[Top] [All Lists]

Re: What is a good nature sound recording?

Subject: Re: What is a good nature sound recording?
From: "Klas Strandberg" klasstrandberg
Date: Fri Nov 2, 2012 5:52 pm ((PDT))
Hi David!

Your track:
It brings me back to the very early days with the first experiments
trying to get stereo with a parabola, when a mono MD21 was in focus,
mixed with a kind of xy stereo by two electrets pointing sideways.
Is it a quiz? Do you know what was wrong?

But do we agree that something is wrong with it? Or would you say
that it is a matter of opinions?

With the purpose of making true demos of the SSM's, I would leave the
whining from the grain mill and the hiss from the stream, as well as
low frequency blasts.
If I could, I would remove my own breath, belly sounds or sounds from
the tripod however, without telling.
On Soundcloud I have told if my recordings have been EQ'ed or not.

I will certainly add more tracks later, where the stereo is shuffled
and manipulated in different ways, but then I will say so.

"With the purpose of making true demos of the SSM."
Other people have other purposes with their work.
That is totally okay with me.


  At 22:28 2012-11-02, you wrote:
> > if you have a recording that you really want to share with people,
> > as a good example of what you think is "a good nature sound
> > recording "
>- what would you do?
>1/ Add it on SoundCloud as it is, - as you hear it -or
>2/ postproduce it, so that it fits better to PC loudspeakers and
>kitchen radios?
>Taking 2/ first, no - I would not pre-distort it. I assume that anyone
>interested enough would be listening on a reasonalble stereo setup or
>good headphones.
>1/ If it is too long, and often has blasts of wind or boring sections,
>I edit it to present a good sound excerpt. That's simple
>post-production. I use a bass roll-off as standard, and often adjust
>this in post production so that the piece sounds as I would have heard
>it. If I do an edit within a recording I usually note this in the
>However there are two processes I do not usually declare: De-hissing,
>and an occasional whine from a grainmill about a mile away. The hiss
>is usually from a stream in the woods and contribtes nothing to the
>widlife sounds, so I use my judgement to reduce this using Audacity
>and always doing a before/after comparison to see if it affects the
>wanted sounds. If it does, the hiss stays in. The whine is at a
>precise frequency and I've got a fine notch filter which reduces its
>effect, again making an "artistic" before/after judgement on the
>wildlife sounds.
>If all the above sounds like "manipulation", that started with the
>choice, placement and aiming of mics, recording level, and decinding
>when to push the record button.
>I've got weeks of rubbish recordings, but the ones that go  out are
>those which, to my mind, represent the wildlife in this area. It is
>the end result which matters.
>BTW I've just put a stereo file on Soundcloud asking what is wrong
>with it:
>David Brinicombe
>North Devon, UK
>Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
>sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
>Yahoo! Groups Links
Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
Phone & fax int + 295 310 01

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

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