|
|
|
|
|
|
Binaural vs. DSM Mic Method
In
a message dated 1/15/05 8:59:32 AM Pacific Standard Time,
a@acobb.com writes:
Hi
Leonard,
I
thought you'd like to know my site has a link
http://www.timbreproductions.com/pages/mental_psychoacoustics.html
to
your site in my initial intro to binaural recording. I'll
have more binaural material in the next few months (there
are a few synthetic tracks already, but no acoustic recordings
yet).
Please
let me know if you want me to refine or adjust anything,
especially the few words I've said about you and your
mic placement technique.
Allen
Allen
Cobb
a@acobb.com
www.timbreproductions.com
Hello
Allen,
Appreciate
the link to my site and the opportunity to help bringing
better appreciation for this form of recording.
While the DSM mic/method is often referred to as 'quasi-binaural,'
I suggest we rethink this use of the term for better understanding
of why Binaural HRTF method is not more available as sound/music
commercial recordings.
My
primary concern is with using the term Binaural to describe
all the types of psychoacoustic HRTF related methods,
including my patented DSM mic/method. This is exactly
like always describing all automobiles without some discriminating
reference. Without additional description and knowledge,
a Volkswagen Beetle is the same as a Hummer, is the same
as a Lexus sedan 'automobile.'
The
term 'automobile' is just like using the term 'Binaural'
as a description that's supposed to convey what it is,
and for what purposes something is good for. If this were
the case, someone who really should specify a HUMMER for
rugged off-road travel requirement, may instead end up
with something else called an automobile. While correctly
named an automobile, a Lexus sedan or Beetle 'automobile'
is totally unsuitable for a needed purpose. Someone may
have really needed a HUMMER, but got any automobile because
this the only 'accepted' descriptive term for all 4 wheel
drive off-road vehicles. Kinda dumb, but this is a good
analogy nonetheless.
In
this same way, Binaural or Dummy Head is a most non-descriptive
term as applied to all HRTF, psychoacoustic, and patented
DSM recording technology.
Yes,
'Binaural' is a HRTF, psychoacoustic recording method,
but a subset or particular type of the general form. DSM
method is also a HRTF, psychoacoustic recording method,
but is NOT binaural in method as the term is understood,
and playback ability as the 'binaural' term is now regarded
to mean in-ear worn, or in-ear dummy head microphones
where it counts the most.
What
is happening by using the 'Binaural' term for all HRTF
or psychoacoustic methods?
Does
the term Binaural really describe what you need to know
to understand what it is, its past, present, and application
for today's playback systems?
In
the '50s, 1-channel monaural expanded to 2-channel 'binaural'
recordings and systems. Then some years later, someone
coined the word stereophonic, soon shortened to 'Stereo'
and the 'Binaural' term fell to disuse, and was mostly
forgotten until person-worn in-the-ears, and synthetic-ear-dummy
head recording was termed as 'Binaural' recording. This
term for head-mic's recording has survived to this day.
Yes, Binaural is (a type of) stereo, but a very special
kind of stereo to say the least.
In
today's professional audio world, Binaural is a mostly
'dirty word' as now recognized as a dead-end 'hobby grade'
technology, NOT suitable for prime-time recording method.
Reason is mostly 'binaural's' very limited, non-universal
playback ability for general media products.
Many
years ago some creative media professionals tried 'in-ear
Binaural' for commercial projects and were mostly embarrassed,
even chastised when only a short few seconds were tolerable
as interesting on anything, but headphones. Even so, for
a small percentage of listeners with radically different
'ear-shape' signature, even headphones listening was intolerable.
'Binaural
mix to mono was 'discovered' to be generally awful, vinyl
Binaural records were nearly impossible to cut for having
too much the 'phase' information for the 'cutter (and
playback stylus)' to mechanically follow, so professional
(broadcast radio) usage was solely limited to (tape recorded,
and later on CD) Binaural stereo headphone FM listening
programs like the more recent 'Binaural Audition' hosted
by John Sunier.
In
other words, the need for universal playback ability,
without problems, created very bad 'mojo' for using anything
termed 'Binaural ' for pro-media requirements.
This
was the case when I researched 'HRTF' or 'psychoacoustic'
audio effects BEFORE the terms existed in the mid 80's.
Suggest
it's best NOT to say Binaural when describing my DSM method
in the same sentence unless containing the 'not' word,
maybe with some explanation included for having some understanding
that this is 'NOT your father's binaural' microphone and
method! Recent 'quasi-binaural' term is only slightly
more descriptive, but I never really liked the connotation
or inference that this is again just another (nonprofessional)
'binaural' method.
