Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
The second video is better. More body, resolution... across all frequencies.The difference is obvious and significant.
I agree. I think I will try to start using this microphone standardly for recording systems, even if monaural.
The problem is it requires a whole separate tripod which adds a lot of weight to the (already heavy) suitcase.
The problem is it requires a whole separate tripod which adds a lot of weight to the (already heavy) suitcase.
What happened to the idea that we should all use phones to "level the playing field"?
That was only a suggestion for the hobbyists. Ron is doing something different in an official capacity for WBF.
Ron, I would be interested in hearing what an iPhone video sounds like of that same Ray Brown album, just for comparison sake. How much worse is it, really? I know it is a hassle, but it might be quite interesting to know the differences.
I agree. I had every intention of doing precisely that comparison.
But then I got derailed and aggravated because it turns out that one of the Earthworks microphones appears to be DOA. That's why I had to record the external mic version in mono (both audio input channels on the XA50 video camera set to the same single input).
And now I have lost track of the volume level. Maybe some other time . . .
I think tonight's project proved clearly that even the single Earthworks QTC40 mic is noticeably better sounding (even played back only on an iPhone) than the internal stereo camera mic.
OH! I can probably just mount the Earthworks mic on a cold shoe on top of the video camera!
So in this case video played back on iphone can be used to extrapolate real difference?
Ron, just approximate the volume and make a video with your phone so we know how much better the other mic is.
I still have a question about mic location. One seems located at the camera itself while the other looks to be 12 or 18 inches in front of the camera on its own tripod. Shouldn’t they be in the same location for such a comparison? And shouldn’t they be located right where your ears are in the listening seat rather than a few feet in front of the listening seat?
I think you would find similar differences were the two recordings made at the exact same location. However, you'll only know if you try. Regarding recording at the listening position, it would make sense since you can get very different response at different locations in the room. But sometimes the listening position, that should be optimal for our ears, is not optimal for a recording. I don't have any explanations for that!
Thanks. That presumes Ron has compared and chosen those two different mic locations as optimal for each mic and better than the listening position. I had thought the idea was simply to record a video from the listening position. Of course, one can place a mic a few feet from each speaker for less room interaction and make the recording that way. I guess it all depends on the intent. Ron, as a reviewer, dealer, WBF owner is presumably operating with different priorities that are those simply hobbyists who share an iPhone recording of their music on their systems. I was just questioning the consistency of Ron's methods for comparing the two different mics and hoping for a third with a standard phone device for completeness.
Understood. Personally, I'd like to see more binaural recordings with dummy heads. It's hard to satisfy everyone.
Yeah, it's not even close!!
Earthworks it is.
It still doesn't sound anywhere close to the in-room sound, which I have heard, but if you want to get some inkling of an idea -- not more than that, really -- the Earthworks does a much better job.
Microphone!
You said one was dead…you want stereo, right?
I have to see if Sweetwater will replace this pair of matched microphones first. I'm not going to just buy another $1,000 microphone to replace this dead one I already paid for.
Stereo would be ideal, but not at the travel inconvenience of needing a whole separate tripod and a dual mic support.
A single QTC40 sounds noticeably superior to me to the internal XA50 microphone. A single QTC40 already is a big improvement.
Totally agree that it sounds superior to the camera microphone. How are you feeding this into the camera so that you have video capability?
I was trying to do something like this with my Tascam portable recorder and feed the output in to the camera but the gain was too mismatched to make it work properly. That is why I bought that little Zoom microphone, which I used last year in Munich but it seems to have broken shortly thereafter (it might actually be ok as the charging socket in my old Iphone is probably to blame because I have trouble charging it now).
I would get them to replace the one that died...surely there is guarantee of some sort when it arrived DOA?
Does it require phantom power? How are you doing that?
I truly believe that paying up for exactly the right tool is money well spent. The Canon XA50 has built-in XLR jacks which internally provide 48V phantom power.
So I plug the Earthworks microphones via XLR cables directly into the camera.
So I plug the Earthworks microphones via XLR cables directly into the camera.
Similar threads
- Locked
