At 8:54 PM +0000 3/26/07, ErnstKarel wrote:
>Very interesting. While your comment on that page that "the HD-P2,
>HHb MDP 500 and the
>Mic2496->HD-P2 combination* performed almost as well as the $4000
>744T reference
>recorder" is true with respect to noise floor, it sounds to me as if
>the sound of the tick-tocks
>themselves on the 744 is much fuller and more detailed than the
>sound from any of the other
>preamps. Which is just a good reminder of what we all know, that
>noise floor/tech specs is
>only one part of the picture....
>
Hi Ernst--
The 744T and 722 have reproduced ticks with greater relief on other
tests too. I don't know, perhaps this is telling,.. the first MDP
500's ticks stand out nicely too. The tenor and brilliance of the
electric clock ticks change a lot. In these selections (I choose
them on the basis of low background levels) the right tick of the MDP
500 test seems to be softening.
The clocks sound to me as if they are about a foot away, but each is
36" away. The dampened room allows one to hear the clock, remarkably,
but at the expense of imaging the room. I'm very interested in
tonal/spatial imagining performance qualities too; this test
situation is the opposite! :-) It is designed to isolate the noise
bed of the pres because as sound levels drop and micing distances
increase in the field, any noise contributed by the pre-- above that
of the mics'-- is something most recordists would be prefer to avoid.
Looks like its safe to say this can be done for less than $1000USD.
Rob D.
|