--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
> Of course, one would opt a good binaural rig, like the Neumann KU-100
> or one of the better, lower-cost options using DPA4060's or 4053's.
> These rigs are sophisticated and capable of producing very "accurate"
> tonalities with more than sufficient separation for analysis even in
> loud settings. Should one of these rigs prove incapable, I would be
> even more suspicious of the foreground/background imagining I'd
> obtain with a directional mic and mono recording. I'm assuming that
> Travis needs good imaging of the "background" too. Am I off-course
> about this?
Rob, what I actually meant is that even a professional binaural rig is prob=
ably not suited for this kind of the research. I agree that the results tha=
t one can achieve with a Neumann KU-100 dummy head are great for our own pe=
rsonal enjoyment. I have the CD series published by Walter Tilgner, who has=
been using this rig for ambient nature recordings in Germany (http://www.n=
atur-tilgner.de) and I like it very much. However, one should keep in mind =
that this kind of gear is intended for human listening. But the research we=
are taking about should better exclude the human auditory system (that's o=
ne of the reasons why the researchers primarily work on spectrogram display=
s rather than trusting to their own listening capabilities). I see no
> I'm sure that we agree that location reverberations and other subtle
> cues play very important roles in actual communications. Seems that
> capturing these as best as possible for comparing urban/rural
> behaviors would be beneficial, not undesirable.
Sure, that would be another research project. However, the researchers usua=
lly need to isolate a single aspect in order to manage the complexity of th=
ese things. Otherwise, they would be lost...
Regards,
Raimund
|