naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

1. Re: Mono v. Stereo

Subject: 1. Re: Mono v. Stereo
From: "Klas Strandberg" klasstrandberg
Date: Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:23 am ((PST))
Hi John, all...

"in my humble experience"

During the 25 years of Telinga, no scientist that I know of has 
failed doing his research because he has used a Stereo DATmic instead 
of a Twin Science.

Using mono, I have several times been able to hear two different 
sounds from the same spot. Is it the same bird, making both sounds, 
or two different birds sitting very close??

At a few occasions, using stereo, it has been possible to hear or 
analyze with a PC if it is, or is not, the same bird.

My general recommendation is that you use a Twin Science if your 
recordings mainly are for film-tracks or science. If you want your 
recordings to trigger your fantasy - "remember and get back at the 
spot" - use stereo.

My memory is very auditive: If I replay a recording made in stereo, 
it might be a very old recording, it brings back most of the 
sensations, even smells. It is like going back in time.

It is also my experience that "common" people tend to bright up and 
smile when they hear bird song in stereo headphones, - "very 
beautiful!" - while they look a bit worried when the same sound comes 
into both ears, as if they didn't really know what to listen for.

It is correct, though, to say that "in theory" a mono parabolic 
recording made with an omni is more "accurate".
I say "in theory" as you get sooo many errors anyway, when you make 
long distance recordings.
When people are doing science based on freq. analysis, I always tell 
to double and tripple check what they are doing.

Klas

At 11:38 2008-12-30, you wrote:
>Another thing worth considering (in my humble experience) is that with
>mono recording, you may get a nice clean recording of a bird
>vocalising for example. But with stereo, you may gain considerable
>insight from other sounds not heard in mono. Was the bird just talking
>to itself for instance, or was it actually responding to another bird
>or threat off centre that has not been picked up in mono.
>
>One thing I've often wondered about is how much useful information has
>been missed over the ages by not having a complete picture of that
>moment in time that is captured by a recording or photo. What's just
>out of frame? What's just out of earshot?
>
>Just an rambling thought
>
>Regards
>John
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
>sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
email: 
website: www.telinga.com
         





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 1. Re: Mono v. Stereo, Klas Strandberg <=
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