<<If you're thinking of moving from MS to XY, I'd offer the opinion
that you're trading apples for apples. MS, properly decoded, IS xy. >>
True, inasmuch as the sum & difference signals electrically combine
to form the same signal as XY. However, MS can be expected to have
the advantage that the mid mic is on axis to the sound source,
whereas both mics in XY are 45 degrees off axis. This is more of an
issue with some mics than others, especially with less expensive mics
where off axis response is a bit ragged. Also, prior to decoding, an
optimal mono signal can be derived from the MS array. I would say the
MS set up also has some benefits as relating to physical mounting of
the array. And one can utilize various patterns other than a cardioid
for the mid position, resulting in differing non-XY stereo fields.
<<When I've done tests of large scale sound systems, my MS and a
friends XY Schoeps setups, were nearly identical. We actually both
agreed that if anything, the imaging on the MS was a tiny bit better,
but almost imperceptible.>>
Sure, given the very uniform off axis response of Schoeps mics, there
should be very little difference between the two.
<<Now, different techniques such as spaced omni's, Blumlein, ORTF,
will definitely sound different, and it would be worth trying some of
them. The problem is, I would think that unless you're comparing the
same band of mics, it would be a difficult test, the mics themselves
will color your testing as much as the stereo method.>>
XY vs ORTF (or NOS) is a quick & easy comparison with the same mics.
Scott Fraser
|