John, I think I usually use "transparency" for what you mean. I then
mean a combination of stereo picture and low noise.
In my experience, microphones have different "transparencies"
depending on the sound. Usually, I find a low noise M/S to be most
transparent, but not always.
This is difficult to talk about, as most of us do not only mean
different things with words, but also have different emotional logics
about it.
Klas
At 18:14 2013-03-12, you wrote:
>David,
>I finally understand what you mean by fetch now:)
>It is not how I would use the term, but fine.
>I include noise as a factor in perspective, because it affects the
>perceived soundscape, but that is also just me.
>
>John Hartog
>
>--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
> >
> > John,
> >
> > Apologies for labouring the point again but "fetch" is all about
> > acoustic perspective, not noise.
> >
> > > narrow angled stereo using two cardioid Rode NT1A's with self-noise
> > > of 5dB;
> >
> > No useable mic has an excess noise over thermal of 5dB. This figure is
> > claimed as a world record by B&K for one of their special
> > instrumentation mics.
> >
> > Ill-defined noise figures are misleading. Sennheiser quote around 23dB
> > ITU-R468 weighting which many other mics can't get near.
> >
> > I'd take the mic hiss down using my algorithm on Audacity unless it
> > sounded like part of the soundscape.
> >
> > Now for the wildlife answer. :-)
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > What you don't quote is the acoustic background noise in the setup
> > like tree noise. Unless it is considerably lower than the faint sound,
> > you won't get much anyway. If it is faint to the ears, it will be
> > fainter to any mic.
> >
> > None of this is what you are asking - so -
> >
> > If the sound is faint to the ears it will be fainter to any mic rig.
> > What a good fetch gives is a closer perspective against the ambient
> > sounds and reverberation - if that is what the recordist wants.
> >
> > What I would do is to listen to all three rigs and choose what sounds
> > best. I would probably choose the Jeklin simply because it used
> > Sennheiser mics which would survive rain. :-) Second would be the
> > crossed cardioids which will have a similar perspective at bird
> > frequencies, and avoid the hypercardiod with its annoying rear lobe
> > picking up tree noise from the rear. Two with two rear lobes would be
> > needed for stereo of course. If I could baffle off the rear
> > lobes, it may be useable, but the only hope of getting a "specimen"
> > recording would be with a rifle mic like the MKH-816 in mono.
> >
> > The intervening trees would probably disperse the call. I spent a
> > summer trying to get a clean woodpecker drumming in my woodland on 150
> > metre cables. I could fetch it in at a reasonable level with rifle
> > mics, but the reverb from the trees muddled the drumming. I got the
> > blighter last year when it drummed on a tree across my car park at 60
> > metres using the fetch of my 416's.
> > http://www.stowford.org/recordings.htm#woodpeckerbeech
> >
> > David
> >
> > 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
email:
website: www.telinga.com
|