Hi Raimund--
Thanks for making it possible for us to gain a
sense of the built-in mics and arrays!
While comparing the arrays:
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/type/public/media/DR1-LS10-D50-R09_CLIPS_Sor3Lr=
g.mov
(4mb, 16b/48K, QuickTime movie, adjust playback
volume to a comfortable level).
I noticed that the Sony's left channel is down
quite a bit. Do you know the reason for that?
Also, in the clip I extracted, the birds in the
later half seem to be portrayed as centered by
some of the mics/arrays and clearly to the right
by others. Do you happen to recall which imaging
is more correct?
The supplied mp3's were 128 kbps, so some quality
loss can be expected from that compression.
Rob D.
=3D =3D =3D
At 8:42 AM +0000 5/27/08, Raimund Specht wrote:
>Last Sunday I tried to compare four of the new "point-and-shoot"
>recorders with their internal mics in the field (in Berlin, Germany).
>I placed them all on a stack one above the other and recorded the
>following tracks simultaneously:
>
><http://www.avisoft.com/test/R09_field.mp3>http://www.avisoft.com/test/R09=
_field.mp3
><http://www.avisoft.com/test/DR-1_field.mp3>http://www.avisoft.com/test/DR=
-1_field.mp3
><http://www.avisoft.com/test/LS-10_field.mp3>http://www.avisoft.com/test/L=
S-10_field.mp3
><http://www.avisoft.com/test/PCM-D50_field.mp3>http://www.avisoft.com/test=
/PCM-D50_field.mp3
>
>I tried to match the different recording levels a bit, but the results
>it might not be perfect.
>
>On the SONY PCM-D50, the mic orientation was set to 120=B0. This is the
>reason why the left and right channels are audibly reversed.
>Unfortunately, the sample rate on the PCM-D50 was only 22.05 kHz (I
>simply forgot about that while struggling with the numerous devices).
>There was a soft breeze. I therefore covered the stack of recorders
>with a T-shirt in order to reduce the wind noise a bit. There is of
>course still some noise originating from the reed on the left channel
>(right channel on the PCM-D50).
>
>I believe that this real-world test reveals some interesting
>differences (certainly on the frequency responses of the different
>microphones and the nature of their noise) but it also demonstrates
>that it is quite difficult to get reliable results under field
>conditions.
>
>Regards,
>Raimund
>
>
--
|