comparison.
The original problem was that John Crockett wants a recorder like the M10 b=
ut
with a stereo image like an LS-7 or LS-5. If the M10 is to be made suitable=
by
adding external mics then they need to be in a really tiny package.
Peter Shute
>-----Original Message-----
>From:
> On Behalf Of Gregory
>O'Drobinak
>Sent: Thursday, 19 July 2012 10:32 AM
>To:
>Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10
>internal mics comparison.
>
>
>
>Well, there is a cheap & quick solution for a simple array that gives
>better
>sound, but is not really binaural. It is similar in concept to strapping
>a pair
>of omnis to either side of a small tree, like Bernie has mentioned
>before.
>
>Go down to ToysRUs or Walmart or something and get a round foam Nerf
>ball. These
>are about 7" in diameter and cost about $5.00.
>Attach the EM172s to either side of that foam ball with a strip of Lycra
>tied
>around it, facing forward. Punch a hole in the bottom of the ball so
>that you an
>mount it on a gooseneck shaft attached to an inexpensive, lightweight
>tripod.
>You really can put that foam ball on most anything since it weighs very
>little.
>The pull some fake monkey fur over it and you're done! The whole mc rig
>should
>cost less than $40.00 for everything (the fur may cost as much as the
>mics!).
>Oh, and just solder the EM172 onto a proper stereo shielded cable,
>terminated in
>a 1/8" Stereo mini-plug befoe attaching them to the ball (I found a good
>small-conductor stereo cable from an old pair of headphones, but make
>*sure*
>that it it shielded). Then you just plug it into your M10 and use the
>PIP menu
>option to power the mics.
>
>I've also had good luck using the Shure MX391LP/O microflex boundary
>mics that I
>found on ebay for ~$26.00. I made a very simple adapter using two TA4M
>connectors wired appropriately to a stereo 1/8" mini-jack. Then you just
>plug
>everything together and use a cable terminated into a 1/8" mini-plug at
>both
>ends, plug it into the M10, use PIP and again you are off & running.
>Lightweight
>& low-cost. What yo do with the 391s is up to you; there are an infinity
>of
>choices such as the foam ball, various versions of the 'SASS' array,
>trapazoidal
>foam blocks, etc. All of these are very lightweight, compact, cost-
>effective and
>quick to make. Just do it!
>
>This will definitely be better for stereo separation than the built-in
>M10 mics
>and the mics I mentioned are essentially equivalent in term of self-
>noise to
>that of the M10.
>
>Enjoy!
>
>- Greg
>
>________________________________
>From: rock_scallop <
><john_hartog%40rockscallop.org> >
>To:
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Wed, July 18, 2012 6:38:38 PM
>Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal
>mics
>comparison.
>
>Hi Vicky,
>That processing procedure was quick and gross, and later think I
>improved it
>with a bit more playing around.
>
>The problem I have with most arrays is the LF stuff gets piled in the
>center,
>attenuating that a bit might make sound more natural, however this time
>I think
>I just I over did it.
>
>But you are right, an external array is the best solution for improving
>the
>stereo image. I don't like head worn arrays because I can't look around
>while
>recording, and the sound of my own breath is so often noticeable.
>
>John Hartog
>rockscallop.org
>
>--- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , vickipowys
><> wrote:
>>
>> John,
>>
>> I have to agree with Greg, your MS processing did not work for me
>> either, when listening through headphones.
>>
>> In the first clip the environmental noise is evenly spaced around me
>> and I can travel outwards, but in the processed clip I feel like I am
>> in a pressure cooker and can't escape.
>>
>> Not a very technical explanation I know :-)
>>
>> To save on all this post-production, the best quick solution for good
>> stereo from a pocket recorder is to use external head-worn electrets
>> (e.g. EM172s), quick to put on if they are mounted on a lightweight
>> headband from an old set of headphones.
>>
>>
>> Vicki
>>
>>
>>
>> On 18/07/2012, at 2:30 PM, Gregory O'Drobinak wrote:
>>
>> > John:
>> >
>> > Interesting. But when listening to this with cans on, the second
>> > part sounded
>> > like it was pulling down hard on my ears!
>> > It was a very strange sensation, with a very curious spectral
>> > shift. Not at all
>> > pleasant.
>> >
>> > I've been thinking about some ways to 'spread out' a narrower
>> > stereo image, but
>> > it may be very tricky with M-S processing. Perhaps having a wider
>> > sound stage
>> > like the SASS-type rigs is not at all possible with closely-spaced
>> > capsules, no
>> > matter what the method. Seems like you can't put in the proper
>> > inter-aural
>> > delays that one would have with a natural spacing of the mic
>> > elements ex post
>> > facto, but I could be wrong. I'd like to see if anyone can really
>> > pull this off
>> > effectively.
>> >
>> > What exactly was your process?
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > - Greg
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: rock_scallop <>
>> > To:
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
>> > Sent: Tue, July 17, 2012 10:39:01 PM
>> > Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10
>> > internal mics
>> > comparison.
>> >
>> >
>> > For the sake of understanding values or risks of Mid-Side
>processing.
>> > Here is a URL to a bit of my urban backyard test with the pcm-m10.
>> > The first part has no added EQ, the second part has Mid-Side
>> > processing to
>> > correct the stereo image.
>> >
>> >
>> > http://soundcloud.com/john-hartog/jh-test20127017-pcmm10-ms/s-TnZrf
>> >
>> > Any comments are welcome.
>> >
>> > John Hartog
>> > rockscallop.org
>> >
>> > --- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , "rock_scallop"
>> > <john_hartog@> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Robin,
>> >> It is always nice when post-processing is not needed, but show me
>> >> an external
>> >> 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 it
>> >> sounds good, is it not good?
>> >>
>> >> John Hartog
>> >> rockscallop.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , "robin_parmar_sound"
>> >> <robin@> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> 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
>> >> difference.
>> >>>
>> >>> 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
>> >> introduce
>> >> other distortions.
>> >>>
>> >>> -- Robin Parmar
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
|