Maybe
DSM is 'New Binaural' as compared to 'Old Binaural'? .............
No, maybe not, as I feel this still carries the old stigmata.
Anyway,
my '89 patent is at least good for technically understanding
some real differences between 'true in-ear Binaural' mics,
and the Dimensional Stereo-surround Microphone (DSM) method
of sound pickup. For less dry reading to get the important
points in hopefully entertaining language, go to page:
http://www.sonicstudios.com/multitrk.htm
My
MP3 DSM recordings page
is there so anyone can experience real 'Stereo-surround'
virtual reality with NO common 'binaural' playback constraints.
Listen on headphones, stereo, surround systems; play it
back in MONO.
Yes,
DSM sounds just like 'binaural,' except when played in
mono, stereo, or surround speaker systems. Binaural never
sounded this good, how can it be Binaural?
Give
a listen; Go to: http://www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm
Final
word is on Dummy Head technology.
Yes,
most makers of 'dummy head' mics mostly get the shape/size
correct, but little else that really matters. HRTF usually
means 'head related transfer function' of air-born acoustical
energy.
Our
bony heads are surrounded by 'water saturated tissue'
ABSORBING MOSTLY ALL frequencies of ACOUSTIC ENERGY, and
this composition reflects virtually nothing, or very,
very little sound over the entire acoustic spectrum of
frequencies.
Kinda
like a big black hole for acoustic energy. As such, the
head (and to a lesser degree the upper body) create a
truly unique signature to the mics positioned at or near
the head's surface.
Sonic
Studios, and NO other manufacturer of 'Dummy Head' baffles
is even close in replicating this needed signature using
proper acoustic materials and design. GUY and LiteGUY
HRTF baffle faithfully replicate this needed absorption
at virtually all acoustic frequencies, and with virtually
no reflections.
Result
of DSM recording system's advanced acoustical design is
the consistent ability to record EXACTLY what a live sound
actually sounded like everytime, anyplace, of anything,
for playback for everyone on headphones, stereo/surround
speaker systems with an uncommon virtual realism.
Calling
DSM binaural is asking for the usual ridicule from the
proaudio media creators we need most to get the 'lets
get more real' message.
Until
then, mostly amateur recordists using those 'binaural'
methods will be making the most realistic recordings on
Earth
So
whatdoyouthink Allen? Can you use any of this on a Binaural
interest web site?
I
certainly hope so. It's about time we at least get 'more
real' choices on how our consumer music/film/TV/radio
audio is being recorded.
DSM
is not 'your father's binaural' to say the least!
I
will stop the drum beating at this point to return everyone
to our regular schedule program of 'Multitrack Mix Recording
Hell' (in Dolby 5.1 surround where broadcast)!
Best
Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard (& Debbie) Lombardo
----------------------------
Sonic Studios "18 Years of Stereo/Surround Audio
History with DSM Microphones"
Patented HRTF Portable Ambient Systems for Multichannel
Field/Studio/Event Recording
---------------------------------
Informative Web Site: http://www.sonicstudios.com/
DSM Microphones,
MD/DAT/CF/HD/Laptop Portable Multichannel Recording Systems/reviews+tips+FAQ+mp3
USA FREE: 1-877-347-6642 TEL: 541-459-8839
|
<<
Subj: mics
Date: 98-02-08 14:13:08 EST
From: WDen
To: GuySonic
So, you have to buy the glasses, mics and a power pack? Is the
genral model OK for a newbie like me? I've reread the pages (very
informative) but since i haven't done this before I am wondering
how different the ATA 822 would be from these mounted mics. Is
the advantage in that you actually are using two separate(d) mics?
Hope these questions don't get to you but I am a real newbie.
Thanks, Bill >>
>>
I really don't mind your questions and appreciate your interest
in sound recording; it's a very satisfying hobby if you can tolerate
the snobs with more money to spend than real knowledge of recording
technique.
While Mono sound recording uses just one mic perspective, stereo
sound is the capturing of sound from two perspectives (like our
vision with two spaced optic sensors).
A single point microphone (AT-822 & similar) cannot actually
get that perspective of the sound field because of too narrow
a focus. In addition, the effect of our head causes
a 'modulation' of the sound before we again modulate the sound
with our ear shape.
Spaced microphone recordings without a head baffle have multiple
problems and do not offer complete dimensional aspects of the
ambient sound to be recorded.
