sandy hall-behrens wrote:
> robin, what sort of wind covering did you
> use to record the wind such little if any mic disturbance?
I think there is still a fair bit of disturbance in that recording. The poi=
nt I was trying to make was that this actually is desirable IMO since it ad=
ds context. The whistling/fluting of the metal structure is best understood=
in relationship to the wind.
Here is a photo of the recording setup:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rparmar/6774553512/
Over each AT3032 is the original foam cover and then the "WindTech Standard=
WindCutter" from www.thewindcutter.com. I also bought the higher grade (?)=
StormChaser line for my ME66.
Note that I have used the structure itself to block some of the direct air =
pressure on the mics. I also got the caps darned close to the part of the s=
tructure doing the singing.
As an aside, I note that it might be better (in terms of soundstage) to hav=
e a baffle between the omni mics. Though I tend to like the results even wi=
thout.
As David Brinicombe noted:
"You can often avoid "blocking off" or LF overload, by recording at a
low level. What a windsheild does for you is to let you operate at
useful MF gain levels without low frequency overloads."
I found it rather tricky to set levels on this occasion, since the gusts re=
sulted in significant SPL increases. But it would have been impossible with=
out the fluffies. I was able to get a decent recording and EQ out the exces=
s low end, which at least had not overloaded the caps or preamp.
I have no doubt a blimp would have done an even better job, but one large e=
nough to house this particular spaced mic setup would be far too big for me=
to haul up a hill in the rain and muck. One day when I'm rich I'll sort al=
l that out! In the meantime 30 bucks per mic can work wonders. Try it for y=
ourself.
Ref recording:
https://soundcloud.com/robinparmar/moytura-wind-song
-- Robin Parmar
|