Subject: | Re: Responses to ambient sound recording |
---|---|
From: | "Dan Dugan" dandugan_1999 |
Date: | Tue Nov 30, 2010 8:27 am ((PST)) |
> A broad-band noise reference signal however cannot safely be distiguished > from the ambient noise. For this reason, the BLPN signal had to be much > louder (lets say 10 to 20dB) than the ambient noise. Otherwise, the level of > the test signal would be overestimated. Agreed. I don't use BLPN in the field, I use it for calibrating my rig in my lab. My lab isn't isolated, but it's quiet enough to use 64 dBA, especially when I'm measuring the levels with an A-weighted filter. BLPN is the standard stimulus for calibrating the channel balances of surround systems. -Dan |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Responses to ambient sound recording, Raimund |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Responses to ambient sound recording, Rob Danielson |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Responses to ambient sound recording, Raimund |
Next by Thread: | Re: Responses to ambient sound recording, Rob Danielson |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU