naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: mic spacing vs spatial veracity

Subject: Re: mic spacing vs spatial veracity
From: "Curt Olson" flipov411
Date: Mon Aug 5, 2013 7:47 am ((PDT))
I agree with John about coincident arrays. Ocean and stream sounds might be=
 among the few exceptions, as there often isn't a lot of spacial informatio=
n available to capture.

In case it might be helpful to someone who hasn't seen it before, here's a =
writeup of my experience with the whole matter...

http://minnesotasoundscapes.com/mic_rigs.html

Curt Olson


On Aug 5, 2013, at 3:59 AM,  wrote:

> I think we have heard plenty of examples shared here on this group of non=
-coincident arrays producing good stereo localization without any aberratio=
ns being noticeable or problematic. I also think coincident arrays like XY,=
 Blumlein, and MS will also produce localization aberrations, like on-axis =
lobes, depending on the polar frequency response of the particular micropho=
nes used. Ocean and stream sounds can be especially challenging with any ar=
ray, and I would agree, at least in specific instances, a coincident array =
may help simplify things.
>
> John Hartog
> rockscallop.org







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

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