Rob Danielson wrote:
> Hi Curt--
>
> Thanks for sharing some highlights of your excursion. Unattended rig
> I assume.
Yup. Unattended all night, about a half-mile hike on logging trails
from where I was parked.
I had a second rig with long cables strung from the shoreline location
to the recorder in my vehicle.
> re: (first clip)
> <http://www.trackseventeen.com/soundblog/x100418-evening_woodcock.mp3>
> http://www.trackseventeen.com/soundblog/x100418-evening_woodcock.mp3
> or
> <http://tinyurl.com/2bg4xvw>http://tinyurl.com/2bg4xvw
>
> You probably know these:
> Both woodcock calls-- very nice close penks! the other is the gyp
> gyp gyp. good landing flutter too.
> Snipe distant right (fantastic close-up below!)
> Spring Peepers left distance
> Wood frogs (distant center & right on left at times too)
> Ducks flybys and calls (help!)
> mammal commotion on the lake?
>
> The abundant, early Spring pattern in the upper midwest continues.
That far north, the spring pattern is considerably behind you. I went
early this year to avoid the fullest assault of Spring Peepers.
> re:
> http://www.trackseventeen.com/images/mic_arrays/3032_winged.html>
> http://www.trackseventeen.com/images/mic_arrays/3032_winged.html
> or
> <http://tinyurl.com/24uez8k>
> http://tinyurl.com/24uez8k
>
> I see you've moved the mics towards the front boundaries to get a
> very short setback. In addition to more airy-ness, less boundary
> surface in front and the tapered edges should lessen the 10 o clock
> and 2 o'clock "hot spot" effect.
Moving the mics forward corrected a "jump" I was hearing between 10-11
o'clock and 1-2 o'clock in my previous "winged" rigs. Transitions
across the soundstage are now a lot smoother.
> affecting 25-40% of the incoming sound? Lot more direct sound than
> your earlier boundary arrays.
You're better qualified to put numbers and good definitions to these
things than I am, so I defer. To my ear, the "wing" structure seems to
create a much improved sense of spacial definition than I got from the
original parallel boundary rigs.
> That was a productive comparison Paul and Andrew gave us to chew on,
> wasn't it?
Yea, I find these comparisons always helpful.
> P.S. It's "Babes." The chicks come later.
Great point, Rob! That thought occurred to me too. ;-)
I might just change the heading on my web page.
Thank you for weighing in,
Curt Olson
|