naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: recording rig advice

Subject: Re: recording rig advice
From: "Walter Knapp" waltknapp
Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:54 am (PDT)
Posted by: "Rob Danielson"

> We may have different understandings or expectations of the
> capabilities or accuracies of recording systems including mics. I
> think my hearing is pretty good.  For web file exchanges and
> conversations like this, I use headphones.

I spent a number of years doing hearing tests on folks who thought their
hearing was pretty good. Check your hearing at least as accurately as
you check mics. I think you will be surprised at just how irregular your
hearing is. Like everyone else.

For highly technical evaluations of recording systems used for recording
wildlife you might want to get into some of the formal Bioacoustics
groups. If you want highly accurate and calibrated recording those are
the folks to go to. I used to belong to several groups, but let them
lapse as they were generally not too valuable for generalized nature
recording or even my scientific recording. And no way I could afford the
equipment they considered minimal.

> My understanding is that every component in the recording chain
> contributes qualities. With reverberant field recording, tonal
> imbalances, including resonance are pretty much given. I accept these
> imperfections and I believe trying to understand it helps me.

resonance in a recording system has specific causes, does not come out
of thin air. I believe you are in error in claiming resonance of such
magnitude from the mic. There is some resonance from the diaphragm
itself, but that's not limited to specific frequencies to the extent you
describe. For quality mics it's well damped. You need to widen your
search to more likely causes either before or after the mics.

> "Out there" being where you stood or where your mics were?

Except in the case of the tall tripod recording they are generally one
and the same. I'm not 17' tall, so monitor and move the high tripod via
listening to the mics. But I compare what I'm getting to what my own
hearing gets down below.

   Our
> brains "form" most of what we perceive through inference even if we
> are listening to the same sound file on the same model headphones.
> With this in mind, its easy to see why many recordists feel that mic
> technology is perfect enough. I enjoy trying to connect and better
> understand the imperfections that are the systems we live in, I'm
> sorry if the rubs anyone in the wrong way.  Rob D.

It's in how you represent what you find that it's questionable. You too
are subject to your brain's interpretation of what it hears. You do tend
to report as if you are reporting a universal lab tested finding, when
in truth it's just what you hear. Or think you hear.

You are at odds with what mic designers such as sennheiser report on
your findings in some cases. I have a strong tendency to think that the
mic designers have a better handle on this stuff than any of us.

Do not believe that you are the only one to critically evaluate
recordings or care about such things.

Walt





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU