I tried two recorders simultaneously this weekend. Spaced them apart inside a
small rural church and left them running for 15 minutes. My thought was to try
and get a sense of very quiet spaciousness, with the distant sound of
woodpigoens seeping through the ancient windows. But it made no difference to
my ears when I layered the tracks! But obviously that's just one, and rather
unusual, environment.
I did notice, as predicted, a difference of 0.12 milliseconds in the recording
times though between the Edirol and the Sony over the fifteen minutes.
Anyways, off to record our local nightjar later - in glorious mono with my ME66
(if it stops raining)
cheers
Tony
--- In Geoff Sample <> wrote:
>
> All I mean is that it's physically impossible to listen from two points at
> once without the use of technology - so 'beyond nature'. But no, I wouldn't
> say that multiple perspectives are beyond nature if you're recreating a
> soundfield through a multichannel installation. If trying to recreate a
> single scene, you would need to be careful about timing and intensity issues
> through speaker placement and/or signal timing adjustment, otherwise the cues
> for directionality in our hearing will be smeared.
>
> Partly following on from Jez's theme on the earlier thread, reacting to the
> thinking that there's only one way of doing things, I'm not comfortable with
> the normative idea that you can only record waves/the sea through a composite
> of multiple takes. Or that this is the best way.
>
> And I suppose I'm defending my corner a bit. I work very much with single
> point stereo. I like the discipline of listening carefully and considering
> the exact placement of the mics in relation to the spread of the soundfield.
>
> But hey, try it and experiment!
>
> Geoff Sample
>
>
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > 2d. Re: Simultaneous recording with two digital recorders?
> > Posted by: "soundings23" soundings23
> > Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 1:03 pm ((PDT))
> >
> > Thanks Geoff ... very interesting. I think it comes back to how the
> > recording relates to the thing recorded, the subject of previous
> > conversations. If you want it to simulate how a pair of ears might
> > experience it, then you're absolutely right, a single point stereo
> > recording will approximate that. But are multiple perspectives "beyond
> > nature" as you put it? That's an interesting question.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > T
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In Geoff Sample <lists@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Tony
> >>
> >> I followed the quiet thread but it left me somewhere in the aether. But
> >> this is interesting. I've worked a lot on recording the sound of the sea
> >> on the coast here in Northumberland over the last 20 years, and for me the
> >> idea that you NEED multiple input is a myth. No offence to Chris or Bernie.
> >>
> >> If you want to create something beyond nature, fine - multiple input
> >> points can give you the raw material for heading off. Or if your objective
> >> is a multi-channel installation, a mic array makes sense, whether to
> >> several recorders or a multi-track, though it leads you into other
> >> time/distance issues.
> >>
> >> But we listen with two ears from a single point; so it makes sense if one
> >> wants to record the nature of a place, as heard, to record from a single
> >> point, whether static or in motion through time. And personally, for me
> >> this works better because of rhythm. From a single point you get the
> >> rhythm of wave and water flow: not just the major rhythm of the waves
> >> breaking, but also the undertow of sussuration on sand or shingle as the
> >> waves' fall-out recedes. Once you start mixing it from different
> >> perspectives, you mush it up. Even if well synced up, the fine detail gets
> >> mushed. And I think the example on Michael Gallagher's blog showed that.
> >> Rhythm was obscured.
> >>
> >> So from this point of view, the craft is a matter of listening and
> >> choosing the point where you feel the balance of distance and foreground
> >> feels good. And I think this is where the art of soundscape recording
> >> resides. Perspective - sorry for the visual metaphor.
> >>
> >> OK. Back to work.
> >> All the best, Geoff.
> >>
> >> Geoff Sample
> >> http://soundcloud.com/wildsong
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8 Jun 2012, at 22:32, wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> ________________________________________________________________________
> >>> ________________________________________________________________________
> >>> 3a. Simultaneous recording with two digital recorders?
> >>> Posted by: "soundings23" tony.whitehead2332@ soundings23
> >>> Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:35 am ((PDT))
> >>>
> >>> Hi All ... I currently use an Edirol R-09 for my recordings. But I've
> >>> just picked up cheap secondhand Sony PCM M10.
> >>>
> >>> I read that if you're recording soundcapes such as waves on a beach
> >>> multiple recording points are recommended.
> >>> (http://www.michaelgallagher.co.uk/archives/tag/chris-watson)
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone had experience of recording on two independant digital
> >>> recoders, using say a handclap to provide a sync point, then
> >>> mixing/layering them together later.
> >>>
> >>> Does this work?
> >>>
> >>> Will they stay in sync?
> >>>
> >>> Any recomendations on positioning in general?
> >>>
> >>> I could of course just go and experiment ... but its nice to perpare!
> >>>
> >>> cheers
> >>>
> >>> T
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|