The idea of having two of these to form an M/S would be tempting for the
budget minded people but how bulky would these be in the field?
Then of course you would have to think about suspending them in a shock
mount, and then there is the windscreen, windjammer. A lot of work to desig=
n
and build one. I don't know, has anyone taken one of these NTIA into the
field, any sound bytes to hear?
For convenience alone, the MKH series is great to stick in a rucksack and
get out there including the windjammer. I would have to see what these
looked like and preformed outside a studio...
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!
425-898-0462
-----Original Message-----
From:
On Behalf Of Rob Danielson
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 8:46 PM
To:
Subject: [Nature Recordists] 722 vs,.. Rode NT2-A!
At 1:58 AM +0000 6/21/05, Rich Peet wrote:
>Having heard the results of Robs current field setup compared to mine.
> Well, I ran home and went to work for more than a week trying to
>catch up.
>
>Now we as a group have to talk Rhode into an Omni version of the NT-1
Be careful what you ask for:
http://www.rodemicrophones.com/nt2a_desc.asp?menu=3Dnt2aMenu
Eventhough the self noise of the NT1A is lower and the response
between 125-700 Hz can be less prone to exaggeration, the wide,
spatial imagery and flexibility of m-s with mkh 30/40 m-s is pretty
hard to match with 2 cardioids,.. but now we can experiment M-S with
NT1-A and NT2-A or the Peet Cube with 4XNT2-A's.
The NT2-A circuitry looks very similar circuitry to the NT1-A. The
first downside I see is a fair amount less output (16mV/Pa vs
25mV/Pa) and a bit more noise (7dbA vs 5.5 dBA). Doesn't I didn't
see the weight and size info yet, looks longer and fatter. Rob D.
>a
>as it clearly is outperforming the mkh line at a lot less money.
>
>And the 744? Well, it is clearly outperforming at a lot more money.
>Rich
>
>--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>...
> I've resorted to judging performance in terms of
>> specific combinations of mics and pres. Some combinations work better
>> than one might expect, others much worse than the specs predict.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"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
[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
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|