At least you did not refer to it as the ubiquitous “girl with guitar”.
Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings
- Thread starter Ron Resnick
- Start date
At least you did not refer to it as the ubiquitous “girl with guitar”.
Very fine resolution has clearly been something ultimately of a constraint with iPhone video recording but the iPhone videos greatest natural virtue of being successfully indicative of a system’s tonal balance and also in showcasing a systems musical expressiveness has been an area iPhone that has delivered.
So to go and improve fine detail capture in a relatively non-critical way at the cost of no longer reflecting the actual tonal balance of the system is a far greater loss than any gain overall for me at any rate. Generally the total overall balance of iPhone videos has been something that has made iPhone recordings give a valuable insight into what is going on holistically and I figure organically contributed to the uptake in usage of iPhone videos in the first place. The classic audiophile move to chase the details but also bleaching the balance turn makes them less able to showcase a system’s expressiveness and is more a backward step than any slightly illuminating win in upper system detail for me.
So to go and improve fine detail capture in a relatively non-critical way at the cost of no longer reflecting the actual tonal balance of the system is a far greater loss than any gain overall for me at any rate. Generally the total overall balance of iPhone videos has been something that has made iPhone recordings give a valuable insight into what is going on holistically and I figure organically contributed to the uptake in usage of iPhone videos in the first place. The classic audiophile move to chase the details but also bleaching the balance turn makes them less able to showcase a system’s expressiveness and is more a backward step than any slightly illuminating win in upper system detail for me.
Last edited:
But the resolution of the MV88+ is so strikingly superior to the iPhone mic that I am not ready to give up. Several people have suggested that whatever it takes to make the video recording as sonically representative of the sound in the room is what we should be doing.
Here is a way forward to keep the resolution of the MV88+: EQ the mic to achieve a tonal balance as representative as possible.
This rendition is still a bit brighter than what I hear in the room, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the videos I posted yesterday (which sounded bright AF!). The resolution is representative of what I hear in the room. I really think the resolution is worth preserving in these videos if we can remedy the tonal balance issue.
PS: On a personal note I have a feeling that at some arbitrary point I'm going to get tired of this recording stuff, and I am going to go back to just listening to music.
Here is a way forward to keep the resolution of the MV88+: EQ the mic to achieve a tonal balance as representative as possible.
This rendition is still a bit brighter than what I hear in the room, but it's a heck of a lot closer than the videos I posted yesterday (which sounded bright AF!). The resolution is representative of what I hear in the room. I really think the resolution is worth preserving in these videos if we can remedy the tonal balance issue.
PS: On a personal note I have a feeling that at some arbitrary point I'm going to get tired of this recording stuff, and I am going to go back to just listening to music.
Last edited:
These are the settings I used:
If other people using this same mic set the EQ to maximize representativeness it would be be very interesting to see if we all basically use the same EQ profile, which means the mic is too lean/thin.
I actually think we would wind up using literally the same or almost the same EQ profile.
If other people using this same mic set the EQ to maximize representativeness it would be be very interesting to see if we all basically use the same EQ profile, which means the mic is too lean/thin.
I actually think we would wind up using literally the same or almost the same EQ profile.
Peter, what equation are you trying to solve in your head? "If Ron likes one of his videos better than David's Tang video, then that proves to me that Ron does not know what a violin sounds like?"
Everything I recorded with the Shure MV88+ before tonight has to be discarded for inadequate tonal balance representativeness.
Of course the mic has anything to do with it -- the mic has a lot to do with it. The mic is grafting an EQ device onto the proceedings. I have proved this to my satisfaction over the last few nights with these direct mic comparisons among the iPhone mic, the MV88 and the MV88+.
I only tested my mic EQ idea on one song ("Witchy Woman," but I am pretty encouraged and I expect to be using the MV88+ going forward.
To answer your question . . . My MV88+ recording was no good. On my iPhone mic recording I think I hear slightly better resolution and slightly better transparency on the vocal on my recording. I also think the David/Tang video maybe has a bit of a weird spacial perspective for a solo vocalist (maybe this is what stenho is talking about?). However, I much prefer the tonal balance and the weight and woodiness of the violin on the David/Tang video. The tonal density of acoustic instruments on Bionors is why I love bionors for jazz music.
I would be more certain of all of these impressions if I played them back through the big stereo.
Peter, what equation are you trying to solve in your head? "If Ron likes one of his videos better than David's Tang video, then that proves to me that Ron does not know what a violin sounds like?"
Everything I recorded with the Shure MV88+ before tonight has to be discarded for inadequate tonal balance representativeness.
Of course the mic has anything to do with it -- the mic has a lot to do with it. The mic is grafting an EQ device onto the proceedings. I have proved this to my satisfaction over the last few nights with these direct mic comparisons among the iPhone mic, the MV88 and the MV88+.
I only tested my mic EQ idea on one song ("Witchy Woman," but I am pretty encouraged and I expect to be using the MV88+ going forward.
To answer your question . . . My MV88+ recording was no good. On my iPhone mic recording I think I hear slightly better resolution and slightly better transparency on the vocal on my recording. I also think the David/Tang video maybe has a bit of a weird spacial perspective for a solo vocalist (maybe this is what stenho is talking about?). However, I much prefer the tonal balance and the weight and woodiness of the violin on the David/Tang video. The tonal density of acoustic instruments on Bionors is why I love bionors for jazz music.
I would be more certain of all of these impressions if I played them back through the big stereo.
Ron, it was a simple question. No special motive or equation being solved. Lots of people prefer your videos anyway, even if we now learn you say they are flawed.
BTW, that stringed instrument is not a cello or violin. It is why it sounds so big and deep and woody.
Oh no, back to the sword! (Nah, I never remotely suggested I knew anything about acoustic instruments.)
What instrument is that?
The large instrument on Ferrucio Spinetti's back is a string bass, sometimes referred to as a double bass. Turn your album over and this picture is on the back cover.
You mean woodiness of the bass? Anyway I find the deviations on her vocals too distracting in the Tang/David video. Vocal intelligibility is low and there is muffling of the voice in her lower range. Bass has nice weight and is reasonably similar to the recording itself. Ron’s bass is missing some “wood” and is too much string but vocals are much closer to the recording. I could not live with the tonal and resonant abberrations I hear in the Tang recording but could probably live with a bit less body on the bass…for this recording…for others the opposite might be true.Peter, what equation are you trying to solve in your head? "If Ron likes one of his videos better than David's Tang video, then that proves to me that Ron does not know what a violin sounds like?"
Everything I recorded with the Shure MV88+ before tonight has to be discarded for inadequate tonal balance representativeness.
Of course the mic has anything to do with it -- the mic has a lot to do with it. The mic is grafting an EQ device onto the proceedings. I have proved this to my satisfaction over the last few nights with these direct mic comparisons among the iPhone mic, the MV88 and the MV88+.
I only tested my mic EQ idea on one song ("Witchy Woman," but I am pretty encouraged and I expect to be using the MV88+ going forward.
To answer your question . . . My MV88+ recording was no good. On my iPhone mic recording I think I hear slightly better resolution and slightly better transparency on the vocal on my recording. I also think the David/Tang video maybe has a bit of a weird spacial perspective for a solo vocalist (maybe this is what stenho is talking about?). However, I much prefer the tonal balance and the weight and woodiness of the violin on the David/Tang video. The tonal density of acoustic instruments on Bionors is why I love bionors for jazz music.
I would be more certain of all of these impressions if I played them back through the big stereo.
Music Nuda "Eleanor Rigby"
Shure MV88+ on tripod, mic EQ (as illustrated above) for tonal balance representativeness
Shure MV88+ on tripod, mic EQ (as illustrated above) for tonal balance representativeness
Better but where is the presence on the vocals? The actual recording her voice is quite upfront and present. On yours she is sat back in the mix.
Some iPhone models do provide pretty good results, and I would agree that there is no point in "upgrading" to external microphones if those result in an even more unbalanced sound.
The MV88+, it seems, is more suited for podcasting than for music, so that may not be a good choice.
More than detail, a neutral frequency response is key. But if we can have both, what is the problem?
I find it fascinating how this topic about recordings, which should remain purely technical, from my point of view, seems to become yet again a platform for stereotypical opposition between the good and bad audiophiles.
Last edited:
Compared to the recording, this one gets closer than most. The vocal presence is there intelligibility is high and bass has nice tone and weight.
These are the string instruments most commonly found in an orchestra.
A piano has strings struck by hammers rather than bowed or plucked so it is considered a percussion instrument.
I agree with this assessment, and if it is not the iPhone recording that explains the issues, then the term "natural sound" hardly applies.
Similar threads
- Locked
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |