Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
Of course, you are correct, and we can't know that, which is why it is best to use higher quality recording equipment...
But we can also try to make an evaluation of the end result compared to the original track. If that were not the case, would you (or anyone else, including myself) be posting videos on YouTube?
My only reference, as a viewer, is to compare the video to the original track.
It is a very difficult excercise, and I think I was very careful in pointing out potential limitations of the recordings (of all three videos).
Last edited:
Criticize the words, the description, not the man.
The MV88+ video reasonably fairly represents the in-the-room resolution I hear. The iPhone mic video reasonably fairly represents the tonal balance I hear in the room.
I, personally, find the David/Tang speaker video to be comparatively low in resolution and transparency. Peter, I hear that it is rich and warm and fulsome in the upper bass to lower midrange frequency range. It has a sonic center of gravity in the "power" range that I find emotionally engaging and unfatiguing.
I think the treble range is shaved down. For this reason I find the sound to be unbalanced.
I don't understand how you find that video abundant in "information" and "nuance."
I have learned from my objective in room frequency response measurements alone the wide gap between objective measurements and perceived subjective frequency response balance. (The frequency response of my system drops off sharply after 5kHz, yet the system subjectively sounds flat and neutral and leaning towards brightness. I think it would be extremely illuminating to see a carefully measured frequency response of your system/room or of Tang's system/room.)
Last edited:
Yes:
iPhone Microphone Frequency Response Comparison
With the advent of sound level meter apps for the iPhone OS (of which SoundMeter was the first) people began to ask, "How flat is the frequency response of the iPhone's microphone?" Early testing indicated
blog.faberacoustical.com
Once again, I was not criticizing Rexp, I was just trying to offer explanations... Why are you being so insistent about this ? Did I offend you in some way ?
Once again, it is really unfortunate that we don't have frequency response measurements for these microphones. The specs (usually state 20hz-20khz) are pretty useless. Reviews of these microphones are usually geared towards different applications (speech) so not so useful either.
Here is one link with some measurements, illustrating why it is important:
Complete Guide To Microphone Frequency Response (With Mic Examples)
Master microphone frequency response with this complete guide. Understand how it affects sound capture with practical mic examples.
mynewmicrophone.com
Yes:
iPhone Microphone Frequency Response Comparison
With the advent of sound level meter apps for the iPhone OS (of which SoundMeter was the first) people began to ask, "How flat is the frequency response of the iPhone's microphone?" Early testing indicated
This is measuring an old iPhone model. I can't imagine that if David and I have an iPhone that is no more than one (1) generation apart that the microphone frequency response is going to materially different.
One could assume that, but similar "older" models have discrepancies, so who knows ?
I just found this site which does offer some measurements of various phone's build-in microphones: https://www.dxomark.com/category/audio-reviews/page/2/
Concerning the iphone14, it states here (https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-audio-test-result/): "The differences between the iPhone models when it comes to audio playback and recording have usually been minimal. The same holds true now with the release of the iPhone 14 series"
But I think this is only valid for recent models. Also, in their tests, the FR graphs don't go very low in the frequency range.
Here is a detailed review of the iphone 13 pro:
www.dxomark.com
"As a recording device, the 13 Pro Max delivers a very good timbre performance. The rendition is natural, warm, and rather consistent, with an emphasis on the lower midrange.
Unlike in playback, recordings have a darker sonority due to a receding high-end extension and limited treble. As a result, brightness is dimmed, and vocal intelligibility is altered. In noisy surroundings, such as our urban scenario, conversations have a hard time standing out of the background noise. This problem is less noticeable in high-SPL scenarios, in which the phone demonstrates clear, precise, rich and consistent midrange, a better high-end extension, and powerful bass — without ever sounding boomy.
In life videos, memos and meeting scenarios, the phone’s frequency response generates a slightly muffled sonority with subtle resonances in the lower midrange. That said, the overall result remains natural and pleasing."
