I agree Rob. It is not often that I mix for 100% sound from the dish
but on occasion it does happen that way. I record surf with the large
dish as it is less blurred and sounds more natural without the triple
edit approach.
When I wished to record the wind generated by forest fires I could
only do it with the dish as I could not get close due to heat and
danger. Linked is a controlled burn recorded 100% by dish. The voices
were never closer than 30'. This was edited down to a couple mins
from a couple hour burn and eq was used.
Critics are welcome. Did I capture the fire wind good enough? Or try
again by another approach?
300k photos, 3 meg sound file.
http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/fire.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/fire1.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~richpeet/fire.mp3
Rich
--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the opportunity to share impressions
> Matt! You might try running "master" as an
> archive search. There are some very long strings
> on the subject of EQ within the context of
> mastering for a known product in post production.
>
> I prefer the original of the two because the two
> primary elements preserved in the recording (a
> machine-oriented drone and the thrush) retain
> more overall relation and tonal balance. The
> dish, or some other factor, has attenuated most
> of the lower-end energy of the original setting.
> Lows are critical for space because they
> establish the sound horizon-- sounds that are
> distant relative to those that are close. The
> last time i did a crude test, about 70% of the
> energy, even in my remote location recordings,
> was under 700Hz, much of that under 125Hz.
> Perhaps using more low-end roll-off in your
> equalization further challenged a quest for more
> balance. (There are others more familiar with
> dishes who can talk about the way they shape the
> low-end-- or another subject you can search in
> the archive.
>
> Recordings like this one can be very effective
> mixed into a full range ambient stereo "bed."
> Once you have a recording of an actual space and
> understand its strengths, then its easier to
> experiment with EQ and simple time delays and
> simple reverb patches to get reflections that are
> consistent with the acoustics of the space.
> Without spatial cues to start with, its very hard
> for me to figure out what the heck I'm even
> trying to do! Yes, posting presents issues of
> subjectively, but if recording can be considered
> an "art," it might stem from the ability to
> capture enough cues in the field to be able to
> build upon them consistently through the whole
> process. Rob D.
>
|
