Here is a comparison of a pair of Sennheiser ME66 microphones and my homema=
de Partially Baffled Boundary Array.
http://soundcloud.com/the-natural-contemplative/thrushes-in-vermont
The ME66 pair is first. The mic capsules are coincident at about 70 - 80 de=
grees to each other, handheld. I applied a high pass filter at 300 Hz to th=
is recording to remove wind noise in the left mic, which had no wind sock o=
n it (a borrowed mic). I compared the original and filtered recordings and =
heard no difference other than the reduction in wind noise.
The array is based on a pair of EM172 capsules, and is loosely based on Rob=
Danielson's PBB2N array. I threw it together in rather a hurry as an exper=
iment in preparation for making an array for a pair of AT3032 microphones.
These recordings were made in the same location (my front yard in southern =
Vermont), pointing in the same direction, on subsequent days, although the =
wood thrush/pbba recording was earlier in the day.
The Veery/ME66 sample is the only minute out of about twenty that was free =
of car or air traffic noise. I deleted a few seconds where I fumbled the mi=
crophones. In this recording you will hear three Veerys, one very slightly =
to the right of center, one slightly to the left of center, and the third i=
n the distance far to the left.
The Wood Thrush/pbba recording is relatively free of traffic noise (but not=
entirely) because it was started at 4:30 am, before the air traffic out of=
Logan Airport in Boston picks up substantially and commuters start to work=
(around 6am). This recording features a wood thrush far to the right, a ca=
tbird to the left, and an American robin in the center. I amplified this re=
cording 10dB to compensate for an overly cautious low recording level compa=
red to the other recording. I made this recording by setting the system out=
and leaving it unattended for an hour, and didn't want to get blasted by t=
he catbird, who often perches and sings in a crabapple right next to where =
I placed the microphones. In this case he chose a tree a little farther awa=
y.
The Veery/ME66 was recorded on a Marantz PMD-670 compact flash recorder (mi=
cs powered by internal batteries, not P48), and the EM172 array was recorde=
d on a Sony MZRH1 minidisc recorder.
I think this comparison displays the more spacious feeling that comes from =
the PBBA setup. It's not a completely fair comparison because the birds are=
more widely spaced in the catbird/thrush/PBBA sample, but I have noted tha=
t difference even when recording side by side with these systems over the p=
ast few days. I haven't posted those recordings because they were made in t=
he middle of the day and are mostly traffic and airplanes and a few distant=
birds. The PBBA sometimes sounds a little harsh in the high frequencies to=
me. The ME66 pair represents the sounds well, but with the array I feel li=
ke I am capturing the space, not just the sounds.
John Crockett
Westminster, Vermont
--- In "John Crockett" <> wrote:
>
> I've been experimenting a bit with a borrowed extra ME66, and so far I wo=
uld say that the "stereo ME66" is an interesting addition to the toolbox bu=
t not effective enough at attenuating noise from the sky to make it worth t=
he investment (in mics and windscreens) for me at this time. It does not of=
fer anything like the open, spacious sound of my prototype sass/pbba type s=
etup.
>
> I love the way individual sounds pop out of the background with the sass,=
while the background remains rich and spacious. The stereo ME66 sounds to =
me much more like my Rode NT4. Competent but not brilliant. The stereo ME66=
is better than the NT4 (two cardioid capsules) at localizing sounds that a=
re near the center of the sound field, while the placement of sounds near t=
he edges of the field seems quite similar, as one might expect. The NT4 ten=
ds to push all sounds near the center into the center. I hear very little d=
ifference in terms of rejecting noise from the sky.
>
> This morning I was recording three chorusing Veerys with the stereo ME66.=
It was perfect for that because two of the Veerys were quite close, appare=
ntly defining their territorial boundaries, and my NT4 would have lumped th=
em together, while the ME66 pair maintained their few degrees of separation=
. I got a few good seconds before traffic and air noise closed in on us (an=
d the Veerys appeared to increase their volume to compensate - although I h=
ave yet to confirm that with a measurement).
>
> I think the boundary array would have also maintained the separation, so =
I wish I had a direct comparison. Maybe tomorrow if they go at it again.
>
> John
>
|