Bruce Wrote:
>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
That the 20" spread A/B and the Blumlein produce an image with a
similar impression is quite unexpected.
>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 beyo=
nd
>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.
Of course, MS can be shaped with a lot variation using a 3 ch mixer
patch rather than a fixed plug.
>
>The XY setups just stayed boring to my ear, although the stereo was there,
>and they had pretty well-controlled middles.
In No 7. How did you achieve X-Y? One on top, inverted?
>
>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.
Should have filled more of the center? This could be the m-s matrix again.
>
>So, I was surprised I didn't like ORTF as much as I thought, and that I li=
ke
>AB (for speakers) much more that expected.
This reminds me of Curt's comments a few weeks back.
Was No.9 the only one with the 20" spread? If you like this effect,
definitely try the omni settings spread out (and possibly also with a
barrier).
Its been my experience that wider "A/B-like" timing differences
accentuate the impression of spatial "reach." I typically spread
NT1-A (wide cards) from 13" to 21" angled-out slightly like ORTF but
spread like A/B. The spread seems to be most responsible for the
effect (at least the one I'm hearing!) Rob D.
>
>Bruce Wilson KF7K
>http://science.uvsc.edu/wilson
|