naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Anthrophony in "nature" soundscapes

Subject: Re: Anthrophony in "nature" soundscapes
From: "Mike Rooke" picnet2
Date: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:57 pm ((PDT))
Hi David,
              An interesting question and one which recently brought home t=
he reality of recording. I was in Portugal last week recording dunes and su=
rf with a binaural rig and also a pair of boundary mics in a blimp - in all=
 over 9 hours of material. Some of this is useable as is, but perhaps 40% i=
s spoiled by a generator din (when the mic was placed in between rocks the =
lf is was amplified due to resonance) - also very distant night club low fr=
equency bass, thumm thumm thumm. One take from the dunes to the surf was ne=
ar perfect, no anthrophony except my gentle wading in the sea to reach the =
crashing waves - at this point some one with a powered parachute decided to=
 zip along the beach... Arrrrrhg
- reset, walk back to the start and do it all again....  To really answer y=
ou need to get your feet wet...

While reading further enjoy a one take and busy recording from my recent va=
cation:-

This was a proof of concept for further binaural recordings. Im using a pai=
r of 35 dollar Shure MX391 Omni boundary mics via ebay as mentioned a while=
 ago by John H.  (and I can't thank him enough!) together with the Sony D50=
 recorder in a plastic waterpoof bag, feet wet in the surf...

http://soundcloud.com/urlme/monte-gordo-beach-portugal

Reaper setup (showing the sequence):
http://urlme.net/audio/montegordo-setup.tiff

> I am curious how each of you deals with the sounds of man and machine
> in your recording practice.
>
> Do you edit it out?

If its present and Im the cause and part of the recording no, otherwise I r=
e-take the recording and move slower :)

> Do you minimize it through EQ?

I recently brought RX2 for this purpose but found it to be pretty hopeless =
both from a GUI usability point of view and technically very poor at displa=
ying enough spectral resolution to see the offending tones. (a generator ru=
nning on the beach in this case, 11dB above the noise floor of the recorde)=
 - RX2 liked to crash rather a lot and also consume cpu cycles.

> Do you practice extreme patience and wait out the sounds of man

yes wake up at astronomical twilight, enjoy the transitioning dawn and reti=
re for a few hours afterwards.

> looking for tiny slivers of "quiet"?
depends on the location.

> Do you reconstruct a scene from fragments?

No, re-take or at minimum remove the offending section if it happens to be =
a powered parachute zipping along the beach at 8am in the morning. (inserts=
 penny to swear jar)

> Do you leave it in?

occasionally if the noise is not too offensive and its way in the backgroun=
d.

>
> In my own recordings I typically try to seek out places where
> anthrophony is minimal, and the sounds of non-man are dominant. This
> is not nature for nature's sake, but rather to get sound scenes that I
> find interesting to listen to. For me, an area with a wash of traffic
> noise is not particularly easy on the ears and I have not yet been
> particularly interested in recording the sounds of man and machine.
> But whether we like it or not, the sounds of motor vehicles,
> airplanes, boats, and general human schenanigans are pervasive, not
> only in North America, but almost everywhere on the planet.
> Anthrophony is a part of our soundscape and natural environment.
> Giving it a first class position in Soundscape Ecology recognizes this
> implicitly. Sometimes anthrophony is pollution, disrupting breeding
> populations. Other times it is completely benign. But whatever it's
> affect in any given situation, there it is.
>
> So my general aesthetic currently is to leave it in, although I do
> minimize sections where the anthrophony is particularly annoying. I
> also happen to do this with sections that have been blown out by wind
> or with birds that are just way too close to a microphones. They just
> get edited out. This is not to say that my recordings are littered
> with airplanes and cars, but often I find that the process of editing
> a soundscape for anthrophony destroys something about the soundscape
> itself. Sometimes hours of continuity (place) can be lost waiting for
> a completely "quiet" moment. This can be particularly acute during
> light transitions.
>
> I have another concern though regarding editing/waiting out
> anthrophony. The documents we create through patience and careful
> editing portray a world that does not exist (or exist in incredibly
> limited quantities - and perhaps herein lies the value). Arguably, all
> recordings are biased anyway and there is no way to avoid creating a
> fantasy. We often lament the growing noise in the world, environmental
> destruction, and devastating losses of species and habitats, but by
> and large the recordings we create show a world untouched by man. I do
> not want consumers of "nature sound" to be disappointed by presence of
> anthrophony that sometimes appears in my recordings, however I am
> concerned about the message sent when soundscapes are redacted to
> exclude anthrophony.

Sadly that world exists only in the editing studio. Unless you really do fi=
nd a quiet
location, when you do - don't tell anyone. :)

Kind Regards,
Mike.


>
> This of course is just my opinion, so I wonder your collective
> feelings on this topic.
>
> Sincerely
> David
>








<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

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