Hi Raimund--
That's interesting. Input noise that low in the frequency spectrum
might be accounting for some of the perceived boost in the lower
mid-range response of the LS-10's pre. A 2dB difference in noise
performance at 500Hz probably sounds louder than a 2dB difference at
8K Hz.
Puzzling that the bit rate would affect noise performance directly.
Seems unlikely that quantizing noise is playing a factor at the sound
levels Vicki has used thus far-- even when recording in low sens mode
at level "10." Rob D.
At 9:47 AM +0000 7/7/08, Raimund Specht wrote:
>Hi Rob,
>
>Yes, there is indeed an increased level of noise below about 500 Hz on
>the LS-10.
>
>The discrepancy might also result from the 24 vs 16 bit setting. At
>the MIC SENSE LOW setting, I generally get more noise at 16 bit than
>at 24 bit.
>
>Regards,
>Raimund
>
>--- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
>Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>>
>> Raimund --
>> I was also thinking that recording at "10" in Low Sens mode at 24 bit
>> depth was where we were headed, but if I'm reading her report
>> correctly, Vicki suggests otherwise. She reports more noise with Low
>> Sens @ "10" compared to High Sens @ "4" even when using the built-in
>> mics (with high self-noise). This suggests to me there is still
>> significant pre noise with the Low Sens setting. It could be that
>> the LS-10's pre noise is so warm that it sounds louder than it
>> measures. Its been consistently described as "fizz," opposed to
>> "hiss." Rob D.
>
>
--
|