There are 10 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Boston sounds
From: Daan Hendriks
1b. Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Dan Dugan
1c. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Daan Hendriks
1d. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Bernie Krause
1e. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Daan Hendriks
1f. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Bernie Krause
1g. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
From: Gregory O'Drobinak
1h. Re: Boston sounds
From: E Karel
2a. Re: Alice Microphone for Field Recording?
From: Klas
2b. Re: Alice Microphone for Field Recording?
From: Klas
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Boston sounds
Posted by: "Daan Hendriks" daan_humanworkshop
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:27 am ((PDT))
*It’s good to hear from someone recording in surround. Is anyone else here
besides me and Steve Sergeant doing surround?-Dan*
I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis;
the DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like with
DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons, though
again very practical and does probably come into its own when up sampled to
higher orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
surround or spatial microphones.
I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1
with Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with
his (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
Anyway, my 2p :)
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Gerrit
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
> Well Hi Dan and others,
>
>
> Though strictly speaking not "surround" in the 5.1, x.1 sense, I have
> recently begun exploring recording techniques to allow full 360 degrees rec
> and (speaker!)playback based upon the Ambiophonics principles (
> ambiophonics.org) ie crsoo talk cancellation and including pinnae
> refelections. This includes my field recordists implementation of a(n)
> ambiophone (dual-sided (back-to-back) Brinibox in this case ...).
>
>
> Still rather rudimentary attempts as I only this summer completed the
> back-to-back briniboxes (EM172's based).
>
>
> Does that count too ...?
>
> Interesting topic, thnx for opening it Dan !
>
> Gerrit
> ------------------------------
> *Van:* <>
> namens Dan Dugan [naturerecordists] <
> >
> *Verzonden:* donderdag 22 september 2016 0:55
> *Aan:*
> *Onderwerp:* Re: [Nature Recordists] Boston sounds
>
>
>
> Do double MS and/or ambisonic formats count, Dan?
>
> Bernie
>
>
> Sure!
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Dan Dugan" dandugan_1999
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:46 am ((PDT))
Changing the thread as I led it astray.
Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
> I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
> technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
> simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis; the
> DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
> stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and rear
channels wide spaced omnis.
> I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like with
> DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons, though again
> very practical and does probably come into its own when up sampled to higher
> orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
I like having more spacing in my recordings—at least ear spacing in the front
array and more in the rear.
> I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
> surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
> ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
> surround or spatial microphones.
VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest in pro
audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at IBC in
Amsterdam. It’s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn’t
quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
> I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1 with
> Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with his
> (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings upmixed to
5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds great. Important to
distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode does steering, music is a
passive matrix.
-Dan
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Daan Hendriks" daan_humanworkshop
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:11 pm ((PDT))
*I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
rear channels wide spaced omnis.*
One thing I've always wondered about, for lack of a better term, DIY
surround setups is how you monitor in the field whether the image you are
producing is 'correct' or satisfactory, or otherwise not going to cause
phasing or other issues. I suppose it is a case of trying out multiple
setups over a prolonged period and eventually settling for a positioning
and distance between the four mics that 'works'?
*Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at IBC in Amsterdam. It’s
made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn’t quite cut it
for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.*
Interesting, I was aware of their upcoming Ambeo mic, but hadn't found any
info yet on the self noise. 18dBA is disappointing. I guess that means I'll
save myself splashing a couple of grand come this November on this mic.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dan Dugan
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
> Changing the thread as I led it astray.
>
> Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
>
> > I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
> technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
> simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis;
> the DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
> stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
>
> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
> rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>
> > I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like
> with DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons,
> though again very practical and does probably come into its own when up
> sampled to higher orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
>
> I like having more spacing in my recordings—at least ear spacing in the
> front array and more in the rear.
>
> > I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
> surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
> ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
> surround or spatial microphones.
>
> VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest
> in pro audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at
> IBC in Amsterdam. It’s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA
> self-noise doesn’t quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH
> version.
>
> > I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1
> with Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with
> his (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
>
> I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings upmixed
> to 5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds great.
