Where did the tic-tac tests go?
I think a silent room, same ambience and the ticking clock is the
most accurate way to show self noise.
Klas.
At 11:47 2006-12-16, you wrote:
>At 10:39 AM -0800 12/15/06, Dan Dugan wrote:
> > >Hi-- Thanks to Tom Bamberger who loaned me his new unit, I was able
> >>to run this test:
> >>
> >>QuickTime Movie (IMA:4 compressed sound)
> >>http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/mediafiles/H4_744_
> NH700_Compare_Sm.mov
> >>(8mb)
> >>Caution, the recording is loud. Adjust sound level to a comfortable lev=
el
> >>
> >>QuickTime Movie (uncompressed 16/48K sound)
> >
> >http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/mediafiles/H4_744_NH70=
Message: 0_CompareLrg.
Subject: mov
> >>(12.5mb)
> >
> >Thanks a lot, Rob. The first thing that jumped out was that the ART
> >power supply made a significant high-pass filter. Perhaps it has
> >series DC-blocking caps in the output that aren't big enough. That's
> >something that would be easy to modify.
> >
> >-Dan Dugan
>
>Hi Dan--
>I'm not positive there isn't something awry with the Art->722 segment
>of the test, for example, I hear a shift in the stereo balance which
>I couldn't explain. I lost the other examples of this test due to the
>corruption events so I couldn't duplicate it/affirm it. No test is
>perfect. I left that segment in there because I couldn't resolve the
>stereo balance shift. I had to return the H4 and the main goal of the
>test was to compare the recorders. Perhaps the Hi-MD combo could
>sound better, but not the H4, that's for sure.
>
>My guess is the change in the low Hz response is most likely the
>result of a wind gust in the first 722 segment. I was fighting wind
>and local traffic. The 722 files get boosted 12 dB and then the
>whole test gets another 6-8dB boost to preserve quality when its
>compressed. I can't study that moment on the orig 722 take nor go on
>line at the moment to check because I'm out of town. I saw the
>pronounced lows in the 722 segment, but I didn't seeing the same
>dramatic change when the Art was removed in the NT1-A -> to H4 chain,
>so I let it go. If a high pass change happens in the H4 section of
>the test too, then something could be screwy with the Art.
>
>I've subjected the Rolls to the NT1-A ->722/Internal Phantom test
>many times and its consistently very transparent. Here's a test that
>have access to on my laptop that compares the Rolls to the Art
>(NT1-A->Rolls->Hi-MD and NT1-A->Art->Hi-MD) about midway through.
>http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/mediafiles/PortPhantomHiMD=
Reprtv01SorIMA.mov
>I made a sonogram of that segment and no high Pass filtering with the
>Art is evident to me. I'll be on the outlook for a performance issue
>with the (my) Art PhantomII, but the evidence as a whole suggests to
>me its very transparent. You can hear a subtle whine when the Art is
>used with the H4 (internal phantom off) but I've not encountered this
>interaction with the other inputs/recorders I tested.
>
>I'm not sure when this post will be added to the list. Sorry if its
>untimely by then. Rob D.
>
> >
> >
> >"Microphones are not ears,
> >Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >A listening room is not nature."
> >Klas Strandberg
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>--
>Rob Danielson
>Peck School of the Arts
>University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
>http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/
>
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email:
website: www.telinga.com
|