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

Reply via email to