ben, thanks a lot!:-)
you are right that those soundfiled mics are far better to take with
you.
the problem is, i mainly record ambiences and nature recordings for
cinema.
so there you have the left, center right channels with a lot of space
between.
time of arrival sounds better there, i think.
right now i=B4m just planning to record multichannel. i own a 702 with a =
30/40 combination, so i know how the intensity stereo translate at the
mixing stage.
not bad, but could be better..
14dba of selfnoise is not terrible bad, but if you want to record
subtle ambience, its a little bit too much. i found the shoeps too
noisy for my applications,
and they have a lack of bass, compared to the sennheisers..
i will try my luck with some at4022, they have a selfnoise of 13dba,
but they seem to be better in reality.. (at least thats what everybody
writes here:-))
to the cardioid triangle system, i was more thinking about using just
omnis. thats because i would like to have a more generalized sounding
record.
but i also have to say that i=B4m in an experimental stage, where i will =
try some things out before i buy..
Am 29.04.2010 um 23:26 schrieb Eric Benjamin:
> Emil,
>
> Your English is just fine. Far better than my German, I assure you.
>
> Yes, I was referring to a Soundfield microphone. If one is doing
> nature recording then there is a distinct advantage to only have to
> pack a single microphone.
>
> > those mics have a terrible self noise, and second you just have
> intensity stereophony and no time of arrival stereophony
> I wouldn't have described the Soundfield microphones as having
> terrible self noise. The Soundfield MkV has a specified self noise
> of 14 dBA (1 dBA better than the Schoeps Mk4), which is really
> pretty good for a small diaphragm cardioid.
>
> But the real question is whether you like the results or not. I'll
> only point out that the intensity stereo output from a coincident
> microphone setup translates to time of arrival differences at the
> ears. To go on about that probably will go beyond the technology
> tolerance of the members of this list.
>
> Are you considering using the Optimized Cardioid Triangle system of
> Gunther Theile?
>
> Eric
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: emil klotzsch <>
> To:
> Sent: Thu, April 29, 2010 2:11:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] sonic61
>
> sorry, my english is not the best, so i have to ask: with single point
> miking techniques, you mean those things like the soundfield mic?
> if so, i have to say that i don=B4t like those mics so much.
> first those mics have a terrible self noise, and second you just have
> intensity stereophony and no time of arrival stereophony, which is
> specially great for multichannel recordings i think..
>
> so the sonic 61 seems to be the cheapest. but also its not very
> flexible.
> the a-ray is very flixible, but it costs a lot more..
>
> anyone here in multichannel recording?
>
> i=B4m planning to buy the dr-680 ftom tascam, and maybe if the pre amps
> are so much better, the sd522 as a mixer.
> i think i should get the same quality with that setup like with a
> sd788 machine.. (a more complicated set up, but the same quality in
> sound i hope.)
> but thats another thread i will start when i have tested the dr680,
> compared to my sd702..
>
> Am 29.04.2010 um 00:57 schrieb Eric Benjamin:
>
> > emil klotzsch <> wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.sonicsymphonic.com/sonic.html
> > > its cheap (around 350=80) compared to its competitors
> > > is there another alternative?
> >
> > There's the S5 from DPA:
> > http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/products.aspx?c=3Ditem&category=3D122&=
item=3D24272#diagrams
> >
> > but that one's not cheap!
> >
> > And the various microphone array positioners from Audio Engineering
> > Associates:
> > http://www.wesdooley.com/aea/Microphone_Array_Positioners.html
> >
> > but that wouldn't be cheap either.
> >
> > It seems to me that Nature Recording is the ideal application for
> > surround sound. Have you considered single point miking techniques?
> >
> > ERic
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: emil klotzsch <>
> > To:
> > Sent: Wed, April 28, 2010 10:04:46 AM
> > Subject: [Nature Recordists] sonic61
> >
> > hi everyone,
> >
> > has anyone seen this yet?:
> > http://www.sonicsymphonic.com/sonic.html
> >
> > its cheap (around 350=80) compared to its competitors (a-ray from
> > ambient..)
> >
> > is there another alternative?
> >
> > all the best
> > evs
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> > sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> > Krause
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> Krause
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
|