> Important to distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode does
> steering, music is a passive matrix.
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Bernie Krause" bigchirp1
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 12:42 pm ((PDT))
Daan, you mentioned earlier, that you were not too impressed with double-MS.
Just curious how it missed the mark for you?
I found, for example, that if one has a really well-calibrated playback system,
the actual illusion of space that the double-MS approach provides seems to be
larger than the sum of its actual parts. That�s especially true when the audio
data is converted to output formats like 7.1�similar to what we did recently in
Paris at the Fondation Cartier exhibit
(http://fondation.cartier.com/#/en/art-contemporain/26/exhibitions/2638/now-on/2708/the-exhibition/)
The sound program, derived from MS and double-MS recordings, was installed by
the folks at IRCAM and the Pompidou Centre in Paris who incorporated Meyer
Sound�s new Amie speakers. Might be worth checking out if you�re comparing
outcomes.
Of course, these results are always a matter of personal taste and trial &
error.
Bernie Krause
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-938-5388
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Daan Hendriks
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
> rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>
> One thing I've always wondered about, for lack of a better term, DIY surround
> setups is how you monitor in the field whether the image you are producing is
> 'correct' or satisfactory, or otherwise not going to cause phasing or other
> issues. I suppose it is a case of trying out multiple setups over a prolonged
> period and eventually settling for a positioning and distance between the
> four mics that 'works'?
>
> Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic �ambio� at IBC in Amsterdam. It�s made
> with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn�t quite cut it for
> soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
>
> Interesting, I was aware of their upcoming Ambeo mic, but hadn't found any
> info yet on the self noise. 18dBA is disappointing. I guess that means I'll
> save myself splashing a couple of grand come this November on this mic.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dan Dugan
> [naturerecordists]<> wrote:
> Changing the thread as I led it astray.
>
> Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
>
> > I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
> > technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
> > simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis;
> > the DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
> > stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
>
> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
> rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>
> > I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like with
> > DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons, though
> > again very practical and does probably come into its own when up sampled to
> > higher orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
>
> I like having more spacing in my recordings�at least ear spacing in the front
> array and more in the rear.
>
> > I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
> > surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
> > ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
> > surround or spatial microphones.
>
> VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest in
> pro audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic �ambio� at IBC
> in Amsterdam. It�s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise
> doesn�t quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
>
> > I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1
> > with Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with
> > his (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
>
> I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings upmixed to
> 5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds great. Important
> to distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode does steering, music
> is a passive matrix.
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Daan Hendriks" daan_humanworkshop
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:38 pm ((PDT))
Hi Bernie,
First of all I should say I have not exhausted the possibilities or
capabilities of DMS - I’ve only personally owned it as a recording system
for a few months, and have in the past borrowed other people’s rigs on
occasion. I also haven’t had the pleasure to listen back over an extremely
well calibrated system such as you describe. So my experience is limited.
But I have owned and recorded with a high quality (MKH) MS system for many
years, and developed a personal distaste for using it to faithfully
represent (stereo) soundscapes. While I still love it for recording fx,
I’ve moved to different recording approaches for stereo ambient work. The
reasons are that first of all I felt I could never really trust MS for very
wide images - the off-axis representation of a sound field, especially
around 90 degrees from the centre, does strange things to the positioning
of sound sources. Many times I have noticed that sounds that should be to
the far right or left, jump to some position that is more to the centre of
the image. I’ve been very careful with proper alignment of the capsules,
but never been able to fully eradicate this unwanted effect.
But maybe more importantly for me is that with an MS soundscape recording,
I’ve always felt that my own efforts could never transcend exactly just
that - it always sounded like a “recording”. There is a mild flatness to
the end result that bothers me. While I’ve been able to make many
recordings that I am happy with, and objectively sound good to my ears,
there always was a lack of faithfulness to how I remembered how the space
sounded when I was there, recording.
This has become especially more clear to me now that I record with DMS and
boundary/baffled omnis simultaneously and then compare the two stereo
results (of course removing the rear channel from the DMS recording). While
the MS can still sound very good to me, I am again confronted with this
slightly unreal copy of the space I was in, while the boundary or baffle
recordings come much closer.
