> I agree with you about the NT1-A's tonal balance. Several people
> suspect its rating of 25mV/Pa is highly influenced by a "bump" at
> <40Hz. It seems to have weak response to the lower mid-range and
> useable bass registers than many mics, but this might be more common
> than I was aware of. The bump/noise color of the NT1-A tends to
> translate into considerable high Hz noise saturations when used for
> full spectrum renditions of quieter locations where lower mids
> (125-700 Hz) are important. That said, if we consider the rich
> acoustic spaces that John Hartog and others have been able to portray
> with NT1-A's, we know there's more to the story. As recordists we
> tend to generate more evidence than explanation, but if we try to
> make sense of both sides, our field work stands to improve
> explanations. Rob D.
>
Hi Rob,
Since I have not had practice with very many different mics, all I can really
say is that for recording quiet settings the NT1-A produce less noise than the
AT3032, and the AT3032 less than the WL-183. In combination with the SD702
recorder, I have noticed the AT3032 has greater sensitivity than the NT1A - at
the same gain setting the AT3032 produce a stronger signal.
When scouting soundscapes, I don't worry much about tonal character of the mic.
Often I can predict the general position for the mics by unaided ears, but
unless I forgot the headphones, I like to take some time to explore a variety
of mic positions while monitoring until I think I find the sound I am after.
Sometimes I find it, other times I do not. If the NT1A has a known tonal
imbalance and the sounds produced do not, that might mean that natural
imbalances of sound at the mic position have offered the appropriate
equalization.
John Hartog
|