Wearing the two miniature pickups with your head as the baffle
offers the most natural and effective way to record sound that
is virtually realistic.
Any other method of microphone technique tends to be difficult
to learn for getting satisfactory results and the stereo never
sounds as realistic.
Mounting the mics is variable and eyegear is just one way to comfortably
get them in place. The main idea is to have your head
between and not be too close to the ears so that the recordings
playback well over speakers.
If you are getting the D7/8/100 deck, you can operate the DSM
without the powering adapter but may need one if Loud Bass Heavy
Rock is your main goal.
I have mostly all 6S grades for doing the louder music but can
offer a bit of a price break on the listed prices. Let me
know again what your deck is and the type(s) of music that is
currently your main interest.
Sometimes I have a good condition second-hand DSM (traded-in)
set with the Sensitivity that may be suitable for you to start
with.
PA-6LC3 Bass reduction powering adapter with the switch is maybe
too much money, but there is a new PA-6LC model with no switch
that's set at 65 cycles, the most used setting for loud Rock recording
for $125
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
----------------------------------------------------------
<<
Subj: Re[2]: mini-jack cables
Date: 98-02-20 11:58:43 EST
From: SHBR@
To: GuySonic@aol.com
Hi Leonard,
Thanks for the advice - sort of. Re the use
of the ST250, I think a
key part of my query was the "borrow" part,
I ain't spending $6K for a
mic - and it might be worth adding that the
person I'm borrowing it
from is Jeff Silberman, so I think I'll be
able to take advantage of
his experience with this mic and its intricacies.
I was wondering more about which XLR connector
would be appropriate
for the mic cable side of the connection.
I was told it was a female
XLR, just wanted to confirm that was correct.
I'm not as familiar with
balanced cable conventions as unbalanced.
And I don't know whether a
locking XLR on my cable side requires a special
XLR on the mic cable
side of things. I have been told that your
mini-jack connector is the
way to go, so that's why I'm checking with
you.
I'm scheduled to play with the ST250 tomorrow,
so I'll be able to see
for myself which connectors apply. I'll get
back to you next week.
Have a nice weekend.
Regards,
Steve Brown
>>
Hello
again Steve.,
IF anyone knows how to use the Soundfield, it's Jeff Silberman!
My main gripe about most of the other Stereo mic/methods is that
they are not following what nature actually does within the acoustic
reception area. Thiese alternate methods that do not resemble
our natural instincts at stereo field reception and listening
to 3-dimensional ambient cues resulting in a far less versatile
microphone for the trouble and expense than expected.
These methods are very finicky to provide good results and take
a master at a particular technique to get outstanding results
The need for preprocessing and later decoding (other than simple
Dolby pro-logic type) also limits the end uses for these recording
even when excellent.
Keeping this in mind, you absolutely should get as much experience
as possible with a wide variety of mics and methods. Learning
how to use the Soundfield from Jeff Silberman couldn't provide
a better way to know about this technique; he is one of the admitted
masters in using this mic method and always gets good and occasionally
excellent results.
DSM mic/method is a most versatile/natural way to record 3-D stereo
and can also be configured as a stand-alone mic at far less cost
than the Soundfield.
The Sonic Studios web site listed below has very informative magazine
reviews and the taping tips page will be at least helpful in a
general way. The Multitrack artical will elaborate on the
DSM stereo mics/methods in detail.
Let me know what you find out about the actual XLR configuration
needed. If it 's a single XLR but a stereo feed, it would
help to know the pin's1,2,3 signal designations.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
============================================
In
a message dated 98-02-21 15:03:49 EST, you write:
<< ------------------------------
From: Len Moskowitz <moskowit@panix.com>
Subject:
Re: mic comparison
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 10:39:12 -0500 (EST)
I'm not certain why anyone who buys an MD or DAT machine that
can record
90 dB of dynamic range would buy a set of mics made with unmodified
$2
capsules that only have 70 dB of undistorted dynamic range and
distort
at high sound pressures. It would make a sort of sense if
you only
record relatively quiet music with a restricted dynamic range,
but
otherwise it's like reverting to an analog cassette recorder (minus
the
tape hiss and saturation distortion).
We've worked hard to develop the capsule modifications that increase
our
mics' dynamic range more than 20 dB and reduce distortion at high
sound
pressure levels; that's part of what what makes Core Sound's mics
special.
Our comparison files detail the rest of the differences -- feel
free to
ask for them.
