird motions in stereo was limited to 2, at most 3 birds at
>>a time even though 10 or more were calling in flight at any given
>>moment. My attention seemed geared to pick out only the closer moving
>>birds with the rest of the birds becoming a stationary background
>>plane in my mind. I would guess that the further away the birds, the
>>more difficult it would be to articulate their motion.
>
>Interesting - might it not have been more discernible with directional
>mics? I haven't done much with this, but accurate imaging requires carefu=
l
>phase control too, as I understand it.
As per your interest in portraying many birds in motion, its possible
there are limits as to how many objects one can perceive as being in
motion at once within a stereo or guad field.
<snip>
> >I've read of them being popular at one time with tapers.
>
>What, as candle-holders?? ;-) Or did you mean Tapirs? Stereo snorts.
>
sorry, "tapers" are folks who record music performances/public concerts.
>
>>Signal to Noise Ratio: "better than 50 dB"
>>Sensitivity: -76dB+/- 2.5 dB
>>
>>These are unbalanced mics unless they were modified. They run on
>>internal round 9 volts right? There could be some issues going on
>>here with the US-122's mic pre inputs. Comments anyone?
>
>Yep, Radio Shack special orders. Recordings through the US-122 so far
>haven't been particularly problematic, although to be honest I was
>expecting more gain. I'm going out to the Valley tomorrow, so we'll see
>what I get.
Have fun. Rob D.
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|