At 9:45 PM -0600 10/5/10, Kevin Colver wrote:
>Actually, there wasn't that much going on in the middle of the field.
Hi Kevin--
Albeit, less-frequent, the calls in the center of
the stereo field show me that your Jecklin array
has no problem with center imaging of higher
frequency sounds. They're accurately bright and
precise in position to my ears.
Not as a criticism but to point out one trait
that people cite as a positive with Jecklin disks,
it is the continuous, lower frequency/background
sounds that are well-represented at the edges of
the stereo field. Wind in the pines is a good
example. Take a listen to your recording on
speakers. Does it seem as if the wind is coming
out mostly from the locations where the speakers
are located? If there little or no wind more
accurately imaged in the center, how can this be
a good thing?
As I mentioned briefly, one can fix a centered
hole in the bass pretty successfully in post. I
personally prefer getting more bass at the
"edges" and left right difference in the lowest
octaves at the outset over recordings with mostly
uniform bass concentrated in the center. The SASS
arrays tend to produce very uniform, centered
bass and lower mids. M-S and X-Y usually more so.
The lowest registers can be "shuffled" or spread
more towards the speakers in post, but usually
not as easily as balancing bass across the stereo
field that was captured with more left right
distinction. But there are other array
performance factors that weigh in heavily too. No
array I've found, puts all my preferences into
one package. Rob D.
>It wasn't the greatest recording as far as placement and performers,
>it was just the best I had so far with this array. I had a better=A0
>recording which showed the stereo field but it was of Long-billed=A0
>Curlews that, unfortunately, were disturbed at my mics even in camo=A0
>and spent the whole time dive bombing the rig until I went back and=A0
>pulled out. Those guys are going to require a very hidden mic system=A0
>to let them relax enough for a good recording.
>
>The mics are about 5 inches apart with a plywood 1/4 inch thick disk=A0
>covered with foam in the middle. I think I did roll off some of the=A0
>low frequencies due to the wind in the conifers. The occasional=A0
>distant airplane was spliced out.
>Kevin J Colver
>Soundscapes for Birders - a Podcast of Natural Sounds
>www.7Loons.com
>
>
>
>
>On Oct 5, 2010, at 9:33 AM, Rob Danielson wrote:
>
>> Thanks Kevin--
>>
>> I'm making Colo. camping plans today. Ditto everyone's remarks. Maybe
>> I'm using different cues in front of my speakers, but I think the
>> subtle impression of the far sides having slightly more heaviness
>> compared to the center (thus "hole") is from the "roundness" of lower
>> register frequency response of the omnis in free air. This impression
>> is not really a concern as it can be addressed easily in post--
>> probably by lessening the resonance ~230? Hz on the sides. What it is
>> NOT characteristic of the Kevin's array is clustering of the low
>> frequencies in the middle of the field that we tend to get with
>> coincident arrays. Its hard for us to tell if there's front-back
>> confusion in this Jecklin recording-- which can be strength or
>> weakness depending on one's aesthetic or goals.
>>
>> I'd expect a little bit more richness in the lowest harmonics. Is
>> there some LF roll-off employed or were you that far into the
>> "wilderness?"
>>
>> See inserts below:
>>
>> At 9:07 AM -0500 10/5/10, Curt Olson wrote:
>> >Thank you for posting this Kevin,
>> >
>> >I agree with Mark that it delivers a nice sense of space combined=A0
>> with
>> >good localization of individual callers. I think I detect a slight
>> >"hole-in-the-middle" effect, but it's not profound. Overall, an
>> >excellent example of what Jeklin rigs can do. Come to think of it, if
>> >I recall correctly, two of the most impressive nature recordings I've
>> >ever heard were captured with Jeklin-type variants (john and Rob,
> > >please correct me if I'm remembering this wrong)...
>> >
>> >1) John Hartog's June 2005 clip "An early morning chorus along
>> >Murderers Creek," located about 2/3 down his Sound Journal page:
>> >
>> ><http://www.rockscallop.org/JVp2.html>http://www.rockscallop.org/JVp2.=
html
>> >
>> >2) A goose fly-by captured by Rob Danielson last April along the St.
>> >Croix river in Northwestern Wisconsin. You can hear it about one
>> >minute into the audio clip near the bottom of this write-up on the
>> >2010 Midwest Nature Recordists Campout:
>>
>> I can think of examples with better imagery made with your
>> experimental boundary arrays, no problemo,..
>>
>> So that clip was from just the rear pair? If so, that's a non-cored
>> "Jecklin" array. By "non-cored" there's just a 2" high density foam
>> baffle-- no interior barrier core. Caveats are: costly 2-mkh 80's
>> with the array actually pointed into a sloped rock wall bowl 20 feet
>> away. Some of the directionality provided by the bowl reflector is
>> angled up into space where the goose passes over at tree top level--
>> so (luckily) quite close. Its a Pseudo-Jecklin/large Scale Pseudo
>> Parabolic Dish array. You can hear the same heavy roundness on the
>> edges that is in Kevin's recording from the free air omnis--
>> especially on the left which is where the rapids from the river were.
>> The PBB2's recording of the event has less body/closeness but more
>> depth imaging. With this surround pair, I place the Jecklin closer
>> point sources and rely on the PBB2 for reach. The Jecklin is not as
>> good for distant subjects so they can play off each other's
>> strengths, when I get lucky.
>>
>> ><http://www.trackseventeen.com/soundblog/2010/crex.html>http://www.tra=
ckseventeen.com/soundblog/2010/crex.html
>> >
>> >The recent talk here about Jeklin rigs has me pondering how one could
>> >deal with three practical concerns that have kept me from going very
>> >far down that road: ruggedness, compactness and wind protection.
>>
>> Here's a photo of my updated Jecklin.
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/2ezk2vq
>>
>> The disk is a piece of scrap aluminum sided, 3/4" close-call foam
>> insulation. The absorbing material is thick carpet padding. The arms
>> are hinged/foldable with thumbscrew joints oak. I used a curled a
>> piece of vinyl gutter cover around the ends for baskets. The dead air
>> space could be larger. Natural burlap screens. The very light weight
>> dish slips off the PVC post and it all collapses into my small
>> backpack.
>>
>> Transporting the 4' X 8' heavily-insulated sound barrier to set up 2'
>> behind for rear rejection is where I get the needed exercise. ;-) Rob
>> D.
>>
>> >
>> >Curt Olson
>> >
>> >Kevin Colver wrote:
>> >
>> >> I built a home-made Jeklin disk and recorded with a pair of
>> >> Sennheiser ME62 mics this summer. Here is a sample of how it did:
>> >>
>> >> <http://tinyurl.com/3y9a66e>http://tinyurl.com/3y9a66e
>> >>
>> >> Listen and feel free to give judgement on how the array does with
>> >> spaciality, ect. I posted it mainly for our nature recordists
>> >> because of Rob's discussion about his Jeklin.
>> >>
>> >> It's also at www.7Loons.com or at the iTunes Store under the
>> >> "Soundscapes for Birders" podcasts.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Kevin Colver
>> >>
>> >> www.7Loons.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
>sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
--
|