if you have some sound examples i would be happy if you upload them,
if its not too much work!
the idea of a lot of people coming together and record same sounds
with different rigs, that would be great. i=B4m missing a real world
comparison in a lot of professional applications.
not a lot of people do blind tests, a thing i like to do:-)... but on
the other hand, maybe its not just the sound, maybe its a little bit
more, concerning if you like you=B4re equipment as walter knapp says..
I just read the technical specifications on the mbho site. the noise
level of most mics is around 26 to 30 db spl (equivalent SPLrated at
CCIR), which is a little much...
thats interesting to hear about the earthworks. sounds like i don=B4t
have to look after that anymore.
before i read your thread i searched in the naturerecordists archive
after earthworks and stumbled over a KM 183 vs. AT 3032 comparison,
which for sure, amazed me. i mean, these are really cheap mics, (not
suitable for MS), but they sounded allright.
anyone tryd those one or other audio technica mics? i know its what
you pay is what you get, but hearing the AT 3032 in comparison to a
183 makes me insecure about that...
beside that, i don=B4t think i will ever record in a jungle. here we
have no places with great humidity. maybe if i close the bathroom
door and take a shower... but thats not sounding so amazing;-)
Am 21.08.2006 um 21:10 schrieb Tim Nielsen:
> I have heard good things about the MBHO, very 'Schoeps-like' I'm
> told, and I think they even make figure 8?
>
> I've never been impressed with Earthworks. I tried a pair of QTC1's I
> think they were, and they were very noisy. Self noise was up around
> 22dB I think which is insanely high for a high quality omni mic. I
> know they're supposed to sound good, but all I heard was noise. I
> think for nature recording, they are simply too noisy.
>
> My honest opinion, is that with any high quality set of mics, you
> should be able to record most of what you want. Some of us have
> multiple rigs, but in fact, for years I only had my Schoeps MS rig,
> and it recorded everything I needed it to. Of all my mics, it's what
> I would grab if I had to keep only one thing (although that might
> change once I've played with the MKH's a bit more).
>
> I think that's why I propose MS as a great starting set of mics, you
> get portability, you get by default a single mono facing mic for FX
> gathering or recording dialog, etc. You get an adjustable, mono
> compatible stereo image that can sound amazing.
>
> If you really want to go small, consider either the Schoeps CCM
> series or the Neumann KM series with detachable capsules. I know
> several people with these rigs (or the CCM Schoeps XY setup). The
> problem I've found is that the Rycote ball-gag system for those
> capsules aren't very secure, there is a fair amount of mic movement
> in there. The CCM Schoeps XY is very hard to hand-hold, the Rycote
> suspension just doesn't seem sturdy enough. The Neumann MS with
> detachable capsules, or Schoeps MS in CCM form is easier, and
> incredibly compact. The CCM's are very expensive, but have no 'body'
> and so a very tiny rig can be made. I have my Schoeps CMC mics
> mounted in a size 1 zepplin, so it's still very small, the suspension
> is stronger and better isolated, and it's not 'that' much larger than
> the ball-gag system. A Sennheiser MKH set be quite a bit larger.
>
> I know people only seem to want to recommend the MKH's, but I would
> tell you to at least check out the Schoeps and Neumann's and MBHOs.
> If you don't think you'll be doing most of your recording in the
> jungle, you'll probably have no problems with humidity. My Schoeps
> have been around the world, recorded in 95% humidity and 95 degree
> heat all day, and never failed me. Doesn't mean they're immune to
> humidity problems or that they won't someday, but I think the
> humidity problem is often quite overstated.
>
> I would be happy to post some a few sounds to my FTP recorded in
> Schoeps MS that I think illustrate a nice stereo image, not to try to
> convince you, but just so you can start to hear some different mics
> and configs.
>
> I would love to someday get together about 10 people and their
> respective rigs, and record identical program material using various
> setups. Volume equalize them, and have a great and true comparison of
> rigs. Record all using say 722's from Sound Devices for consistency.
> Too bad we're all scattered across the planet.
>
> As for MS decoding, you've just about nailed it. There isn't anything
> more than adjusting the various amounts of the different mics. But
> some MS plugins are also 'spatialization' plugins that do have the
> ability to 'widen' the stereo image artificially. The Waves imaging
> plugin can do this. I don't much like the effect, but it does sort of
> work.
>
> Also remember that if you have the 722 set to decode the MS into an
> XY signal for recording, it's very easy to 'undo' that later and get
> back your MS signals, which is kind of fun. Most MS plugins for
> digital audio workstations can do this. You can even take an XY
> signal recorded XY, and 'derive' an MS signal from it, then adjust
> the width, and put back into XY.
>
> On Aug 21, 2006, at 10:52 AM, evs wrote:
>
> > >
> > Posted by: "Tim Nielsen"
> > > Poke it up close
> > > to something, aim it all around, and hear what I can hear. With
> > stand
> > > mounted stereo pairs, this just seems like it'd be much more
> > > cumbersome. With the MS rigs, I'm just so much more mobile and
> > > flexible.
> >
> > Posted by: "Walter Knapp"
> > > This is one reason why you should probably not choose a mic
> > > you dislike, your brain will make everything it records sound bad
> > > because you dislike it. Just as with a mic you really like you
> will
> > > overlook it's faults and not hear them.
> >
> > yes, that sounds true. maybe the best way is to try a few
> > combinations befor buying. (and thats not easy, find a dealer who
> > gots all the combination you want to try:-))
> >
> > Tim, When i hear you talking, ms is getting more and more
> sympathetic
> > to me. in the end i maybe just have to try different things out for
> > some days. you=B4re right, the big plus for ms is that you are
> > flexibel. its a even bigger plus because this sounds true to my
> > application as well, because to aim the mic around, just to hear how
> > different it will sound, is even interesting if i just record some
> > subtle wind.
> > with some ms schoeps you are even more flexibel because, if you
> > just have the capsules in a windshild, its really tiny compared to
> > the sennheiser ms rig. but if the sennheiser make less noise and
> > sounding better its maybe better to carry a little more...
> >
> > but i want to throw in 2 other words. anybody tryd earthworks
> > microphones? the sr series or the qtc series? maybe they are not so
> > resistant for using outdoors?
> > and anybody used MBHO microphones? just read about them a few
> minutes
> > ago, so i don=B4t no anything about them. anyone has a idea?
> >
> > all the best
> > evs
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
|