At 5:23 PM +0000 1/19/08, Chris Hails wrote:
>Thanks to Fran Guidry on the Fostex Forum I picked up this test he has
>done using live acoustic guitar and a simultaneous comparison of
>an FR2LE, SD744, Zoom H2, and Edirol R09. Not natural sounds I know,
>but he does a really nice "blind" test where you can get the answer
>later. Nice playing too !
>
><http://www.fxguidry.com/pblog/index.php?entry=3Dentry080112-121236>http:/=
/www.fxguidry.com/pblog/index.php?entry=3Dentry080112-121236
>
>Chris
Thanks for the heads-up, Chris. The results are surprising and very
relevant to Umshankar's comments about the performance of the H2's
built-in mics on this list. "Acoustic Guitar Mic Comparison" might
be a more accurate description of the test/outcome than, "Field
Recorder Comparison Test."
I left the below comment on Fran's blog. Rob D.
"Surprising results! With two of the recorders having the same
brand/model mic and the other recorders employing different mics, it
seemed to me that the test would be more likely to reveal some of the
differences in the mics more than differences in the recorders' mic
preamps (especially with low preamp gain, close-micing and monaural
samples). It was hard for me to discern between 1,2, & 4 even though
I knew I was listening for two, matched mics! I made a blind tests
comparing phrases one after another from these takes and found that I
could not consistently distinguish #1 from #4 and #2 from #4. That
three of the samples would sound so close was a complete surprise to
me.
The conclusion I tend to reach is that the H2's internal (mics when
close-mic'd) can have sound quality very similar to that of the
Schoeps MK41. The Edirol's built-in mics are much brighter-- though
part of this might come from being further-up the neck of the guitar.
I'm not sure this test is useful in discerning differences in the
recorders' mic preamp performance. Its probably a better comparison
of the three mics for close-mic'd, instrumental applications. Other
recordists have reported that the H2's internal mics sound
surprisingly good. I assume they are assessing tonal qualities and
not other potentially important qualities like self-noise, but you
never know! Surprises, both good and bad, seem to be normal fare in
the lower-cost options recordists have to choose from these days."
.
--
|