Scott Fraser wrote:
>> "Wavy" is the best word I've found so far to describe a phenomenon I've =
noticed consistently for many years on recordings captured with ORTF, M-S a=
nd spaced-omni arrays. Not a partial blending toward mono, but rather a ver=
y subtle but audible "jitter" or "inter-channel instability" in these non-b=
affled arrays. Sorry, that's the best I can do at describing it.
>
> Trying to grasp your meaning here. I'm imagining this to be the indistinc=
t localization of sources around center? Things which somewhat jump back & =
forth between left & right speakers but which are just a few degrees off ce=
nter? And the shift occurs with slight head movements?
I'm sorry this isn't easier, Scott, but I appreciate you gently nudging me =
toward more clarity. I'm not talking about major localization errors or any=
thing like you describe above. What I'm talking about is a faint, almost im=
perceptible "fluttering haze" (to take another desperate stab at trying to =
describe it) that rides well below the threshold of distraction. But it's t=
here routinely in the types of un-baffled arrays I have mentioned, and disa=
ppears in flush-mount and perp.-mount boundary arrays.
Words are failing me at this point.
>> I've been able to greatly reduce the effect in ORTF-type pairs by moving=
the two mics closer and closer to each other until, at some point, dependi=
ng on the mics, the "wavy" effect seems to become unnoticeable.
>
> So, XY?
Not quite. Again, words fail, but this time I can show a picture:
http://track17.com/xq/z77/
(Incidentally, I use this rig occasionally for interviews, but it's not goo=
d for wide soundscapes.
>> Of course, the desired stereo width gets reduced too.
>
> Sounds like you're preferring stereo based on level difference over stere=
o based on time difference. Except . . .
Not at all. See this web page (especially footnote #5):
http://track17.com/mic_rigs.html
I was merely reporting what I've had to do with spaced cardioids to get th=
e "wavy thing" to go away.
>> Why this would occur in M-S recordings is absolutely beyond me, but it's=
almost always there.
>
> Except that MS is entirely level based. So, I dunno.
Yea, that's why I don't do M-S -- that, and that darn "wavy" effect (which =
I probably need to stop trying to describe or explain).
Curt Olson
|