[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Simultaneous recording with two digital recorders?

Subject: Re: Simultaneous recording with two digital recorders?
From: "Flawn Williams" flawn1951
Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 5:11 pm ((PDT))
David's notes are definitely germane for sound sources that are close to bo=
th mikes/recorders. It's not a good idea, for instance, to mike a piano wit=
h two separate recorders...the drift between the two clocks may be only say=
 a quarter of a second across an hour, but the comb filter effect of the gr=
adual shift will be audible.

In a nature recording scenario, where the microphones/recorders may be sepa=
rated by many feet, the amount of audio that is common to both recordings i=
s tiny. If you already have many milliseconds of delay for sound arriving a=
t Recorder B from Point A and vice versa, the timing shifts due to clock er=
rors are much less noticeable. I did a project for NPR/NGS a while back tha=
t involved five different portable DAT recorders capturing mikes that were =
as much as a hundred feet separate from one another. There was timing drift=
, but little audible effect.

Timing drift has two components: steady drift (when two clocks are each ver=
y stable but slightly off one another) and variability (when a given clock =
has a range of frequencies that it drifts within). If steady drift is your =
issue, then that can be corrected to minimize audibility using time compres=
sion or expansion in a computer DAW. If variability is the issue, it's much=
 harder to correct.

If the recording is for scientific analysis, different standards of accepta=
bility may apply than if the recordings are just for personal enjoyment or =
for media release.


> 3n. Re: Simultaneous recording with two digital recorders?
>    Posted by: "soundings23"  soundings23
>    Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:32 pm ((PDT))
> Thanks David, I may just try something without a common source as you sug=
gest. Following on from previous discussions, quiet soundscapes might work =
well. I'll just have a play and see what happens.
> --- In  "Avocet" <> wrote:
>> Tony,
>> I've used two "toy" Tascams together with two pairs of stereo mics.
>> Syncing the tracks is fiddly and needs more than a clap. With film
>> recording a clapper board gives accuracy to the nearest frame, but if
>> you want to match two sounds with a common source, you need better
>> than millisecond accuracy. That's why I'm saving up for a 4-track.
>> With timeode recorders, the timing accuracy is better than one frame
>> per week or around one 10 parts per million. With two free-running
>> affordable recorders you will get a drift which will produce flanging
>> from a common sound source. If you don't have a common source, exact
>> sync is not necessary anyway - just sync to a passing plane or
>> whatever. :-)
>> o.1 millisecond across a stereo image gives a noticeable shift in the
>> image - that's 5 samples at 44.1 Ks/s. One part per million drift will
>> produce that in around two minutes. Mixed, that produces a comb filter
>> effect based on 1kHz.
>> Point to ponder - how far away can a clapper board be before it is 1
>> frame out of sync? That was one of my questions for trainees. :-)
>> David
>> David Brinicombe
>> North Devon, UK
>> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce

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

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