Here's what they were:
1: ORTF using normal cardioids
2: ORTF using wide cardioids (11 O'clock position)
3: MS using mid=3Dnormal cardioid
4: MS using mid=3Dwide cardioid
5: MS using mid=3Domni
6: Blumlein
7: XY with normal cardioids
8: XY with wide cardioids
9: AB using wide cardioids spaced 20 inches (0.5 m)
10: NOS using wide cardioids
My biggest surprise was the AB setup. It had a lot more stereo than I
expected, and sounded great 'between' the speakers, but didn't extend beyon=
d
them like the others did. I want to do more playing with AB using normal
cardioid patterns to better delineate the stereo "view".
I was partial to ORTF before I started this, but now I'm not so sure. I
liked the sound of MS-omni in the phones. I realize that when MS-omni is
decoded is should be identical to Blumlein, but it didn't sound that way,
probably because of the non-ideal patterns of the mics.
The XY setups just stayed boring to my ear, although the stereo was there,=
and they had pretty well-controlled middles.
When I listen to all the examples of normal cardioid vs. the wide cardioid=
setting (the setting bragged up in a review on the Rode site), I tended to=
like the normal setting better. Probably less cross-talk in the ORTF setup,=
and it should have widened the normally narrow MS apparent "field of view"=
but didn't.
So, I was surprised I didn't like ORTF as much as I thought, and that I lik=
e
AB (for speakers) much more that expected.
Bruce Wilson KF7K
http://science.uvsc.edu/wilson
|