Peter is it not possible to improve the sound stage using shuffling or othe=
r mid/side techniques? See http://www.urlme.net/blog/?p=3D1744
The SASS boundary would scale but as the size is reduced so is the boundary=
effect and you move its effect upwards towards the high frequency region.
A tiny barrier between four coincident omni's with post processing may be t=
he way to go if your after a smaller rig, or a dipole setup - in the field =
it sounds mono so perhaps not that useful.
The audio at 02:29 =96 03:28 is a Dipole Microphone in the example on my bl=
og:-
http://www.urlme.net/blog/?p=3D1297
The omni's are EM172's and 2 per channel - they fit inside the original Edi=
rol/Roland CS15 microphone.
Circa 2010 vintage.
-Mike.
--- In Peter Shute <> wrote:
>
> If the M10 is ok apart from the poor sound stage, I wonder how small one =
could build external mics for it that do better. Ie small enough to leave p=
ermanently attached and still be able to fit it in your pocket.
>
> Would the SASS design many of us use with EM172 capsules scale down?
>
> Peter Shute
>
>
> --------------------------
> Sent using BlackBerry
>
> ________________________________
> From:
> To:
> Sent: Mon Jul 16 04:56:00 2012
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal m=
ics comparison.
>
>
>
> Yes, Robin, I agree. This is why I have not yet decided on a small record=
er to replace my minidisc. None of the currently-produced, low-cost units g=
ets it quite right for me. The LS-5 might do it if it were available in the=
US. The LS7 would if it had a line input.
>
> Marco, I have found these tests very helpful, especially to have both the=
earlier test to demonstrate sonic image, and the later test to demonstrate=
self noise. The earlier test clearly showed the inferior image from the PC=
M-M10 and Roland R-05. Very quiet, but very monophonic. Did either recorder=
display more than one Brini-sonel?
>
> John Crockett
> Westminster, Vermont
>
> --- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com>, "robin_parmar_sound" <robin@> wrote:
> >
> > vickipowys wrote:
> >
> > > In all three tracks (i.e. judging the quality of the built-in mics)
> > > my choice is 1. M10 2. LS7 3. LS5. The M10 has much lower noise
> > > levels than both the Olympus models.
> >
> > Yes, but it also has a sound stage that is, for me, unusable. The close=
ly spaced omnis act to record in something closer to mono than stereo.
> >
> > A good recorder, but only if using external mics.
> >
> > -- Robin Parmar
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
|