Hi Vicki, Rob
On 13/03/2010, at 10:14 PM, vickipowys wrote:
> This was a very interesting comparison and I recall that I spent ages =
> analyzing both clips in uncompressed format when they were first
> edited for the AudioWings CD in 2008. At that time, and again in
> listening now, for some obscure reason I prefer listening to Paul's
> recording made with his parallel boundary rig. There was a sharpness =
> in Andrew's recording that put me a little bit on edge. Nothing
> scientific here, just the listening experience. I also hear in these =
> new samples more fizz-hiss in Andrew's version, which I find somewhat =
> unpleasant. No idea why that hiss occurs, because the SD 722 and the =
> MKH 20s should actually be giving less noise than Paul's set up? The =
> noise in Paul's recording is more comfortable to my ears, somehow.
There were definitely differences in the way the two recorders were set up,=
and the resulting files had significantly different levels of modulation. =
My recordings need something like 10dB gain applied to match Andrews files=
. Andrew recorded at 16/44.1 while my recordings were made at 24/48. Lookin=
g at the raw files the Andrew file has no content 20hz which seems indicate=
that Andrew had the SD 722's 40hz HPF enabled while recording. The HDP2 =
files were made without any filtering and have significant energy down to 0=
hz. I've played around with sections of the original files and applied a st=
eep 40hz HPF to my recording which results in a similar level of LF energy =
in both recordings. This doesn't appreciably change the fundamental differe=
nces of tonal character between the two setups. In hindsight it would have=
been interesting to record both rigs into the each of the recorders or eve=
n better to record both simultaneously into a 4 track recorder so we could =
quantify the contribution made by the mic preamps to the different tonal ch=
aracters.
I also wonder about the hiss which can be clearly seen as a cloudy area in =
Rob's sonogram. It seemed to be primarily in one channel and I do wonder i=
f the upwards orientation of Andrews rig might have resulted in increased l=
evels of foliage noise. In other sections of the recording the hiss isn't n=
early intrusive.
cheers
Paul
|