In my limited experience with auditioning surround recordings made using
DMS, the same problems have persisted - a sense of a lack of truthfulness.
While happy with having sound coming at me from the rear channels now as
well, and certainly also feeling that the recordings I made so far are at
least serviceable and sometimes ‘good’, it still feels like I am listening
to sounds coming from a speaker array.
However, my experience here goes directly against what you describe with
the sense of space being larger than the sum of its parts, on a really well
calibrated system. Perhaps that's the crux of my problem/limited experience
with DMS so far, the playback system. Also, I've not tried converting the
signal to 7.1 yet. And of course I also do realise that a recording, no
matter how well done, will never quite challenge the experience of being at
a place yourself.
So, a lot of words here for essentially what is a very personal and a bit
of a woolly observation. I do really like using my DMS rig because it’s so
convenient, and my personal results so far are certainly ‘good’, but yes,
not very exciting.
I’d love to hear that installation you created in France however. I know
there’s a lot more for me to learn in the world of surround sound.
Thanks,
Daan
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Bernie Krause
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
> Daan, you mentioned earlier, that you were not too impressed with
> double-MS. Just curious how it missed the mark for you?
>
> I found, for example, that if one has a really well-calibrated playback
> system, the actual illusion of space that the double-MS approach provides
> seems to be larger than the sum of its actual parts. That’s especially true
> when the audio data is converted to output formats like 7.1…similar to what
> we did recently in Paris at the Fondation Cartier exhibit (
> http://fondation.cartier.com/#/en/art-contemporain/26/
> exhibitions/2638/now-on/2708/the-exhibition/) The sound program, derived
> from MS and double-MS recordings, was installed by the folks at IRCAM and
> the Pompidou Centre in Paris who incorporated Meyer Sound’s new *Amie*
> speakers.
> Might be worth checking out if you’re comparing outcomes.
> Of course, these results are always a matter of personal taste and trial &
> error.
>
> Bernie Krause
>
> Wild Sanctuary
> POB 536
> Glen Ellen, CA 95442
> 707-938-5388
> http://www.wildsanctuary.com
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Daan Hendriks
> [naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
>
> *I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me)
> and rear channels wide spaced omnis.*
>
> One thing I've always wondered about, for lack of a better term, DIY
> surround setups is how you monitor in the field whether the image you are
> producing is 'correct' or satisfactory, or otherwise not going to cause
> phasing or other issues. I suppose it is a case of trying out multiple
> setups over a prolonged period and eventually settling for a positioning
> and distance between the four mics that 'works'?
>
> *Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at IBC in Amsterdam. It’s
> made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn’t quite cut it
> for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.*
>
> Interesting, I was aware of their upcoming Ambeo mic, but hadn't found any
> info yet on the self noise. 18dBA is disappointing. I guess that means I'll
> save myself splashing a couple of grand come this November on this mic.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dan Dugan [
> naturerecordists]<> wrote:
>
>> Changing the thread as I led it astray.
>>
>> Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
>>
>> > I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
>> technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
>> simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis;
>> the DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
>> stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
>>
>> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me)
>> and rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>>
>> > I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like
>> with DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons,
>> though again very practical and does probably come into its own when up
>> sampled to higher orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
>>
>> I like having more spacing in my recordings—at least ear spacing in the
>> front array and more in the rear.
>>
>> > I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4
>> channel surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed
>> interest in ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding
>> convenient surround or spatial microphones.
>>
>> VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest
>> in pro audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at
>> IBC in Amsterdam. It’s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA
>> self-noise doesn’t quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH
>> version.
>>
>> > I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1
>> with Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with
>> his (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
>>
>> I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings
>> upmixed to 5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds
>> great. Important to distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode
>> does steering, music is a passive matrix.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1f. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Bernie Krause" bigchirp1
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 3:47 pm ((PDT))
You make some excellent points, Daan. Every one of them noted�and likely very
true under many circumstances.
We just have to remember that every mic system we use and every choice we make
with regard to field recording protocol ends up being some kind of compromise;
what we pick up at one end, we lose at the other. The result I hear using MS or
DMS with the soundscape appearing to be larger than the sum of its parts might
sound compelling to me but disturbing to others�a really fair note you make
about the lack of �faithfulness� of the sound. We just have to remember that no
matter what, we�re creating an illusion with this stuff. It�s a far,
decontextualized and fragmented cry from the �real thing� or �authentic� or
�genuine� or �pure,� another point that you make eloquently. This might sound
like a contradiction, but I figure that if one is looking for those criteria to
be met, they need to buy a ticket to Disneyland.
I�m getting older, now, around 750 sunrises and sunsets short of 80 years on
this diminishing planet. I�ve lost the top octave of my hearing, replaced with
a very loud and constant 11k signal as a result of tinnitus, and the physical
corpus no longer sustains me on hikes of any distance. So my backpack and field
expectations are considerable lighter then they were a decade ago. I�m not
complaining in any way. Who can imagine enjoying a better life? But, alas, all
of us will come to that fork in the road if we live long enough. As a result my
main field package these days consists of the MKH 30/40 MS combo, a very lite
tripod, a SD 722. If my back hurts, I switch to Chris Watson�s backup plan, an
Olympus LS10 with SD MixPro, and a pair of DPA 4060s, which really sound quite
sweet�especially if I play on a variation of Dan Dugan�s Jecklin setup by tying
a string around a tree the diameter approximating the distance between one�s
ears, and mounting the DPAs at 180� opposite. Again, a compromise, but one that
saves about $33kUSD if I was thinking of replacing that sweet setup with a more
elaborate Aachen head. And the result is ____________(ok, good, great,
credible, acceptable, fantastic, spectacular, real, disgusting, looks and
sounds a lot like Donald Trump).
Bernie
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-938-5388
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
SKYPE: biophony
FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/BernieKrauseAuthor
TED Global talk:
https://www.ted.com/talks/bernie_krause_the_voice_of_the_natural_world?language=en
On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Daan Hendriks
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Bernie,
>
> First of all I should say I have not exhausted the possibilities or
> capabilities of DMS - I�ve only personally owned it as a recording system for
> a few months, and have in the past borrowed other people�s rigs on occasion.
> I also haven�t had the pleasure to listen back over an extremely well
> calibrated system such as you describe. So my experience is limited.
>
> But I have owned and recorded with a high quality (MKH) MS system for many
> years, and developed a personal distaste for using it to faithfully represent
> (stereo) soundscapes. While I still love it for recording fx, I�ve moved to
> different recording approaches for stereo ambient work. The reasons are that
> first of all I felt I could never really trust MS for very wide images - the
> off-axis representation of a sound field, especially around 90 degrees from
> the centre, does strange things to the positioning of sound sources. Many
> times I have noticed that sounds that should be to the far right or left,
> jump to some position that is more to the centre of the image. I�ve been very
> careful with proper alignment of the capsules, but never been able to fully
> eradicate this unwanted effect.
>
>
> But maybe more importantly for me is that with an MS soundscape recording,
> I�ve always felt that my own efforts could never transcend exactly just that
> - it always sounded like a �recording�. There is a mild flatness to the end
> result that bothers me. While I�ve been able to make many recordings that I
> am happy with, and objectively sound good to my ears, there always was a lack
> of faithfulness to how I remembered how the space sounded when I was there,
> recording.
>
>
> This has become especially more clear to me now that I record with DMS and
> boundary/baffled omnis simultaneously and then compare the two stereo results
> (of course removing the rear channel from the DMS recording). While the MS
> can still sound very good to me, I am again confronted with this slightly
> unreal copy of the space I was in, while the boundary or baffle recordings
> come much closer.
>
>
> In my limited experience with auditioning surround recordings made using DMS,
> the same problems have persisted - a sense of a lack of truthfulness. While
> happy with having sound coming at me from the rear channels now as well, and
> certainly also feeling that the recordings I made so far are at least
> serviceable and sometimes �good�, it still feels like I am listening to
> sounds coming from a speaker array.
