At 03:05 PM 11/29/2005, you wrote:
> I am thinking about getting the Sennhieser ME67 long shotgun with the
>K6 power supply, has anybody here used this mic. ?
> Mineroff Electronics also has this mic. with the SME 2100 mic.
>amplifier as a package that I would realy like to try, but for $1200 I
>would like some info from users of the ME67 before I buy it. I want the
>long shotgun because most of my recordings will be of water birds like
>Pelicans. And they never get very close to shore at the lake they hang
>out at here, I can get about 100 yards closer in my kayak, but it would
>be hard to record from without fear of dropping a piece of equipment
>into the water.
> Would I be on the right track for distance recording with this
>perticular mic. ? I would be greatful for any comments or suggestions.
>
> Thank you, Tony Greif.
hello Tony:
Good question and idea. Lots was just said (last week) about this mic, so
try the archives . . I also attach one of my own responses . . Good luck!
-- best regards, Marty Michener
MIST Software Assoc. Inc., P. O. Box 269, Hollis, NH 03049
http://www.enjoybirds.com/
At 12:43 AM 11/21/2005, you wrote:
>Sorry this is probably another oft-dicussed question, but does anyone
>have experinece with the Sennheiser ME66 vs ME67 shotgun caps for
>field recording? Any comments welcome. Sennheiser says the long gun
>is more suitable for instances where the sound source is a long way
>from the mic, which is the case for me, but I'm wondering if that
>really is an adavantage for us - if it 's not *too* directional?
>
>Thanks
>
>Ken
HI Ken:
I used both types for several years, both singly and crossed to make a
pseudo-stereo setup. Summary:The ME-67 is NOT too directional. The ME66 is
so broad it is very hard to get good field recordings of a lone singer.
If you had two ME-67s to try, as I do, you could make an "X" with them,
crossing at a point closest to their diaphragms, about 6 cm out from where
the K-6 and ME-67 screw together. I seldom use these recordings "as
stereo"; I do it because of three other reasons: first, recording with
headphones on, I can find a sound source easily and quickly with my ears by
panning and rotating the rig.
http://www.EnjoyBirds.com/howitworks/HowToRig.htm
Experimenting with the "X" arrangement then, one finds that if the mic
angle is zero, of course, you get the same sound in both channels, and as
you increase the angle, you begin to get stereo separation only when you
are at 15-20 degrees apart. For field use, as my web shows, I have a foam
rig holding them about 30 degrees, where a nice stereo passing effect is
achieved as you pan past a sound source in field or forest.
Please note that this pattern is much broader for ME-66's, and much
narrower for any decent parabolic reflector, where you can pan like crazy
and yet take a long time to get it aimed at an unseen singing bird in the
puckabrush (I did this for thirty years; never again).
I actually most like the stereo setup for TWO other reasons:
1. because when a bird sings unexpectedly, you can later use whichever mic
did the best job - by accident as so often happens with the rare,
"single-call-every-week" species I am often chasing. ;^)
2. because I can whisper verbal observations in the end of one of the mics
while the other is doing a clear job of making the sound record of the beast.
-- best regards, Marty Michener
MIST Software Assoc. Inc., P. O. Box 269, Hollis, NH 03049
http://www.enjoybirds.com/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|