Steven Boardman <boardroomout...@gmail.com> wrote: > For even better polar pattern control, you could use ambisonic mics in an > ORTF. > Schoeps won?t have better polar patterns than a well calibrated ambisonic > mic. So in theory the ORTF array would produce a better spatial image. > If you have enough channels and your budget is good, why not use 8 > ambisonic mics? > > Or if you used something like Harpex, maybe you could synthesise spaced > pairs and only use 4? > You would still be below Schoeps ORTF budget as well?.:)
Only four Core Sound OctoMic second-order microphones are needed replace the 12 mono microphones used in full sphere ORTF-3D, with better polar patterns and true ORTF angles & spacings for all pairs of mics. You'd need 32 recording channels. That can be done at reasonable cost with a Midas 32C/DL32 setup (for under $3000), four Zoom F8ns, or for higher cost with two Sound Devices Scorpios. We tried using Harpex to do ORTF with a single OctoMic. Unfortunately, its plane wave decomposition process for translating ambisonic soundfields in space results in relatively weak location cues. Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com) Core Sound LLC www.core-sound.com Home of OctoMic and TetraMic _______________________________________________ Sursound mailing list Sursound@music.vt.edu https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit account or options, view archives and so on.