>
>
> However, my experience here goes directly against what you describe with the
> sense of space being larger than the sum of its parts, on a really well
> calibrated system. Perhaps that's the crux of my problem/limited experience
> with DMS so far, the playback system. Also, I've not tried converting the
> signal to 7.1 yet. And of course I also do realise that a recording, no
> matter how well done, will never quite challenge the experience of being at a
> place yourself.
>
>
> So, a lot of words here for essentially what is a very personal and a bit of
> a woolly observation. I do really like using my DMS rig because it�s so
> convenient, and my personal results so far are certainly �good�, but yes, not
> very exciting.
>
>
> I�d love to hear that installation you created in France however. I know
> there�s a lot more for me to learn in the world of surround sound.
>
> Thanks,
> Daan
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Bernie Krause
> [naturerecordists]<> wrote:
> Daan, you mentioned earlier, that you were not too impressed with double-MS.
> Just curious how it missed the mark for you?
>
>
> I found, for example, that if one has a really well-calibrated playback
> system, the actual illusion of space that the double-MS approach provides
> seems to be larger than the sum of its actual parts. That�s especially true
> when the audio data is converted to output formats like 7.1�similar to what
> we did recently in Paris at the Fondation Cartier exhibit
> (http://fondation.cartier.com/#/en/art-contemporain/26/exhibitions/2638/now-on/2708/the-exhibition/)
> The sound program, derived from MS and double-MS recordings, was installed
> by the folks at IRCAM and the Pompidou Centre in Paris who incorporated Meyer
> Sound�s new Amie speakers. Might be worth checking out if you�re comparing
> outcomes.
> Of course, these results are always a matter of personal taste and trial &
> error.
>
> Bernie Krause
>
> Wild Sanctuary
> POB 536
> Glen Ellen, CA 95442
> 707-938-5388
> http://www.wildsanctuary.com
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Daan Hendriks
> [naturerecordists] <> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
>> rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>>
>> One thing I've always wondered about, for lack of a better term, DIY
>> surround setups is how you monitor in the field whether the image you are
>> producing is 'correct' or satisfactory, or otherwise not going to cause
>> phasing or other issues. I suppose it is a case of trying out multiple
>> setups over a prolonged period and eventually settling for a positioning and
>> distance between the four mics that 'works'?
>>
>> Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic �ambio� at IBC in Amsterdam. It�s
>> made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn�t quite cut it
>> for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
>>
>> Interesting, I was aware of their upcoming Ambeo mic, but hadn't found any
>> info yet on the self noise. 18dBA is disappointing. I guess that means I'll
>> save myself splashing a couple of grand come this November on this mic.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dan Dugan
>> [naturerecordists]<> wrote:
>> Changing the thread as I led it astray.
>>
>> Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
>>
>> > I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
>> > technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
>> > simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis;
>> > the DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of
>> > the stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
>>
>> I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and
>> rear channels wide spaced omnis.
>>
>> > I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like with
>> > DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons, though
>> > again very practical and does probably come into its own when up sampled
>> > to higher orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
>>
>> I like having more spacing in my recordings�at least ear spacing in the
>> front array and more in the rear.
>>
>> > I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
>> > surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
>> > ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
>> > surround or spatial microphones.
>>
>> VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest in
>> pro audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic �ambio� at IBC
>> in Amsterdam. It�s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise
>> doesn�t quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
>>
>> > I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1
>> > with Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with
>> > his (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
>>
>> I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings upmixed
>> to 5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds great.
>> Important to distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode does
>> steering, music is a passive matrix.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1g. Re: Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
Posted by: "Gregory O'Drobinak" gmo_dunes2
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:11 pm ((PDT))
Bernie:
Sorry, but NOTHING can sound as obnoxious, ridiculous and unappealing as Donald
Trump!The world's most mediocre and simplistic recording gear sounds way better
(and makes more sense).
Stay with us & keep the faith!
