Hi Curt--
I have a project going and I'll enjoy studying your test results
closer, later. A couple of quick impressions and questions:
The sense of space created is provocative with an appealing
horizontal feel. It sounds a bit like what I trying to describe as
"two field comparison" without losing the ability to localize sounds
in the middle. When I EQ'd the files a bit, diminishing the
pronounced, steady tones from ~80Hz to 1300 Hz, considerably more
detail became evident in the center which I found interesting. I
also noticed differences in frequency response in both mic pairs
that, if addressed, seemed to improve transparency. Many of variables
are involved in recording to maximize the impressions of space.! :-)
re:
http://www.trackseventeen.com/images/mic_arrays/3032_183.html
Quite a deviation in your array/boundary mount?! Are the planes
parallel? Is that about a one foot separation?
Thanks for the test! Great to be able to compare the same moments.
Both 44.1K/16 uncompressed I assume? Rob D.
=3D =3D =3D
At 9:53 AM -0600 3/31/06, Curt Olson wrote:
>Remember this brief thread a couple weeks ago?
>
>I owe a long overdue "thank you" to Rob for his helpful reply below.
>After many days of pondering and tinkering between other duties, I made
>some test recordings early this morning just outside my front door in
>suburban Minneapolis, Minnesota. This is two :45-second clips back to
>back, made simultaneously using (first) AT3032s and (second) WL183s in
>similar rigs (no processing, except for an attempt at level matching).
>Unfortunately, traffic noise in these recordings masks the vast
>difference in self noise between the 3032s and the 183s...
>
>1.3 MB mp3:
>
>http://www.trackseventeen.com/media/tsp/060331-3032_183.mp3
>
>15.1 MB .wav:
>
>http://www.trackseventeen.com/media/tsp/060331-3032_183.wav
>
>Photo of the two rigs, one resting on the other:
>
>http://www.trackseventeen.com/images/mic_arrays/3032_183.html
>
>As Lang points out in his appendix to Bernie's wonderful book, it all
>comes down to compromises and trade-offs. This is one stab at it along
>the way. Any reactions?
>
>Curt Olson
>
>
>On Mar 16, 2006, at 2:49 AM, wrote:
>
>> Hi Curt--
>> Lang Elliot has written elegantly on binaural-headphone issues-
>> Bernie cites Lang's key argument in his book.
>>
>> What you describe makes perfect sense to me: a distant, freestanding
>> speaker produces a more localized image (point of origin in space)
>> than headphones. Cardioid polar patterns cover a smaller field than
>> omnis. Matching speaker and micing separations can make these polar
>> pattern spacing differences more or less apparent.
>>
>> I've always felt there's a micing/speaker separation trade-off:
>> "stereo" as tending towards a comparison of two fields and "stereo"
>> tending towards a unified field where sounders in the middle can be
>> more predictably localized. Asking the ears/brain to compare two
>> field with more difference between them can feel fuller and more
>> engaging. ORTF at 13" captures a lot more timing and tonal difference
>> than omnis at 6". Low Hz presence (125Hz-700Hz) can shift from
>> speaker to speaker like waves bouncing and interacting in the field
>> but its hard to sense this spatial quality, if at all, with
>> headphones. I can walk around and function pretty normally in space
>> listening only through binaural headphones where monitoring/moving
>> around with a 13" card ORTF rig takes a lot more mental adjusting.
>> Rob D.
>>
>> At 2:11 PM -0600 3/14/06, Curt Olson wrote:
>>> So I'm casually reviewing some ambient field recordings today and it
>>> dawns on me: Recordings that I've made using cardiods (in my case,
>>> usually some ORTF variation) seem to translate better to my
>>> loudspeakers than recordings I've made with omnis. ("Better" as in
>>> richer, deeper, more spacious, more interesting.) The converse also
>>> seems to be true: Recordings that I've made with omnis (in my case,
> >> usually involving a small boundary and head-like spacing) seem to
>>> translate better to headphones than those I've made with cardioids.
>>>
>>> Am I late in understanding something extraordinarily basic here? Could
>>> my playback systems be deceiving me? Have I totally lost my judgment?
>>>
>>> Thoughts on this, anyone?
>>>
> >> Curt Olson
>
--
Rob Danielson
Film Department
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|