Thanks Mark. I think the point here is we tested at two different pre-amps gains, to eliminate that as a potential source of noise.
There was no difference in SNR, indicating the noise is generated by the capsules and electronics, and not the preamp. Cheers Jack Sent from my iPhone > On 3 Nov 2023, at 02:16, Mark Thompson <ma...@hansonassociates.com.au> wrote: > > Not sure if this helps the discussion or not, but I get the feeling this has > to do with the noise floor of the TetraMic capsules, and thought our own > independent observations may assist here. > > We have used the TetraMic for several years now, and like it. However, yes, > we have always had to increase pre-amp gain significantly (compared to other > microphone inputs) to get good input levels and as a result we meter high > noise levels on each capsule. It doesn't mean we've stopped using the > TetraMic, we just have to be mindful of this. > > Kind regards, > > Mark > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sursound <sursound-boun...@music.vt.edu> On Behalf Of Jack Reynolds > Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 7:10 AM > To: Surround Sound discussion group <sursound@music.vt.edu> > Subject: Re: [Sursound] A comparison of fifteen ambisonic microphones > > Right. I see. > > Thanks for the clarification. > > You pointed out various things you thought were errors, which no-one else > thought were errors, and we didn’t resolve anything at all. > > I think it would be the right thing to do to outline your issues here to > prevent any further doubt being cast on the study. The ‘discussion’ on > Facebook was a farce and I would rather not repeat that here. > > As I remember you thought it was an unfair comparison because your mics are > less sensitive, and that meant they would need more input gain and that this > would unfairly increase the noise floor? > > We added a second recording at an increased gain setting and proved that > assertion to be incorrect. If a Zoom F8 mic preamp isn’t good enough….? > > Your second assertion was that comparing to a KU100 was an unfair comparison > because a real binaural mic has real ITD. Your solution to this was to use > your favourite technique of bilateral ambisonics, which would mean finding > two of every mic, two recorders and twice the number of channels, which seems > like a waste of time effort to me. > That point raised some interesting discussion regarding higher order mics > resolving ITD better than lower order, and various approaches including first > decoding from ambisonics to SPS/T-Designs before binaural decoding as that > could potentially render ITD better. > We tried that and it didn’t sound any better… so we went back to a straight > ambisonics to binaural decode using Sadie ii KU100 HRTFs. Every mic treated > the same way, with no exception. > > What else was there? > > I seem to remember you didn’t like the Schoeps ORTF3D array being in there > for comparison. I’m still not sure why. It’s a spaced 3D array, which will > obviously sound different from the near coincident arrays, but does that > matter? > > What else was there? > > I really do want to resolve this, in public, so we can draw a line under it > once and for all. > > Please just say what you think should be corrected, and why. > Also, if you can find a single person that agrees with your assertions I > would love to hear their opinion. > From the overly lengthy discussion on Facebook I don’t recall anyone agreeing > with you. Hence my position that there are in fact no errors in our method. > > The recordings are there for anyone to study. > If your assertion that there was an error in the process, it casts doubt on > our study and therefore the usefulness of the files. > > If you are unable to outline what those errors are - I can only assume there > are in fact no errors, and you are not acting in an honourable manner. > > Apologies to the other Sursounders if this is out of line. Any input would be > gratefully received. > > Thanks > > Jack > > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 2 Nov 2023, at 19:24, lenmoskow...@optonline.net wrote: >> >> We discussed the multiple errors in detail in our Facebook discussion. >> >> That you didn't correct the comparison study, and actually added more >> incorrect information has made it clear that further discussion won't >> improve the outcome. >> >> >> 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. > _______________________________________________ > 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. > _______________________________________________ > 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. _______________________________________________ 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.
