On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 01:17:30PM -0400, Bob Katz wrote: > 1) two councident hyper cardioids
My preferred one. Iff the mics are available. If not, see below. > 2) coincident cardioids (pretty boring and far > from spacious to my ears) I'd agree, certainly if the angle of the mics is only 90 degrees as usually recommended. Imagine a scene spanning -45 to +45 degrees. Level difference will be only 6 dB at the edges. Even if your speakers are at +/-45 the result tends to be rather narrow, more so with the usual +/-30 degrees placement. If I have to use cardioids, I'll boost the difference signal by 4 to 6 dB. This turns them into hypercardioids at a larger angle. The only exception would be for e.g. a solo player and when I know that some artificial reverb will be added later. How 'spacious' coincident mic techniques will be also depends critically on the distance of the mics. Which is one reason why that youtube video with the moving mics is completely bogus - you just can't compare things that way. In my experience it can be quite difficult to predict what the right distance will be, you need try this out every time unless you've done more or less the same type of music at the same place before. @Dave: you probably remember the Teatro Farnese in Parma. Last year I recorded a violin solo concert there, and of course wanted to capture the rather unique sound of the place. I ended up with the stereo pair at 3.5 meters from the stage - more than double the distance I had anticipated. 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
