Maybe an example will help.
Let's say we are recording from the center of a meadow surrounded by trees and
it is dawn on a spring morning and we are interested in a particular sound we
can faintly hear in the distance. We us identical high quality recorders to
make simultaneous recordings with these three arrays: Jecklin disc stereo using
two omnidirectional Sennheiser MKH8020's with self-noise of 10dB; narrow angled
stereo using two cardioid Rode NT1A's with self-noise of 5dB; and a single
super-cardioid Rode NTG1 with self-noise of 18dB. Which recording will resolve
the distant caller best? Which one the worst? And why?
I'm sure people can come up with a variety of answers.
David, I know from what you say that you believe the super-cardiod will rank
best. But I think that the higher-self noise could bury the clarity of the
sound.
John Hartog
rockscallop.org
--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
>
> > My problem with your proposed ranking system is that it falls apart
> > unless all of the mics being ranked have similar self-noise
> > characteristics.
>
> John,
>
> Noise is nothing to do with sound perspective. That's why I go by ear.
> Forget noises. What I am listening to is similar to the different
> perspectives of camera lenses. To risk taking the analogy too far, a
> cardioid is like a fisheye lens, a short gunmic is a wide angle lens,
> and a rifle mic is like a standard 50mm lens. Stereo is very fuzzy
> Cinemascope. :-)
>
> David
>
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>
|