On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 12:07:20AM +0200, Goran Finnberg wrote: > ... while my ears are certainly NOT occupying the exact same spot > instead they sit some distance apart and this gives my brain both > amplitude AND timing information lost in the pure coicident > recording systems.
Whatever the advantages of spaced mic techniques may be - and I certainly don't want to question the value of your impressions - ** this argumentation is flawed **. Which is a real shame because every time it is repeated in discussions like this one, it keeps the real reasons, if any, why spaced mics may sound good from being investigated. It is flawed because your ears are still separated by the same distance when listening to a stereo pair of speakers, and this will cause ITD for off-center sources even if the mics were coincident or the signals were amplitude-panned. It doesn't explain why you'd need to generate the ITD twice [*], and even less what would be the advantage of ITD values that are orders of magnitude larger than those resulting from the distance between your ears (as produced by widely spaced mics). [*] The ITD for really lateral sources (off-stage, reverb) may be a bit smaller than the natural one and that may be a reason for using a small distance between the mics (ORTF style) to compensate. But that still doesn't provide a valid argument for widely spaced mics. Ciao, -- FA A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia. It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow) _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound
