Bruce, I have to take issue with one of your observations, that which
seems to say that MS is somehow a 'narrower' stereo image.
XY is usually done at 90 degrees. MS with a 1:1 decoding ratio
produces a stereo image of 90 degrees. If done properly, and I have
done tests between an MS Schoeps and an XY Scheops side by side, they
should sound nearly identical (and they do).
True, you can to 120, 135, more on XY, or ORTF, etc. But don't think
of MS as a 'narrow' stereo. At 90 degrees MS stereo can sound full
and rich and provide a stereo image as good as any other method, in
my opinion.
Also don't forget that swapping out a sub-cardiod for the mid mic in
an MS mode would provide roughly 120 degree stereo, and swapping out
an omni for the mid mic would provide 180 degrees, all coincident,
mono compatible and adjustable.
On Aug 20, 2006, at 4:46 PM, Bruce Wilson wrote:
> I use two free mics like you mention. It's true, you have many more
> options
> for placement and control of the stereo field. But set up and
> moving them is
> a total pain! Also, there are many times I don't want the entire
> stereo
> field. If the source is in one direction, the (relatively) narrow
> field of
> the MS setup helps isolate the sound of interest. True, sometimes
> I'll use
> Blumlein or XY to get an entire room (or canyon, or cavern), or
> ORTF when I
> want a 180 degree soundscape, but when I want one sound it's always
> MS.
>
> So I go for two separate mics because I rarely want just a single
> sound. My
> recording mirrors my photography-I shoot rocks and trees, and I
> listen to
> rocks and trees, things which tend to still be there in the five
> minutes it
> takes to set up. The many who try for animals and birds are FAR
> better off
> with a portable, fast-in-the-field MS set.
>
> Bruce Wilson KF7K
> http://science.uvsc.edu/wilson
>
> On Aug 20, 2006, at 11:58 AM, evs wrote:
>
> i=B4m not a so big fan of MS. maybe i=B4m not
> > experienced enough, but i got a few reasons:
> > i find other stereo recordings are more easy to handle (other wise i
> > got to have the ms plugin in sound miner on... well, its not soo
> > hard;-)),
> > but its maybe just a thing i have to get used to.
> > the other thing about ms, is that i thought is that the recordings
> > are not so wide like A B Stereo, which is beside ortf another way i
> > would do with two cardioids.
> > also i thought that with two "free" microphones you are more
> flexibel
> > in doing different stereo recordings (ortf, ab, xy...) which is a
> > plus...
> > when i did some ms recordings, (which is a while ago,) they never
> > sounded as wide as a AB recording.
> >
> > on the other hand you can tweak the ms signal if it should be
> wide or
> > not so wide. and you have it both in one suspension. thats a plus
> for
> > MS. hm. a lot to think about.
> >
> > right at the moment i have a mkh 416 here. theres a option that i
> can
> > have it cheaply. but i guess the mkh 40 or 50 is way better, and
> less
> > noisy?
> > or is the combination mkh 416 / mkh 30 also a good way?
> >
> > i just was on the web site from walter kanpp (http://
> > frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/samples.html) and the
> > combination mkh 60/mkh 30 sounded for me much better than the mkh
> 40/
> > mkh 30 combination. i guess the mkh 50/ mkh 30 combination sounds
> > more like the 60/30 than the 40/30...? the mkh 80/mkh80 combination
> > sounds the best. oh my good. but thats too much money right at the
> > moment. but this is sounding incredible!
> >
> > maybe there is another mic option which are as silent as the
> > sennheiser? maybe a little more cheaper that them?:-) anyone any
> > ideas?
> >
> > opinions more than welcome!
> > evs
> >
> > Am 20.08.2006 um 19:38 schrieb Tim Nielsen:
> >
> > > Welcome to the group.
> > >
> > > Get the 722. The mic preamps are absolutely superb, among the
> > > quietest I've ever heard. I had previously used a Grace Design
> > > Lunatec V2, considered probably the best portable preamp ever
> made,
> > > and the 722's preamps were close enough to that, I have never used
> > > the V2 again. The 722's preamps are quite transparent, and very
> very
> > > quiet.
> > >
> > > As for mics, I recently did a test between my Schoeps MS rig,
> and a
> > > friend's Neumann MS rig, using the KM100 series mics. What we
> found
> > > was that they were sonically so similar, that they could be
> intercut
> > > with almost no difference. So I think between them, it's just
> > > preference. The Neumann's are slightly cheaper.
> > >
> > > But I would strongly suggest you consider an MS rig using the
> > > Sennheiser MKH series. They're noticeably quieter than the
> > Schoeps or
> > > Neumanns. If you're really trying to record gentle wind in leaves,
> > > the Neumann's and Schoep's noise of the mic is very possibly
> > going to
> > > be audible. The Sennheisers are much quieter. I think the Schoeps
> > > sound has more 'character' than the Sennheisers, but the Senns are
> > > amazing mics. As others have and will point out, incredibly
> rugged,
> > > nearly immune to humidity problems that may or may not plague
> > Schoeps
> > > and Neumanns (depending on who you ask).
> > >
> > > Also, if you haven't recorded in MS, I think you'd find the stereo
> > > image excellent, and at least as good as ORTF, especially when
> using
> > > good mics.
> > >
> > > So my suggestion:
> > >
> > > 722 Recorder
> > > Sennheiser MS combo of either MKH30/MKH40 or MKH30/MKH50
> > >
> > > On Aug 20, 2006, at 7:12 AM, evs wrote:
> > >
> > > > hello everyone,
> > > > i=B4m new to this great group, this is my first posting, but i
> read
> > > > some postings on the website and did some searchings there,
> > > > but now i have a question, some need for advice...:-)
> > > > i=B4m planning to build my own recording rig.
> > > > i will record mainly ambient. like very quiet wind, air, wind in
> > > > leaves and so on, but my goal is to record quiet sounds, as i=B4m
> > > > missing those things and because i love them.
> > > > (and because i need them for my work. i=B4m into post
> production in
> > > > film)
> > > > for that i think i need good equipment which will give me
> results
> > > > without (much) noise...
> > > > i thought about the sound devices 722 or the fostex fr-2.
> > > > i like the 722, i allready had it in my hands and it feels well
> > > build
> > > > and strong and its handy, which is important to me. and i=B4ve
> heard
> > > > just good things about the mic pre amps.
> > > > the fostex fr-2 looks (on pictures) not so handy, but i=B4ve read
> > > > somewehere in the internet that the mic pre amps and a/d
> > converters
> > > > are as good as the 722. and the fostex cost a 1000,-euro less...
> > > > anyone compared this too recorders against each other? which
> > got the
> > > > better sound quality? any advice which would you take?
> > > >
> > > > coming to microphones, i=B4m thinking of buying a couple of
> > neumann KM
> > > > 184. cardioid is fine for me because i like to record most of
> the
> > > > times in ORTF.
> > > > the shoeps mics are more expensive and as far as i know its a
> > matter
> > > > of taste if you prefer shoeps or neumann.
> > > > beside from that there are some cheap mics like the oktava
> MK-012,
> > > > but i think maybe they will have a little bit too much noise
> > for my
> > > > application and would not be so perfect for recording subtle
> > > sounds...
> > > > is this right? what would you advice me to buy? maybe you
> have an
> > > > option where i did not even think about!
> > > > any advice is welcome!
> > > > all the best
> > > > evs
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> "Microphones are not ears,
> Loudspeakers are not birds,
> A listening room is not nature."
> Klas Strandberg
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
|