David - that is a wonderful recording,thanks for sharing.
And Rob -
It is interesting to listen for the "different spatial plane" aspect
you mention. I haven't had much experience using m/s yet, but I'm
wondering if m/s might sometimes create a rift between stereo and mono
dimensions yielding straight-on sounds that appear as if on a separate
plane, because the L/R at straight ahead are essentially phase
canceled leaving only the original m channel at this position. Could
it be possible that the central mono and the surrounding stereo might
not be meshing perfectly? Or am I way off with this idea?
John Hartog
--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>
> At 11:15 PM +0000 6/14/07, wildlifeanalysis wrote:
> >Hello Rob
> >
> >The mic rig I used was an MKH30 and MKH40 in an MS configuration on
> >a tripod pointed
> >ever so slightly upward (~15 degrees) into the trees toward the
> >bird-voiced treefrog's
> >perches. I decoded in Peak on Mac with an AudioUnits plugin called
> >Stereo Image Munger,
> >which is free and effective. I gave the side mic a little more
> >prominence than I think is
> >traditional (the mid was at 100% and the side at 60% of full)
> >because the sound scene was
> >so encompassing.
> >
> >In the recording, if memory serves, the first calling bullfrog is at
> >about 12 oclock in the
> >middle of the sound field.
>
> I was guessing it was M-S, possibly a 30 and a 60. The bullfrog that
> starts at 29 seconds seems like its on a different spatial plane from
> the other sound sources. (I think the same individual is also singing
> during the initial fade in). Even if other calls are from behind the
> mics, all of the other calls seem located in the "front" of the
> stereo field to me. Perhaps the discrepant bullfrog's calls are
> reflected within the space differently. I'm trying to gather clues
> about how this effect is produced.
>
> >The second responder is at about 4 oclock slightly behind me,
> >as you said - so the image is a very hard right pan. I have noticed
> >that since the MKH40
> >has a cardiod pattern on either side, they are very sensitive to
> >sounds from behind. I
> >wonder if some sort of parabola would cut down on this when necessary.
> >
> >If you would like, I can upload the raw MS file if you would like to
> >remix the sound field.
>
> That would be interesting to try. Your mix is very pleasant as is.
> Thanks for the additional info! Rob D.
>
> >
> >David
> >
> >
> >
> >--- In Rob Danielson <type@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi David--
> >> Thanks for sharing the beautiful recording and
> >> heartfelt account. I'm in the process of a
> >> location change in response to similar
> >> impressions.
> >>
> >> Your recording makes me curious about the mics
> >> and the array or rig you used in relation to the
> >> stereo field and a unique quality in this
> >> recording. At 29 seconds, a bull frog starts
> >> calling in the middle-ground. Do you know where
> >> this frog was located,.. possibly behind the mics
> >> at "6 o'clock?" At 14 seconds, is that bull frog
> >> located at about "4 o'clock"--or hard right? If
> >> you don't mind sharing the info, what type of
> >> mics & array did you use? Thanks, Rob D.
> >
> >
> >
> >"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> >sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
Krause
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Rob Danielson
> Peck School of the Arts
> Department of Film
> University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee
>
|