I forgot..
http://soundcloud.com/urlme/useyourhead
Perhaps the simplest? setup besides the recorders own internal mics is a se=
t of binaural microphones in your own ears. The major downside to this meth=
od is keeping still and silent so your own body sounds are not recorded. Mo=
st binaural mics also do not let you monitor at the same time, some do howe=
ver such as the Edirol CS10-EM - although these are relatively noisy at 30+=
dBA self noise.
Klas's clip on's or equivalent omni capsules can also be placed near your h=
ead or around a tree for a similar effect, backpack boundary, rock sized bo=
undary, large wooden log doubling as a boundary etc.
-Mike.
--- In Marcus Buick <> wrote:
>
>
> A long time ago, before ProTools (BPT), a great teacher
> taught me not to worry about the playback part of the equation.=C2=A0 It =
was of
> utmost importance to capture, as accurately as possible, any historically
> significant sound as well as one was capable of.=C2=A0 While actually pla=
ying
> back something is important to clients, students, and researchers, the ad=
vance
> of technology allows for more forms of media to be reproduced in a myriad=
of
> ways as time marches on.
> =C2=A0
> As an example, a few of my early recordings suffer from
> over-modulation during peaks of very dynamic material.=C2=A0 I=E2=80=99m =
talking about recordings made
> during the 1980=E2=80=99s with analog gear.=C2=A0 There is now software (=
IzotopeRX) that can fix these issues.=C2=A0 It=E2=80=99s true that digital =
OM peaks are
> still a wasteland, but soon that may no longer be the case.
> =C2=A0
> My point is that a $900 ambisonic solution may provide more
> and greater results down the road for more people.=C2=A0 The more accurac=
y that is recorded along with more material
> make a greater percentage of individuals aware that higher quality is a d=
esired
> trait.=C2=A0 Thus more work (and love of
> recording) down the road for those of us who engage in it daily.=C2=A0 I =
love seeing stuff like this.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bernie Krause <>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, July 1, 2011 6:05 AM
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: Best stereo solution for nature reco=
rding while backpacking through Sierras?
>
>
> =C2=A0
> It does. But one has to have a very sophisticated playback system to
> realize the result. Multiple fine speakers, from sub-woofers to others
> in many positions, all carefully calibrated, and a really really
> decent environment (acousti-voiced room) in which to assemble the
> system. Then there is the computer software developed at York
> University (Tony Myatt) needed to drive the playback. Perhaps light on
> one side of the equation (field recording). Quite complex on the other.
>
> Bernie Krause
>
> On Jun 30, 2011, at 11:46 PM, hartogj wrote:
>
> > Hi David,
> > From the context they are clearly trying to say,"it sounds really
> > really real." :)
> >
> > John Hartog
> > www.rockscallop.org
> >
> > --- In "Avocet" <brini@> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm intrigued by this ultra-portable recording setup. It looks
> >>> ideal for recording while backpacking.
> >>> http://www.oomagamma.com/brahmakitstatic.html
> >>
> >> "... true three dimensional ..."? Eh?
> >>
> >> David
> >>
> >> David Brinicombe
> >> North Devon, UK
> >> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> > sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> > Krause.
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Wild Sanctuary
> POB 536
> Glen Ellen, CA 95442
> 707-996-6677
> http://www.wildsanctuary.com
>
> Google Earth zooms: http://earth.wildsanctuary.com
> SKYPE: biophony
>
>
>
>
>
|