R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
 11 
 on: November 21, 2017, 09:21:43 am 
Started by klaus - Last post by kludge
Well, we can distinguish because microphones that were _designed_ to be accurate, and those that were designed to be deliberately inaccurate.  This creates the interesting category of microphones like the U47 that were designed to be as accurate as possible when they were originally made, but which people like today because of their inaccuracies.

 12 
 on: November 21, 2017, 09:04:30 am 
Started by klaus - Last post by Timtape
We are closer to perfect microphones than we are to perfect  speakers.

A lot closer I suspect, and have been for maybe 70 years or more.

What I dont understand in this thread at least is:

1. the ridiculing of accuracy on the one hand...

but then

2.   the praising of mics like the great U47 which from its makers' own words was designed primarily to be accurate. (I can supply the relevent Neumann quotes)

One or the other yes, but, not both. There seems amongst some people almost a fundamental disconnect.  I'm still trying to work out the explanation.

 13 
 on: November 21, 2017, 09:03:26 am 
Started by NorthfireRecordingStudio - Last post by NorthfireRecordingStudio
Thanks Billy! It'll be super helpful to know where to go with this, I'm definitely hitting a tech wall with this so far.

 14 
 on: November 20, 2017, 12:34:30 pm 
Started by djind1g0 - Last post by djind1g0
Hi guys I am beginner EDM DJ and currently looking for some cool drum kits for this genre , can u recommend me something , recently found this sample pack https://www.lucidsamples.com/drum-samples-packs/40-top-club-drums-vol-1.html
 but I am still not sure about buying


 15 
 on: November 20, 2017, 11:27:11 am 
Started by klaus - Last post by Jim Williams
If that perfect microphone is ever developed, it will also require a perfect speaker to hear it.

We are closer to perfect microphones than we are to perfect  speakers.

Perhaps an implant will allow us to skip the speaker/hearing stage and feed the signal directly to the brain like Cmdr. Data or Rush Limbough?

 16 
 on: November 20, 2017, 12:55:40 am 
Started by klaus - Last post by Timtape
Should the requisite amount of "time off in my schedule" and the requisite amount of "inclination to further a discussion in an internet forum" ever coincide sufficiently to merit setting up such a properly-controlled experiment, I promise to share the results with you.

It was hardly a suggestion to do a properly controlled experiment. Just to put some vocal files out there, with  attention to basic things  like level matching, attention to proximity effect, vocalist on axis etc.  Nowhere near a "properly controlled experiment". Please  re-read what I actually wrote.

Quote from: soapfoot
I do wish you the best of luck in your search for the perfect microphone!

No need to. From what I have read of them, I would most happily use any of the listed "big five" mics on for example vocal recording, but lots of other duties as well. So long as they were in good condition, valve not overly noisy etc.
I wonder if you really know, Brad, where I am coming from here. Maybe with a little more time and patience we could come to a common understanding on this.

All the best,
Tim

 17 
 on: November 19, 2017, 10:15:21 pm 
Started by klaus - Last post by soapfoot
Sure, no argument. So why not share it with others? Post comparison files, level matched etc, same performance, and see what others think...

Should the requisite amount of "time off in my schedule" and the requisite amount of "inclination to further a discussion in an internet forum" ever coincide sufficiently to merit setting up such a properly-controlled experiment, I promise to share the results with you.

I know this answer is unlikely to satisfy at the present moment. I regret this. I do wish you the best of luck in your search for the perfect microphone!

 18 
 on: November 19, 2017, 09:09:21 pm 
Started by klaus - Last post by Timtape

...It's self-evident that a mic which lacks the ability to transmit bare essentials of sound transmission will not be chosen.

What are these bare essentials of sound transmission?

 19 
 on: November 19, 2017, 06:13:50 pm 
Started by klaus - Last post by klaus
You did not address my specific criticism of your unclear thinking, namely that, without direct and "live" comparator, no fidelity test as you envision is possible.

Then you picked words out of my concluding sentence that garbled my message.
I wrote:

Quote
"fidelity" defined here as most true to one's image of the original source's emotional content will be the winner.

One's IMAGE or memory of the original source's emotional content is the keyword here.
If you don't give the listener the original sound source when comparing a mic, the listener's image or memory of the (absent) original will be the next best source for evaluating a mic.

It's self-evident that a mic which lacks the ability to transmit bare essentials of sound transmission will not be chosen.

 20 
 on: November 19, 2017, 04:30:45 pm 
Started by klaus - Last post by Timtape
Your thinking is not clear:

 "Emotional content" is not always easy to pin down, but the irony is, without a certain minimum level of fidelity (in the standard sense of the word) no emotional content will be conveyed. For example for words to be understood. Remove enough treble, and speech become a meaningless mumble. Remove enough of the lows and all your hear are meaningless "sss"s  "fff"s, "t"s etc. Same for musical notes. It becomes very constricted and lifeless. 

Fidelity  has to be "good enough". It doesnt always have to be great. Just good enough for the purpose at hand.  So our telephone system was designed for speech intelligibility. People could also sing into a telephone call to a friend, using, from the strict fidelity point of view, the dreadful sounding standard carbon button microphone and yet the full emotion of that singing could generally be conveyed to the person at the other end.

That's why a term like "emotional content" in the context of comparing otherwise pretty high fidelity mics is I think not very useful. If "emotional content " can be conveyed  well enough over very limited fidelity telephone lines then it brings into question the association of that term with certain  mics. Beyond a certain point, certainly more  fidelity to the live voice will increase, but the "emotional content" has already been conveyed well enough with the much lower fidelity. How can that be?

An ear is just an ear. A mic is just a mic. Both are essentially  transducers.

But "emotion" is a quality of  mind. It is of a far different order.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10