> I would add that a double MS will give you 4 discrete channels, which is a
> great surround sound experience, but it lacks the center
> channel of a 5.1 system.
>
> A double MS array is an agile "point and shoot" type of gear, which is very
> handy for documentaries, and if you have a narrator or whatever spoken
> material covering the center channel, no one will really notice its absence.
> But if one has the time for setting up a bulkier gear and are in the field to
> record just the sound I would go for a 5 channel setup.
Luis,
I haven't used a Schoeps myself but a former colleague of mine is now a
Schoeps dealer and hires them out. The double M/S is useful for orchestra
recording as a space and ambience mic and its great advantage is that you
can adjust its lobes remotely by matrixing.
It is essentially a indoor mic and generally not suitable for outdoor work.
As far as I understand it, you can derive a front mid channel with a
hypercardioid pattern, and independently matrix four surround sound channels
producing a 5.0 setup. All a 5.1 adds is s derived mono LF channel.
The disadvantage of a double M/S is its wide lobe angles and thus less
ambience reduction in uncontrolled situations, for instance with noise from
top and bottom directions. I note also the references to needing a sound
engineer in the PDF I posted. Where it wins out is in controlled studios or
concert halls where it gives you effectively several directional mics all at
one three dimensional point source and you can vary these remotely.
David Brinicombe
|