At 09:14 2007-04-12, you wrote:
>Walt, thanks for your excellent reply!
>
>Our auditory perception is indeed good at isolating one sound source
>in a stereo field; I'm pretty sure we're still far ahead of what
>software can do. There's this thing called "blind signal separation",
>but that only works when there are as many channels as there are
>signals, and the signals need to be point sources. Although, there
>may be advances I'm not aware of.
>
>I am surprised to hear that with the Twin Science, the subject's
>sound is centered. I would've thought it would be skewed to one side.
>Is it centered because you adjusted the focus of the microphone until
>it was centered? Is the background ambience uncentered?
The Twin Science has two mono microphone - one omni, facing out and a
cardioid facing into the dish.
You get two outputs, both mono.
To optimize this function, you need to learn how to place the mic
inside the dish, different from one situation to another. The
frequency curve of the parabol will get very different, - several
decibel up and down - depending on which mic of the two is placed
where,in the dish, relative to the focus.
But people don't bother to do this experimenting and learning.
Instead, they learn all about 0,0001 % difference in ways to compress
or not compress... or something....
(Sorry, I couldn't resist... )
>How does the Stereo-DAT compare with the Twin Science after a
>conversion to mono?
Never connect two stereo channels with one-another!
Use one of them.
When you wrote that one channel was distorted and the other not, I
was sure that you had used a Twin Science! That kind of result would
have been typical.
But if you use the Stereo DATmic, how could it become that way?
Were the input level settings different?
Klas.
>"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
|