Sorry that my last message to Rob was not quite right! I herewith
make a correction.
More indoor tests today (using a softly beeping electronic
metronome): For loud sounds e.g. lyrebirds, if you have a strong
signal at high sensitivity volume 2, you will get a better (less
noisy) result if you switch to low sensitivity and volume 10. The
signal will be about the SAME, but the noise a lot less. This rule
applies if you are using ME67, WL-183s, or built-in mics.
However if you need the recorder on high sensitivity volume 5 to get
a decent signal, it is not worth trying to use low sensitivity on
volume 10 then boosting the signal later (if you do, the noise levels
will be very roughly the same).
I have done more tests with the WL-183s, on high sensitivity volume 5
(a good average level for recording birdsong). They give a very
slightly LESS strong signal than the built in mics, but when the
signal levels are equalized, the 183s are still a bit less noisy.
The 183s seem to work best (less noise) with the low cut ON,
alternatively they need a bit of low roll off below 500 hz.
Vicki Powys
Australia
On 07/07/2008, at 9:17 AM, Vicki Powys wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Yes I have tried lining up two files, one recorded in high
> sensitivity volume 2, the other on low sensitivity volume 10. I then
> increased the levels of the low sens. file by 5 dB (also 7 dB) to
> match the levels (of the recorded bird sounds or whatever) of the
> high sens. file. The exact amount of increase needed I am still
> working on, but it seems to be about 5-7 dB. Even with this
> increase, the noise levels are still lower with the low sens. file,
> especially the FIZZ noise.
>
> Vicki
>
> On 06/07/2008, at 2:01 PM, Rob Danielson wrote:
>
>> At 11:52 AM +1000 7/6/08, Vicki Powys wrote:
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Using an ME67 connected to my LS-10, I have done a bit more testing
>>> in the field (and indoors) of noise levels using high vs low
>>> sensitivity. For lyrebirds, I do seem to get a better result using
>>> low sensitivity at volume 10, instead of high sensitivity at volume
>>> 2. There is much less FIZZ.
>>>
>>> But also, surprisingly, I seemed to get better results yesterday
>>> when
>>> recording Regent Honeyeaters (they have a soft melodious call),
>>> using
>>> low sensitivity at volume 10, then raising the levels to match
>>> what I
>>> had recorded at high sensitivity at volume 5. Again, much less FIZZ
>>> on low sens.
>>
>> Did you confirm this with matched playback levels? If not, place the
>> tests made with high and low sensitivity one after the other on
>> different tracks in a time-line. Boost the playback volume of the low
>> sensitivity one to match the playback level of the louder (high
>> sensitivity) one. You should be able to hear the difference in the
>> "fizz" noise level where the two files join.
>>
>>>
>>> This seems to be a very complex issue! More testing needed!
>>>
>>> I haven't tried these tests with the WL-183s, but would suspect a
>>> similar result.
>>
>> Perhaps. The WL-183's are fairly sensitive mics but not in the same
>> ballpark with the ME-67.
>>
>>>
>>> Re my binaural setup, and your comment Rob (see below), where do I
>>> find Aaron's DSM temple mount set up?
>>
>> Aaron uses a WHB/N Windscreen
>> http://www.sonicstudios.com/access.htm#whb I'm not sure if Leonard
>> sells just the mount-windscreen or not but you can see how his design
>> works in the pictures. Rob D.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Vicki Powys
>>> Australia
>>>
>>> On 03/07/2008, at 12:31 AM, Raimund Specht wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rob Danielson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A metronome at 5 metres might be a pretty "hot" reference signal.
>>>>> Its possible that the "Low Sensitivity" setting might not provide
>>>>> sufficient gain for quieter sounds and environments. Its worth
>>>>> further investigation, for sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Coincidentally, earlier today, I thought of Aaron's DSM temple
>>>>> mount
>>>>> preference in relation to your WL-183 rig priorities. Rob D.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this is a relatively loud test signal. Though, I believe that
>>>> this is an adequate model for a loudly singing Lyrebird.
>>>>
>>>> For recording softer sounds, one should perhaps better use the
>>>> HIGH
>>>> MIC SENSE setting. The problem with the Lyrebird was obviously
>>>> that
>>>> the REC LEVEL was turned down to 2, which caused the higher
>>>> overall
>>>> noise level. In other words, it is not appropriate to attenuate
>>>> the
>>>> microphone signal and then amplify it again in the next stage.
>>>>
>>>> Note that the MIC 2 input of the TASCAM DR-1 also provides a
>>>> relatively low gain (input clipping level: -28 dBu), while its
>>>> inherent noise floor (-115 dBu(A)) is still good enough for the
>>>> K6/ME6x series.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Raimund
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> Krause
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
|