naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: draft procedure for amateur recording in parks, v. 2

Subject: Re: draft procedure for amateur recording in parks, v. 2
From: Rob Danielson <>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 21:15:13 -0500
At 3:55 PM -0700 8/29/05, Dan Dugan wrote:
>DAN DUGAN:
>>   >Recording with 65dB SPL peaking at -5dBFS (and averaging around
>>>-15dBFS) brings the mic noise well above the floor of 16-bit
>>>recording. For the last several years I've recorded a wide variety of
>>>soundscapes with this level, which is what I get with 183s into a
>>>Sharp MD at MIC L 17. I found I had to drop my level 6dB (MIC L 14)
>>>to cover the crowded parts of the park. I can't recall any natural
>>>sounds except thunder I've had to turn down for, and some wind
>>>situations where the sound per se wasn't that loud but I wanted to
>>>keep the wind noise in the mics below clipping.
>
>ROB DANIELSON:
>>    For relative ambient levels above the noise floor this should work
>>okay. Again, I was thinking you were going to study the
>>ambience/influences at a distance  You may go down to just few bits
>>resolution if its a really quiet setting. Maybe these quiet settings
>>are no longer there to study.
>
>Of course quieter sounds are recorded with fewer bits, but that only
>matters when you intend to gain-up the recording -a lot-. I recorded
>water dripping in Golden Dome Cave at this level, and the mic hiss
>was the dominant sound (along with the drips). Saturday night it was
>very quiet in Muir Woods, and at locations away from a creek, the mic
>hiss was the noise floor, with plenty of room below that to the
>16-bit noise floor.
>
>If 65dB SPL is -15dBFS (VU averaging), 20dB SPL is -60dBFS. I rest my case=
.


It could be a difference in the objectives of our recordings. To
enjoy the sound elements that make up "ambience" in a quiet setting,
considerable amplification in post is unavoidable for me.  I would
not elect to saturate the background at -45dB in the field if I could
help it. For example, if the background ambience peaks are -40dB
relative to my loudest sound and I set the record level for
saturating the loudest sound near 100%, the background peaks will
receive about 1% sound file saturation.  If I recall correctly, 1%
saturation is resolved with about 5 of the 16 bits. When I take this
1% original and amplify it so that I can hear what is going on at a
distance, I'll get a lot more noise (primarily grunge and very
audible hiss about 2K) compared to an original field saturation of 6%
or even 3%.

Placed in practical context, I was recording all afternoon and all
night in an old growth forest two weeks ago. There were 2-4 sound
events per hour that reached 45 dB SPL.  I choose to use a gain about
20dB above your peak voice ref of 65dB which, by pure chance,
rendered the peak events very near full saturation and gave me right
around 5% saturation for the background. Its my reasoning that even
if I get over-modulation a couple of seconds an hour, for the vast
majority of seconds, I'll have more data to resolve the background
ambience with.  Rob D.

<snip>.
>
>-Dan Dugan
>


--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU