At 2:40 PM +0000 3/13/06, Romilly Hambling wrote:
re:
> [I] am going to refrain from
>further comment until I've had them outside doing dawn
>choruses.
Hi Romilly--
Thanks for the test. I agree its hard to judge quiet location noise
and gain performance with a close-up vocal source.
"Smooth" response to Hi-Hz concentrated calls is tricky to judge as
some listeners attend to the character of the isolated call so
closely, they prefer the added "edge" of exaggeration, especially
above 8KHz. This range is also fairly easy to tame in post. To my
ears, exaggerations between 2K and 8K can be fatiguing and are often
much more challenging to tame in post. However, if one is trying to
ID a distant call, exaggerations in this range can be very helpful.
So, we have several kinds of "preferred" performance to choose from!
In your previous test, I found the upper-end of the NT1-A
surprisingly smoother than that of the TLM103 but neither mic is
probably a hallmark for high-end "smoothness." I find the NT1-A to
be grainier (e.g many narrow peaks of Hi Hz exaggeration) compared to
MKH's and even to the NT2-A. Greg Weddigs "MK" Schoeps mics that we
tested were the most Hi-Hz linearly "smooth" mics I've listened to,
but it seems bird calls really put performance in this capacity to
test.
>
>Any ideas for other such mics? Preferably omnis.
How about DIY or Klas-crafted EM-23's? I have some Sound Project
C-4's for a few weeks that I need to get out and try. Rob D.
>
> > > http://www.godsownclay.com/at3032page1.html
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|