Notice this comparison between various recent phone models:
The graph does not indicate how low bass is measured (in some other graphs they stopped at 100hz). You can see 10db differences between phones on some frequency ranges, which is significant.
Edit: here is another graph for the iphone SE 2022 model, which has a reasonably flat frequency response (build-in mic). You can see the graph stops just below 100hz.
Concerning the iphone14, it states here (https://www.dxomark.com/apple-iphone-14-plus-audio-test-result/): "The differences between the iPhone models when it comes to audio playback and recording have usually been minimal. The same holds true now with the release of the iPhone 14 series"
But I think this is only valid for recent models. Also, in their tests, the FR graphs don't go very low in the frequency range.
Here is a detailed review of the iphone 13 pro:
Apple iPhone 13 Pro Max Audio test
The iPhone 13 Pro Max is Apple’s 2021 top-of-the-line smartphone, powered by the A15 Bionic chipset and offering up to 1TB of internal storage. On the audio playback front, Apple partnered with Dolby Labs to deliver an immersive stereo reproduction. As for recording, the audio zoom algorithm is...
www.dxomark.com
"As a recording device, the 13 Pro Max delivers a very good timbre performance. The rendition is natural, warm, and rather consistent, with an emphasis on the lower midrange.
Unlike in playback, recordings have a darker sonority due to a receding high-end extension and limited treble. As a result, brightness is dimmed, and vocal intelligibility is altered. In noisy surroundings, such as our urban scenario, conversations have a hard time standing out of the background noise. This problem is less noticeable in high-SPL scenarios, in which the phone demonstrates clear, precise, rich and consistent midrange, a better high-end extension, and powerful bass — without ever sounding boomy.
In life videos, memos and meeting scenarios, the phone’s frequency response generates a slightly muffled sonority with subtle resonances in the lower midrange. That said, the overall result remains natural and pleasing."
Notice this comparison between various recent phone models:
The graph does not indicate how low bass is measured (in some other graphs they stopped at 100hz). You can see 10db differences between phones on some frequency ranges, which is significant.
Edit: here is another graph for the iphone SE 2022 model, which has a reasonably flat frequency response (build-in mic). You can see the graph stops just below 100hz.
Which is precisely why I put forward the iTestMic2 in that any inconsistency between disparate chipsets , circuits and mic’s across iphone and Android are rendered moot, and we might have that ’standardisation’ talked about , the hardware at least.Yes:
iPhone Microphone Frequency Response Comparison
With the advent of sound level meter apps for the iPhone OS (of which SoundMeter was the first) people began to ask, "How flat is the frequency response of the iPhone's microphone?" Early testing indicated
iTestMic2 USB-C | iOS Sound Meter UK Microphone Accessories
www.ios-sound-meter.uk
OK, misunderstood your comment - I have the same question... Seems like bass response is not very good, for the rest, hard to say.
I too find that recording lower in resolution and dare I say muddy . Voice and what is being sung is not so easy at times to clearly hear. Is the tone nice? Yes but at least as recorded it throws the baby out with bath water. Tone and dynamics, sure, but there also needs to be transparency and resolution…the other way around(more common in high end) is also not good as it comes across as analytical and unnatural.
Fwiw, I was responding to Scott.
I will try to be patient here.
It's quite simple. You were critically "explaining" why someone else had the view that he did. You don't have access to another's thoughts or motives.
Telling Rexp his judgement is clouded by his idea of what he thinks the system should sound like is a direct criticiism, an ad hominem description.
You did not understand my earlier remark and thought I was talking about LPs. I never mentioned an LP. Here you make an appeal to something streamed from Qobuz saying video 1 did not sound like that and apparently -- my guess -- videos 2 and 3 sound more like what you heard streamed from Qobuz. A far better 'argument', or at least an explanation of why you have your view would be to say "I'm judging these videos based on what I hear from Qobuz, (presumably through headphones); that is my standard." At least that explains your opinion and let's readers assess the value of it from that explanation.
Similar threads
- Sticky
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |