Rob Danielson wrote:
> ...I don't own a SASS so I've never been able to compare it
> straight-up with other arrays. Like Curt, I did make and try some
> "Pseudo SASS" arrays. Here's a comparison test with one:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ylxcol4
>
> Here's just the Parallel Boundary (PB) vs. Pseudo SASS segments
> looped so you can judge differences more easily:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/y89t7wt
I don't recall ever seeing this before. It's very revealing. Thank you
for posting it.
> The two rigs have the same omni mic capsules in them. I feel there i
> more left-right contrast in the Parallel Boundary (PB) rig. The
> steps across the stereo field produced by the Pseudo SASS seem more
> even than those of the PB rig but PB's stereo image feels wider,
> more horizontal (the max sound spread in the test set-up is 180
> degrees). Both of these traits may be contributing to what Curt
> describes as more "spaciousness" in the PB array. The amplitude at
> the center of the stereo field also drops off a bit with the PB
> array which can create a sense of more depth in the center. This can
> be aesthetically appealing but less accurate.
Indeed. I completely agree.
> Note that in this test layout, the center is actually _closer_ than
> the sides. The center of the stereo field is slightly brighter and
> more accurate with the Pseudo SASS. The brighter edges of the PB rig
> probably stem from the additional reflections of the perpendicular
> to boundary orientation.
Very likely, I suspect.
Curt Olson
|