On 01/16/2011 02:45 AM, Ronald C.F. Antony wrote: > I wasn't aware of this. How bad are we talking here? After all, I'm > not after scientific sound localization, but into realistic sounding, > natural ambience for live music recording. So if it sounds like it > COULD be real, it doesn't matter if it IS real. As long as it doesn't > create an image that jumps, wanders, gives conflicting localization > cues, etc. And how much of an improvement in terms of self-noise > compared to the CoreSound unit? Is anyone using this? It's something > that could fit into my budget, unlike most other options...
my limited experience with tetrahedral microphones suggests that smaller arrays have better localisation, whereas wider ones can be quieter and better sounding. i'd expect this octava one to localize pretty badly, but haven't tested it myself. it will likely be quieter than the tetramic, though. does octava supply an a-to-b-format conversion tool? if not, you'd be in for some serious DIY... if you want excellent s/n, and you don't need height, use a nimbus-halliday array. beats every tetrahedron at horizontal-only performance. -- Jörn Nettingsmeier Lortzingstr. 11, 45128 Essen, Tel. +49 177 7937487 Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio), Elektrofachkraft Audio and event engineer - Ambisonic surround recordings http://stackingdwarves.net _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