Love hearing from you all,Greg
From: "Bernie Krause [naturerecordists]"
<>
To: Nature Recordist Group Group <>
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Surround recording (was Boston sounds)
You make some excellent points, Daan. Every one of them noted…and likely
very true under many circumstances.
We just have to remember that every mic system we use and every choice we make
with regard to field recording protocol ends up being some kind of compromise;
what we pick up at one end, we lose at the other. The result I hear using MS or
DMS with the soundscape appearing to be larger than the sum of its parts might
sound compelling to me but disturbing to others…a really fair note you make
about the lack of “faithfulness” of the sound. We just have to remember that no
matter what, we’re creating an illusion with this stuff. It’s a far,
decontextualized and fragmented cry from the “real thing” or “authentic” or
“genuine” or “pure,” another point that you make eloquently. This might sound
like a contradiction, but I figure that if one is looking for those criteria to
be met, they need to buy a ticket to Disneyland.
I’m getting older, now, around 750 sunrises and sunsets short of 80 years on
this diminishing planet. I’ve lost the top octave of my hearing, replaced with
a very loud and constant 11k signal as a result of tinnitus, and the physical
corpus no longer sustains me on hikes of any distance. So my backpack and field
expectations are considerable lighter then they were a decade ago. I’m not
complaining in any way. Who can imagine enjoying a better life? But, alas, all
of us will come to that fork in the road if we live long enough. As a result my
main field package these days consists of the MKH 30/40 MS combo, a very lite
tripod, a SD 722. If my back hurts, I switch to Chris Watson’s backup plan, an
Olympus LS10 with SD MixPro, and a pair of DPA 4060s, which really sound quite
sweet…especially if I play on a variation of Dan Dugan’s Jecklin setup by tying
a string around a tree the diameter approximating the distance between one’s
ears, and mounting the DPAs at 180° opposite. Again, a compromise, but one that
saves about $33kUSD if I was thinking of replacing that sweet setup with a more
elaborate Aachen head. And the result is ____________(ok, good, great,
credible, acceptable, fantastic, spectacular, real, disgusting, looks and
sounds a lot like Donald Trump).
Bernie
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-938-5388
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
SKYPE: biophony
FaceBook: http://www.facebook.com/BernieKrauseAuthor
TED Global talk:
https://www.ted.com/talks/bernie_krause_the_voice_of_the_natural_world?language=en
On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:37 PM, Daan Hendriks
[naturerecordists] <> wrote:
Hi Bernie,
First of all I should say I have not exhausted the possibilities or
capabilities of DMS - I’ve only personally owned it as a recording system for a
few months, and have in the past borrowed other people’s rigs on occasion. I
also haven’t had the pleasure to listen back over an extremely well calibrated
system such as you describe. So my experience is limited.
But I have owned and recorded with a high quality (MKH) MS system for many
years, and developed a personal distaste for using it to faithfully represent
(stereo) soundscapes. While I still love it for recording fx, I’ve moved to
different recording approaches for stereo ambient work. The reasons are that
first of all I felt I could never really trust MS for very wide images - the
off-axis representation of a sound field, especially around 90 degrees from the
centre, does strange things to the positioning of sound sources. Many times I
have noticed that sounds that should be to the far right or left, jump to some
position that is more to the centre of the image. I’ve been very careful with
proper alignment of the capsules, but never been able to fully eradicate this
unwanted effect.
But maybe more importantly for me is that with an MS soundscape recording, I’ve
always felt that my own efforts could never transcend exactly just that - it
always sounded like a “recording”. There is a mild flatness to the end result
that bothers me. While I’ve been able to make many recordings that I am happy
with, and objectively sound good to my ears, there always was a lack of
faithfulness to how I remembered how the space sounded when I was there,
recording.
This has become especially more clear to me now that I record with DMS and
boundary/baffled omnis simultaneously and then compare the two stereo results
(of course removing the rear channel from the DMS recording). While the MS can
still sound very good to me, I am again confronted with this slightly unreal
copy of the space I was in, while the boundary or baffle recordings come much
closer.
In my limited experience with auditioning surround recordings made using DMS,
the same problems have persisted - a sense of a lack of truthfulness. While
happy with having sound coming at me from the rear channels now as well, and
certainly also feeling that the recordings I made so far are at least
serviceable and sometimes ‘good’, it still feels like I am listening to sounds
coming from a speaker array.
However, my experience here goes directly against what you describe with the
sense of space being larger than the sum of its parts, on a really well
calibrated system. Perhaps that's the crux of my problem/limited experience
with DMS so far, the playback system. Also, I've not tried converting the
signal to 7.1 yet. And of course I also do realise that a recording, no matter
how well done, will never quite challenge the experience of being at a place
yourself.
So, a lot of words here for essentially what is a very personal and a bit of a
woolly observation. I do really like using my DMS rig because it’s so
convenient, and my personal results so far are certainly ‘good’, but yes, not
very exciting.
I’d love to hear that installation you created in France however. I know
there’s a lot more for me to learn in the world of surround sound.
Thanks,Daan
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Bernie Krause
[naturerecordists]<> wrote:
Daan, you mentioned earlier, that you were not too impressed with double-MS.
Just curious how it missed the mark for you?
I found, for example, that if one has a really well-calibrated playback system,
the actual illusion of space that the double-MS approach provides seems to be
larger than the sum of its actual parts. That’s especially true when the audio
data is converted to output formats like 7.1…similar to what we did recently in
Paris at the Fondation Cartier exhibit (http://fondation.cartier.com/
#/en/art-contemporain/26/ exhibitions/2638/now-on/2708/ the-exhibition/) The
sound program, derived from MS and double-MS recordings, was installed by the
folks at IRCAM and the Pompidou Centre in Paris who incorporated Meyer Sound’s
new Amie speakers. Might be worth checking out if you’re comparing outcomes.Of
course, these results are always a matter of personal taste and trial & error.
Bernie Krause
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-938-5388
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:04 PM, Daan Hendriks
[naturerecordists] < com> wrote:
I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and rear
channels wide spaced omnis.
One thing I've always wondered about, for lack of a better term, DIY surround
setups is how you monitor in the field whether the image you are producing is
'correct' or satisfactory, or otherwise not going to cause phasing or other
issues. I suppose it is a case of trying out multiple setups over a prolonged
period and eventually settling for a positioning and distance between the four
mics that 'works'?
Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at IBC in Amsterdam. It’s made
with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn’t quite cut it for
soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
Interesting, I was aware of their upcoming Ambeo mic, but hadn't found any info
yet on the self noise. 18dBA is disappointing. I guess that means I'll save
myself splashing a couple of grand come this November on this mic.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Dan Dugan [
naturerecordists]<naturerecord > wrote:
Changing the thread as I led it astray.
Daan Hendricks, you wrote,
> I record in Double MS, though I don't find it a very exciting sounding
> technique - it is of course very practical however. I tend to do Double MS
> simultaneously with stereo in various baffle/boundary arrays using omnis; the
> DMS then acts as a less impressive sounding but surround version of the
> stereo tracks recorded with omnis.
I use the Rich Peet technique, imaging array in front (Jecklin for me) and rear
channels wide spaced omnis.
> I've dabbled with Ambisonics recording using Soundfield mics but like with
> DMS, I found the results underwhelming for a variety of reasons, though again
> very practical and does probably come into its own when up sampled to higher
> orders; something I've not had the pleasure yet to try.
I like having more spacing in my recordings—at least ear spacing in the front
array and more in the rear.
> I'm still to try techniques such as double boundary arrays for 4 channel
> surround, and I'm very curious and hopeful whether the renewed interest in
> ambisonics thanks to VR is going to lead to better sounding convenient
> surround or spatial microphones.
VR is making ambisonics and various surround concoctions of hot interest in pro
audio circles now. Saw prototype Sennheiser ambisonic mic “ambio” at IBC in
Amsterdam. It’s made with good electret capsules, at 18 dBA self-noise doesn’t
quite cut it for soundscapes. I begged for an MKH version.
> I'm also curious of how binaural can successfully be "converted" to 5.1 with
> Dolby Pro Logic 2, which I believe is what Gordon Hempton does with his
> (stunning) Neumann dummy head stereo recordings.
I often play my quasi-binaural Jecklin or shoulder mics recordings upmixed to
5.1 through Dolby Pro Logic 2 (music) for pleasure. Sounds great. Important to
distinguish between movie and music modes, movie mode does steering, music is a
passive matrix.
-Dan
#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318 -- #yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp {border:1px solid
#d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp #yiv3077223318hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp #yiv3077223318ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp .yiv3077223318ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp .yiv3077223318ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mkp .yiv3077223318ad a
{color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor
#yiv3077223318ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor #yiv3077223318ygrp-lc #yiv3077223318hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor #yiv3077223318ygrp-lc .yiv3077223318ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318activity span
.yiv3077223318underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv3077223318
.yiv3077223318attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318
.yiv3077223318bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 dd.yiv3077223318last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318 dd.yiv3077223318last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318
dd.yiv3077223318last p span.yiv3077223318yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318file-title a, #yiv3077223318
div.yiv3077223318file-title a:active, #yiv3077223318
div.yiv3077223318file-title a:hover, #yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318photo-title a,
#yiv3077223318 div.yiv3077223318photo-title a:active, #yiv3077223318
div.yiv3077223318photo-title a:hover, #yiv3077223318
div.yiv3077223318photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318
div#yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3077223318ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv3077223318yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv3077223318
.yiv3077223318green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv3077223318 o {font-size:0;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318photos div div {border:1px solid
#666666;min-height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318photos div label
{color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv3077223318 .yiv3077223318replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-actbar div a:first-child
{margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg
{font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg select, #yiv3077223318 input, #yiv3077223318 textarea
{font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv3077223318 code {font:115%
monospace;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg *
{line-height:1.22em;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-mlmsg #yiv3077223318logo
{padding-bottom:10px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-msg p a
{font-family:Verdana;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-msg
p#yiv3077223318attach-count span {color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-reco #yiv3077223318reco-head
{color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-reco
{margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor
#yiv3077223318ov li a {font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor #yiv3077223318ov li
{font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-sponsor #yiv3077223318ov ul {margin:0;padding:0 0 0
8px;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-text
{font-family:Georgia;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-text p {margin:0 0 1em
0;}#yiv3077223318 #yiv3077223318ygrp-text tt {font-size:120%;}#yiv3077223318
#yiv3077223318ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {border-right:none
!important;}#yiv3077223318
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
1h. Re: Boston sounds
Posted by: "E Karel" lerake
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 9:45 pm ((PDT))
I’ve been recording quad using two ORTF pairs on a short stereo bar. For
mobile recording, I put a long stereo bar over my shoulder with one ORTF pair
suspended in front and the other suspended behind me, 788T draped across my
torso.
Ernst
From: <> on behalf of "Dan Dugan
[naturerecordists]" <>
Reply-To: <>
Date: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 2:49 PM
To: <>
Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Boston sounds
Roy, you wrote,
> I live in southern NH and do sound recording and still photography as a
> serious interest, primarily nature recording and usually in surround sound
> format on land and water. What did you have in mind for your project?
It’s good to hear from someone recording in surround. Is anyone else here
besides me and Steve Sergeant doing surround?
-Dan
Messages in this topic (14)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Alice Microphone for Field Recording?
Posted by: "Klas" klasstrandberg
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:20 pm ((PDT))
Yes, I can get them from the Swedish Primo importer but I don´t know how
many I need to buy.
I can ask. Please contact me at telinga.com
Klas
On 2016-09-20 10:02, [naturerecordists] wrote:
>
>
> Klas, do you have a source for Primo EM-200 capsules? I've poked
> around, but I'm coming up empty.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (11)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Alice Microphone for Field Recording?
Posted by: "Klas" klasstrandberg
Date: Thu Sep 22, 2016 2:29 pm ((PDT))
Please contact me at telinga.com.
Klas
On 2016-09-20 18:29, [naturerecordists] wrote:
>
>
> Do you know of a supplier who sells small quantities?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (11)
"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|