naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

5. Re: Decca Tree?

Subject: 5. Re: Decca Tree?
From: "Dan Dugan" dandugan_1999
Date: Tue Sep 2, 2008 8:54 am ((PDT))
> So the result of MS stereo summed to mono won't "...be identical to
> summed XY"

I think it will.

> and won't "...contain all the side information collapsed to
> the center".

Correct.

> That is the main difference between MS and XY.

They're interchangeable, theoretically. XY can be matrixed to MS and
vice-versa. But the real issue of off-axis mic responses makes real-
world recordings not so interchangeable.

> It is also
> one of the reasons why some film/television audio people have moved
> away from MS and towards XY (to bring us back to the catalyst behind
> this messy fruit salad).

Solves the problem of post people not knowing what to do with MS,
probably a significant issue. At the expense of slightly lower
quality, probably not an issue.

> You can create just about any XY equivalent with MS by choice of M
> capsule polar response and M:S ratio, but it will behave differently
> to the XY equivalent when summed to mono because the S will always
> cancel out completely. When it comes to summing to mono, MS and XY are
> as different as apples and oranges.

Doesn't summing XY give you the equivalent of a cardioid mic facing
forward? (But not as good as a real cardioid because it's only perfect
in the horizontal plane, and the response is degraded to the mics' 45-
degree off-axis response.)

-Dan Dugan



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU