--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
...
> Hi Rich--
> If the array was aligned with the oblong dimension of the space,
> sample 1 could be an indication of the off-axis detail the rig is
> capable of. These, four particular mics seem to be representing the
> lowest octaves with differences. To my ears, 2 & 4 are most closely
> matched. 1/3 less so with each other and the other pair. Of course,
> recording deep space in a remote location places great demands on
> mics-- more than any other event I've tried to record and careful EQ
> can restore quite a bit of balance. One advantage of M/S is its a bit
> easier to obtain tonal balance.
Thank you for the critical listening. You are correct that 1/3 are
not as closely matched. I think this is different brands (ages) of
caps within the mic and because I am not restricted to the size of a
mic case I will be replacing them with matched and better physically
large caps as soon as I can.
...
>
> Mic technology has a ways to go before I'll be happy with the ability
> to account for sound impressions equally in all directions. Omni is a
> distinct polar pattern too.
>
> Miciing array choice could, out of love and obsession, be based on
> the aspects of the location/experience one is gives priority. I hear
> what might be local geography, you hear what might be a distant mate.
> When I place a boundary next to my an ear, 800-2300 Hz+ is
> attenuated, but the boundary can bring out more hi Hz localization.
>
> A barrier in a stereo or quad doesn't address the lower register
> challenges well enough for me to use a "fixed" array in the field. It
> might lessen my ability to adjust to the specific conditions. E.G.
> I'm going to get plenty of highway 131 whether I direct a cardioid,
> omni or parabolic dish anywhere near its direction. If I take this
> for granted, I might be able to get enough of the highway's sounds
> reflected from a hill 1/4 mile away to make the recording a tad more
> illustrative of the space.
Next generation of Cube will go to high density foam rubber because of
the frequency and pattern changes that a hard boundary gives, I agree.
There are construction challenges building a cube with foam. I wish
to sound test the new very high density foams being used for beds.
Please report if anyone here has played with the stuff.
>
> At the moment I'm more obsessed with the impression of depth and form
> than Hi Hz localization-- but with current gear, even a passionate
> listener might find either distinction, "pushing the limits," to put
> it nicely.
>
> Can you think of a way to measure the percentage of the sonic energy
> in your recording that is below 700Hz? studying passages with and
> without the chipping sparrow might be useful. My suspicion is, in the
> frequencies that give body and character to sample no 1, the polar
> patterns of cardiods and omnis might be a lot closer than one might
> think.
I do not at this time know how. There are a lot of things I can not
figure out how to test with this mic and still need to do the basics
of "front to back to side" measurements before I make any more major
changes.
> Martyn hinted at another challenge. Perhaps one reason recordist
> argue for certain rigs/arrray is because its so hard to tell in the
> field what the heck one is actually getting even if one takes time to
> change positions mics/mic types Its a huge, often futile chore
> because what sounded interesting in the field can often sound much
> less interesting than another experiment tested only for a few
> minutes. Time in the field is precious, I can spend it really trying
> to listen with my best system (my ears) or monitoring through
> headphones to a much inferior system. In my studio with headphones
> and two speaker systems to compare, I can become a lot more objective
> "distant" and hear aspects in the recording I could not hear in the
> field. Maybe we stick with a set-up for a while because it helps us
> learn the rigs characteristics faster in the varied world we go into?
>
I sure would like to reduce the size of my equipment and weight. This
for me is a result of limited resources and hopefully we will have
some less expensive field gear shortly that I can convert to and not
be laptop tied down. I don't mind setting up in a fixed location so
much because I have had such good results with "sound trapping" vs
"sound hunting" in the last couple years. When "sound trapping" with
the cube I am free to run around and "sound hunt" with the parabolic.
Rich
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|