As a novice, I like the fact that the Schoeps ORTF configuration is fixed a=
t a pre-ordained angle - but I guess that may hamper future creativity.
Greg - I noticed that you wrote on your site that the Schoepps setup you us=
e allows you to deviate from the ORTF standard without hurting the image. I=
'm wondering if this is something way advanced of anything I could possibly=
conceive of at this stage - or if experimenting with angles and distances =
between mics is something you would recommend from the offset. Have you com=
e to any conclusions about the best angles and distances to use - or do you=
adjust according to the individual situation?
--- In "gt" <> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the shout-out Dan. I have been using an ORTF configuration fo=
r many years. Though I use an MK21 capsule which is a "sub-cardioid" or wi=
de cardioid. I believe the side cardioid is more forgiving with regards to=
a hole in the middle and provides a very wide soundstage. Not so good for=
mono compatibility maybe but I don't care so much about that.
>
> I have had some issues with the Schoeps in high humidity but I deal with =
it in the rare occasions it occurs.
>
> Myles let me know if you have any questions.
>
> --greg
> Paradise, CA
> http://gregweddig.net
>
> --- In Dan Dugan <dan@> wrote:
> >
> > > Do you think this Schoepps ORTF set-up would be suitable for wildlife=
/ nature recording:
> > >
> > > http://www.schoeps.de/en/products/mstc64u ?
> >
> > This is substantially what Greg Weddig uses as his ORTF nature recordin=
g rig, but with two separate mics, in a fat blimp side-addressed.
> >
> > http://gregweddig.net/?tag=3Dortf
> >
> > > I've been told a pair of Sennheiser MKH's 40 would be a more viable s=
olution outdoors because they are more robust in the field.
> >
> > Schoeps have been known to fuzz when humidity gets high. Without the sw=
ivels it'd be harder to windscreen the 40s in ORTF. Might require two small=
blimps.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
>
|