Also, if folks want a lower cost set of mics made with the unmodified
capsules, and a battery box that has a switchable low-cut filter,
we'll
be glad to make it. They'll sound like the mics from The
Sound
Professionals and marcSounds but have a higher build quality and
lower
price than anything else on the market. Ask for 'em and
we'll do it,
just keep in mind what the sound quality trade-offs will be.
Len Moskowitz
Core Sound
WWW site: http://www.panix.com/~moskowit
moskowit@panix.com
------------------------------
>>
I'm
sure that there are many who value the very accomodating way of
doing business that Len displays here; 'The Customer is always
right' may apply here as well.
This brings to mind the period when Sonic Studios got a rash of
determined calls from customers and prospects to provide 'directional'
DSM microphone that would help reject the side chatter that is
often encountered at venues.
As I recall, there was a very strong and determined group of future
'Cardioid type' mic buyers who commented that they would much
rather by such a product from me than anywhere else if I could
only supply it.
This type of mic was going to be THE product that would sweep
the stealth mic recording market and I was told that if I would
only make it available, I would 'corner the market' for this type
of mic.
As many here know, I balked at the opportunity because I knew
this mic would work better than the Omni type DSM in rare cases
and disappoint the recordist with a much thinner, off axis distorted,
and inferior stereo imaged recording ............. mostly.
Although easy enough to provide, I just couldn't face making money
off a directional microphone that would ultimately prove to be
a poor value for general hi-quality recording requirements; also,
complaints were certain to follow from the very same people who
demanded this type of mic thinking that the gain in off-axis sound
rejection would offset the loss of sound quality. NOT!!!
All of us who have followed the somewhat sad saga of the Core
Sound Cardioids know how vocal and confusing this dissatisfaction
can be in this digest.
I would suggest to Len that he use better judgement (this time)
than his prospects for certain types of mic variations are currently
showing. Profiting from a customers lack of knowledge when
requested seems OK at first, but there is always a price that's
paid paid by the supplier of such gear even when the customer
is warned.
So far, I have refused to supply several variations of the DSM
formula mics regardless of what the customer was willing to spend
because it would've resulted at least one step backwards
in recording quality even after all the gained benefits, in the
best circumstances, were figured.
I certainly do NOT laugh on the way to the bank as a result.
Thanks to a consistant quality product line, I also don't have
much need to cry during bank trips either.
So, if knowing better...........(AND If money is no object)...............'Just
Say NO!"
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
=============================================
<<
Subj: Comparison files request
Date: 98-02-24 04:51:51 EST
From: trig@))
Reply-to: trig@
To: GuySonic@AOL.com
Hi
I'd like to have your product comparison files (DSM vs. Core).
Thanks
Mika
>>
Hello Mika,
Thank you for expressing interest in Sonic Studios products.
There are no comparison files available as such. I've heard
that CORE has something like these that are NOT public (like not
available for viewing on his web page.... truth is not something
that's often left hidden from view unless..... it's prejudice(?)
and not factual), but are privately sent upon request to prospects.
I refrained from offering such opinions as it's really best that
DSM owners speak their own experience when asked by others directly
or perhaps you've gained experience yourself from trading and
hearing the results of different microphones from a good sampling
of conditions and recording techniques. The former
is how many tapers get acquainted with Core Sound and DSM quality
issues.
FACT: DSM mics are warranted for 2 years and customers have
a full 60 days to return purchases not meeting expectations.
I still have fingers left from a total of refund requests over
the 13 years of suppling mics.
If you'd like to read the reviews that are available on the Sonic
Studios Web site, this will give you unbiased experience from
seasoned professionals. This should be more valuable over
what any owner has to say about their own product from files kept
closed to general viewing.... or so it would seem.
After visiting the site, ask me direct questions that pertain
to your own specific recording requirements and present or future
portable recording deck
I will tell you that I've been doing acoustics and audio as an
innovator and engineer for over 35 years and microphones for going
on 13 years with very good acceptance in both product and customer
service areas. The partial listing of companies using the
DSM microphones is real. Very satisfied repeat and referral
business is what has kept me more than fully employed doing just
what's displayed on the site.
You might note that when a few pro magazines did reviews of Sonic
Studios and Core's mics, the DSM product was given fuller upstaged
description to the Core offerings by the reviewers that had both
our products on equal basis for evaluation... it does make you
think.
