Subject: | Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison. |
---|---|
From: | "rock_scallop" rock_scallop |
Date: | Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:43 pm ((PDT)) |
Hi Robin, It is always nice when post-processing is not needed, but show me an extern= al array for nature recording that will not benefit from some post EQ most = of the time. Of course one must be careful not to over do it. What do you mean by "skew your phase and introduce other distortions." If i= t sounds good, is it not good? John Hartog rockscallop.org --- In "robin_parmar_sound" <> w= rote: > > John wrote: > > > On the other hand, the advantage of the lower noise mics in the M10 is = the potential for an extended acoustic horizon in quieter settings, and for= those capable of making MS adjustments in post that might make a differenc= e. > > Of course the best thing to do is use external mics when low noise is of = paramount importance. Then you can control the recording topology exactly, = without resorting to post-processing that will skew your phase and introduc= e other distortions. > > -- Robin Parmar > |
Previous by Date: | Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison., robin_parmar_sound |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison., rock_scallop |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison., robin_parmar_sound |
Next by Thread: | Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison., rock_scallop |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
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