i too use red for right and white or black for left (i have a marxist frien=
d who habitually connects red to left) but when it is more than 2 channels =
i use the resistor colour code. i already remember it!
umashankar
i have published my poems. you can read (or buy) at http://stores.lulu.com/=
umashankar
----- Original Message ----
From: frankmhinrichs <>
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 12:55:55 PM
Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Red is Right etc.
Hi Lou, Steve and all,
as many of us I've also used red for right and left usually black as it's t=
he 2 colours you
usally get.
But since using up to 8 mics at times, I too have come naturally to the nau=
tical use of
colours for the first 2 channels green for right and red for left , then br=
own, yellow, blue,
orange, purple, black (that is my personal choise of colours).
That also allows me to group mics (group red, group green....).
But I've seen many different combinations as in a digisnake, other AES conn=
ectors or even
telephone connectors. So I guess there is no international standard for ca=
ble coding. I'd
love one for my part. Electrical, audio, digital, nautical, for the moment =
I guess it all comes
down to a practical and personal preference.
My logic is tying to alternate darker and brighter colours.
This also allows me to draw 3D diagrams for mic spacing.
As for computer connections, yes in post you can lable the channels accorgi=
ng to your
personal choices.
regards,
Frank Hinrichs
ToneDeafBunker, Brussels Belgium
--- In Lou Judson <> wrote:
>
> Steve, to me it is of immense practical interest - butthen, I am a
> professional audio engneer. To wire up a stage or a studio and not be =
> positive about left and right channels in anything stereo is a huge
> hassle. I only have one stereo mic (Shure VP88, and its y adaptor has =
> red for left!) but many stereo sources need positive ID of the
> channels. Seems it is European, specifically the Beeb and Nagra that
> are the things I've (personally) run into that are on the nautical
> way - which makes a lot of sense, just different from my everyday
> experience for so many years.
>
> And I have to keep track of over 65 microphones, so naturally my
> feelings are different from yours, and in the field with nature it is =
> much easier.
>
> And there is no mouse between the recorder and the mic - if so it may =
> be chewing on the wire of any color (or colour). While in the comuter =
> it is easily changed, if it is reversed you need to know where and
> how...
>
> I appreciate eeryone's patience and willingness to talk about it here!
>
> Lou
> Lou Judson =95 Intuitive Audio
> 415-883-2689
> "When the power of love overcomes the love of power,
> the world will know peace." (Jimi Hendrix)
>
>
> On Sep 28, 2007, at 6:38 PM, Steve Pelikan wrote:
>
> All:
>
> This thread really is fascinating to me but, as I understand it,
> primarily of historical interest? I could well be missing the point
> (please explain if I am) but now, it seems, it takes the click of a
> mouse button:
>
> channel =3D channel +1 (mod 2)
>
> to reassign channels/tracks.
>
> When I record in stereo I speak into one microphone (this is <date>
> <location> <subject> <habitat, plants> <weather> <time> <equipment
> setup> this microphone to the <compass (or other) direction>)
>
> Recently I've gotten curious about quad and ambisonic set ups, and
> that seems to be a hairier question as one would need to specify a
> 3-dimensional configuration in order to know what was recorded.
>
> As if I'd ever have 4 decent microphones...
>
> Best regards, and please correct/inform me if I'm mistaken!
>
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
Yahoo! Groups Links
_____________________________________________________________________=
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo! Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html
|