>At 3:13 PM -0500 10/4/10, Rick Munday wrote:
>
>Any comments as to the quality? To me it's just a tad sensitive to the
>higher frequencies (?).
>
>Originally posted:
><http://ourmissourilife.com/rickles/Blackwell092210.mp3>http://ourmissouri=
life.com/rickles/Blackwell092210.mp3
>
>vs uncompressed transfer from blue mikey:
>
>https://s3.amazonaws.com/naturerecordings/NatureRecordists.aif
>
>
>Rick
Hi Rick--
Thanks. The aif transfer is much better.
Here is a quick quicktime movie comparison this order:
(A) aif download
(B) aif download- equalized with stereo field adjusted.
download and play with QuickTime or MPEG Streamclip:
https://pantherfile.uwm.edu/type/public/temporary/Blackwell092210_BlueMicey=
_OrigVsEQdStereoAdjusted_AnimLrg.mov.zip
Nature recording places different demands on mics than pocket
recorder designers have in mind. Here are a few observations with
the distant subject:
a) The mic capsules in this particular unit don't seem to be matched
very well in terms of tonal response.
b) The lower midrange seems less clear, more jumbled than I am
accustomed to with lower cost electret mics.
c) Not surprisingly, the left and right sides of the stereo field are
bunched in the middle.
Hear the low "grungey" drone in the middle of the stereo field?
d) Close placement of the mics helped stereo imagining considerably.
Of course, you can expect much better results when close-micing
robust sounds like voice and music.
I suppose one could liberate the mic capsules from the housing and
place them in a better stereo array, but it might be better to keep
your Mikey unit intact and get some of these mic capsules for
experimenting: http://www.frogloggers.com/BT%20EM172.htm If the
Mikey doesn't have an external mic jack, I guess you'll need a
recorder that does. Sure hope it does!
More on recorders and mics in the list FAQ:
https://docs.google.com/View?id=3Ddcvd49w8_23fbw2vqg2 Rob D.
- - -
--
|