--- In Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>> Hi Matt--
> Thanks for sharing your explorations. The SF Bay recording was the
> most successful comparison subject for me because of the width of the
> stereo field and abundance of tones to regard. I appreciate the
> additional work of setting-up to roll three recorders all at once.
>
> There seem to be fairly significant tonal response differences
> between the mics used in this test that make comparing stereo array
> differences a challenge. If you are able to access a pair of
> MKH-800's, array differences might be more apparent if you used these
> two mics in as many of the arrays as possible. I think the advantages
> of employing the same capsules in the arrays outweigh the advantages
> of capturing the same moments. One can often find similar passages to
> compare if you record each test segment for 10-30 minutes.
>
> I like the choices of arrays that you are working with and hope that
> you'll keep us abreast of these studies. Rob D.
>
> --
>
Rob,
Thanks for the reply. I agree -- in many cases these are very
different mics, and what we're hearing is as much due to the
different models' wide variance in response curves and overall
quality as to the configurations. On the other hand, for some of
the subjects, there's just no substitute for simultaneous recordings
in exposing the differences in the images. In the woods example,
for instance, if you listen to the first few seconds of each clip,
the level and position of the bird call on the right is very
different in the three recordings. Knowing that they were recorded
at (about) the same position and the same time is rather revealing
about the images produced.
There doesn't seem to be any right answer, short of winning the
lottery (always a good strategy!) and getting a few more pairs of
MKH800s. Actually even that is problematic -- the 800's seem
to be usable outdoors only inside a blimp. They are by far
the most wind and shock sensitive mics in my arsenal.
It occurs to me that the *right* way to do this would be to use
a bunch of Ambisonic-type microphones, say 2 on a Jecklin
disk and another two at some spacing. That could simulate
XY, Jecklin, some spaced directional configurations, maybe more,
with similar coloration and response characteristics in all of
them.
But that would involve at least three new mics, plus hauling
at least 16 channels of sample-synchronized capture around, so
it won't be happening any time soon for me...
Best,
-matt
mab blogs at http://www.crypto.com/blog
|