At 5:09 AM +0000 4/10/10, hartogj wrote:
>
>
> > 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
>
Hi Hi John--
There usually is an abundance of low frequency energy under 60 Hz in
natural settings unless they are very remote. This probably helps
offset the NT1-A's bass deficiency some. When my NT1-A's were paired
with various MKH's in a surround array, the difference/deficiency in
the 80-300Hz range would always be noticeable. Ocean surf, wind can
and other sound sources might add amplitude in this range, but they
would also interfere with spatial detail. When I've used NT1-A's to
represent spaces, full spectrum, I often used quite a bit of HF
attenuation to make the overall tonal balance less bright and found
it fairly unresponsive to EQ boosts in the 80-300Hz range to increase
warmth. I suppose a look at some of your EQ curves for patterns
might provide clues as to how you've achieved the good results.
re:
>I have noticed the AT3032 has greater sensitivity than the NT1A - at
>the same gain setting the AT3032 produce a stronger signal.
Yes, the 3032's produce more "needle display" than than I expected
too for a 20 mV/Pa rated mic. A sonogram I looked at yesterday
suggested that the 3032 may also have a LF bump <40Hz. That could
responsible for a good part of the meter peaks, but the NT1-A
_should_ produce higher peaks at the same gain based solely on the
manufacturer's numbers. Rob D.
--
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|