At 2:07 PM +0000 7/9/07, George Paul wrote:
>--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>>
>> At 5:10 PM +0000 7/8/07, George Paul wrote:
>>
>> Rob D asked:
>>
>> >>What rig was used for the "Cerulean Warbler
>>Soundscape," your AT835 -> DAT
>> >>or the mkh20-30 rig?
>> >>http://web.mac.com/geopaul/iWeb/The%20Visit/2_files/webpublish%20boun=
ce.mp3
>>
>> At 5:10 PM +0000 7/8/07, George Paul wrote:
>>
>> >The Cerulean warbler soundscape was with my AT 835 ST > Sound
>> >Devices MP2 > Sony
>> >mini DAT.
>>
>> I see that AT has the 835's side mic capsules spec'd at 26dBA self
>> noise, and the mid at 22dBA.=A0
>> http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/b92dc794916f0fa7/index.htm=
l=A0
>> Its noise performance seems better than that to me. It will be
>> interesting to compare it to the mkh20-30 combo. Did you have the LF
>> cut on? Did you use the non-matrixed M-S mode or one of the
>> internally-matrixed left/right stereo modes? The woodpecker decay
>> moves to the center. Perhaps there was a valley-like landform in
>> front or behind the mic?
>>
>> --
> > Rob Danielson
>
>
>Rob: Geoff Keller also recorded the Cerulean
>warbler soundscape. When he returns from
>Canada I will ask him to send it to me, and I
>will post it, so we can do a side by side of the
>two MS rigs. I did have the LF cut on on that one.
Attenuating the low frequencies in the field
tends to limit what I can do with low-end shaping
and harmonics in post-production. In reality,
the low frequencies come from much greater
distances and create the "sound horizon" in most
natural spaces. Should I have to filter a
recording with a jet in post, its easier and more
efficient to have the entire frequency bandwidth
to work with. An exception is when the low Hz
sound is very loud and dramatically reduces the
saturation of higher frequencies-- rare
situations like recording crickets next to
powerful irrigation pump.
>
>On this recording, I recorded non-matrixed and
>decoded in the studio in Logic Pro 7.2
>with one of its plug ins.
I would tend to favor this option with any M-S mic.
>
>The woodpecker decay is way cool. I don't think
>there was a valley-like landform. What
>there was was a large field, with woods
>surrounding it, maybe 100 yards away. The
>woodpecker, which I believe is a Pileated, was
>drumming from the woods. I suppose the
>sound started in the woods, moved across the
>field, and then moved back into the woods.
>What is your thinking there.
We are in agreement. I intended "valley" as a
general shape. The walls formed by the trees on
both sides of the opening are likely the cause
the decay moving to the middle. Amazing huh?
> The area where the woodpecker was would be on the left side
Its primary impulse is on the right side for me.
>of the photo where Geoff is adjusting the
>Sennheiser rig (mine is already set up in the
>furry
>coat), through the opening and about 100 yards or so away.
>
>The strange thing about these decays is that the
>mics, and recordings, pick them up better
>than our ears, I think.
Good recording rigs and the feedback they provide
can help one learn to notice much more in the
field. :-) I think its the additional
amplification that makes it seem like one can
hear more. Our ears and live listening is
incomparable. Rob D.
>
>Please let me know your thinking on the decay issue.
>
|