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.

Reply via email to