On Jan 16 2011, Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote:
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.
I can't find any technical drawings, but as the mk012 is a 23mm diameter
capsule, crude measurement of the photo would seem to indicate that the
array is about 50mm radius which would mean that localisation degrades in
the 2-3kHz region - in other words, the Oktava
doesn't work above the middle Oktaves (sorry, couldn't resist). On the
other hand, the low end is likely to be quieter than other soundfield type
mics as less boost of the difference signal will be needed.
Dave - sitting watching the cricket and coding....sad on a Sunday
morning at 8:00.
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.
_______________________________________________
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
