naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Rolls PB224 tests

Subject: Re: Rolls PB224 tests
From: "John Hartog" <>
Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2005 17:54:55 -0000
Thanks Mark, for lending your ears. After listening a few more times,
I realize in the last segment I got the wires switched.  No wonder I
couldn't find that raven up in the tree to my right, it was actually
somewhere to my left.
Also it should be noted the MZ-N707 is not Hi-MD, it records only in
Altrac-3, and does not offer digital upload to computer.  I set the
volume levels at about half (at 15 I think). If only by chance, the
clock ticking in these recordings seemed to match the others fairly
well - so I went with it without any adjustments in post. Therefore,
the first segment and the sixth might not be matched up very well to
the others.
-John Hartog

 In  "Mark R." <> wrote:
> Hi John,
>  On the first listen, I couldn't hear a big difference until the last
> recording. It seemed to get quieter and softer to my ears there, at
least
> until that crow said hello :^) On subsequent listens I discerned a
subtle
> and gradual addition of hiss/noise as the PB224 was taken out of the
> equation. Gradual enough that I missed it in my not so sound proof
pc cafe
> here in Korea. To me it sounds as if the PMD Rolls combination may
add only
> a slight bit of extra hiss/noise in contrast to the Rolls + MZ-707,
but I
> can't be positive. To me, this test shows consistency with Rob's test of
> NT1A's + PB224 =3D Clean.
>  Kudos to you John for a fine test. I really like the clock for this
kind of
> listening. Contrary to popular belief, Rob really does have a good
idea once
> in a while :^o
>  Best,
>  Mark R.
>    On 9/30/05, John Hartog <> wrote:
> >
> > So here are the results from the comparative tests I did last weekend


> > with the Rolls PB224 phantom power supply. What did I find? That
> > outdoors is not the place to get meaningful results, and it is likely
> > impossible to compare the noise from the equipment used in this
> > experiment because the wind, slight as it was, adds too much
> > inconsistency. But have a listen, maybe there is something of worth
> > to be taken from my efforts. Here are two of the same recording =96 one
> > wav (10.8MB) and one mp3 (0.96MB:
> >
> > http://www.rockscallop.org/test/jh-050925-rollstest.wav
> >
> > http://www.rockscallop.org/test/jh-050925-rollstest.mp3
> >
> > The recording consists of six 10 second snips from my six test
> > recordings. I used a ticking clock, kind of like Rob does in his
> > tests. I taped the clock to a small alder tree, kind of like I
> > imagine Rob might not do. For the first three recordings, the clock
> > is about eight feet away and somewhat to the left of the microphones.
> > In the second three, the clock is about three feet directly in front.
> > All the recordings were made with recorder settings at full gain.
> >
> > The equipment used follows this order:
> > 1. Rode NT1-A's > Rolls PB224 > Sony MZ-N707
> > 2. NT1-A's > PB224 > Marantz PMD670
> > 3. NT1-A's > PMD670
> > 4. NT1-A's > PMD670
> > 5. NT1-A's > PB224 > PMD670
> > 6. NT1-A's > PB224 > MZ-N707
> >
> > Your questions and comments are welcome.
> > -John Hartog
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<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