naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: AT 3032 omni audio samples

Subject: Re: AT 3032 omni audio samples
From: "Romilly Hambling" <>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:36:33 -0000
Rob, your observations appreciated as always =97 they're very
helpful. I got the NT1As as someone here had said that the
NT2s weren't as proven in outdoor conditions.

Hmm, if by Schoeps MK you mean the MK2s (flat response
omnis) they're what I call verging on the expensive. Maybe my
craving for upper register smoothness can be met by MKH 20s,
which I've sort of promised myself as the ultimate solution when
I can afford them! I've always been impressed by Andrew
Skeoch's (Listening Earth, http://www.listeningearth.com.au/ )
recordings =97 he uses MKHs.

Were the Schoeps smoother than MKHs? If so, are they reliable
outdoors? Refer me to the tests if the answers are there (busy
earning my keep just now).

And ah, Klas's omnis . . . but how would I get a pair? Alas, he is
always busy. (Klas, a crucial part of my spring program depends
on you! The owls will be nesting in 2-3 weeks). I know of them
but nothing about them =97 would need to hear samples.

romillyh


--- In  Rob Danielson
<> wrote:
>
> 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
>






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<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