Take some time and review the material and taping tips on my site
and get back if there's further interest and questions I can answer.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
=========================================
<<
Subj: mic query
Date: 98-02-24 11:06:48 EST
From: howardc@)
To: guysonic@aol.com
Hi,
You may have seen my name on the DAT-heads list recently enquiring
about
buying my first set of mics to go with my new Sony D100 for live
recording.
As budget
is a prime concern I was looking at some of the Core Sound
Binaurals following many favourable comments and I have a copy
of their
sampler tape which I like very much.
However, a significant number of people have emailed me to say
they are not
as good as they seem and as an alternative I should consider either
similar
mics made by Sound Professionals (which come with variable bass
roll-off)
or your DSM-6 mics which I have only heard one bad comment about.
Everyone
says they are far superior though they do cost somewhat more.
I therefore
have a few questions I hope you will answer for me.
I was under the impression that your mics needed a mod to the
recorder to
work properly (something I am reluctant to have done as I am in
the UK and
don't really want the expense and worry of shipping the unit overseas
plus
it would invalidate the extended warranty I have) but having looked
more
closely at your web site I see they can also be powered by your
PA-6 series
external adaptors.
Have I got this right? I would be particularly interested in the
PA-6LC3
with the selectable bass roll-off though $200 seems a lot for
this in
addition to the mics.
Anyway, I would be looking to record a variety of bands though
mostly of
the very loud rock/metal sort (Metallica, Aerosmith etc) through
to artists
like The Black Crowes and Sting in venues ranging in size from
clubs to
large arenas. For various reasons I cannot always stand near the
PA, but
like to be near the soundboard where it is usually still very
loud.
From your listings, the DSM-6/EL or DSM-6/L models would seem
to fit my
requirements, but with the PA-6LC3 this would be $550. Somewhat
more than I
was looking to spend, but if they really are that much better,
it may be
worth considering.
Which of your mics would you suggest I consider based on my intended
use as
described above?
Does the PA-6LC3 allow you to have no bass roll-off or is it always
on in
one way or another?
If you could forward any other information or comments from customers
that
I may find useful I'd be very grateful. BTW, I live in England.
I take it
there would be no problem in taking an order from me. I understand
you
don't offer Visa facilities so i'd have to sort out some other
method of
payment if i decide to buy from you.
PS: What are the dimensions of the PA-6LC3 external power adaptor?
Thanks for any help,
- Howard
>>
Hello
Howard,
Thank you for considering Sonic Studios DSM microphones.
Your interest is appreciated.
Yes, DSM do cost more but most customers find the value is more
than doubled for the recording quality, reliability, and customer
service provided in direct comparison to alternative products.
Your choice of DSM-6S/L or EL models coupled with the PA-6LC3
seems appropriate for your requirements. If doing mostly
the louder and bass heavy venues, then the NEW and less costly
PA-6LC ($125) has the most selected and usable bass frequency
rolloff of 65 cycles. This may be all you'd need for most
everything intended. The 6LC(3) is similar in size to all
the other adapters which is about the size of two BIC lighters
side-by-side and use a single AA powering cell in an open frame
holder.
The D100 can also directly power the DSM mics but at reduced sensitivity
and a bit less clarity due to the much lower available current
from the stock deck. Using the SBM-1 Sony Outboard
Processor Accessory with powering the DSM will provide much better
or almost optimum mic powering with direct SBM-1 mic input.
This would be only appropriate if getting all the bass available
is desired.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
Informative WEB SITE: HTTP://WWW.SONICSTUDIOS.COM
"A bit of knowledge coupled to a great deal of wisdom serves us
best"
You may already have seen this recent DAT-Heads post? Here
are also a few others.
------------------------------
From: powerpro
Subject:
OASIS-Tokyo 2/20/98
Date:
Sat, 21 Feb 1998 23:09:50 +0900
I just taped Oasis at Budokan last night, and am offering it for
trade. It
turned out very nice. It runs 100 minutes. It was
taped with a D100 and
Sonic Studios DSM-6S mics. I'd like to say thanks to Leonard
Lombardo at
Sonic Studios for making such great mics. They worked a
small miracle by
cutting out the excessively overdriven bass in the venue, and
turning out a
very fine recording. I seriously suggest anyone who is in
the market for
new mics to take a look at these. By the way, I'm in no
way affiliated
with this company.
If interested in trades, please send your list via e-mail, and
please
include the word OASIS in all caps in the subject line so I can
run a
filter on Eudora.
Peter
----------------------
From: bruce..com (Bruce N)
Subject:
Sonic Sense DSM-6S Initial Impressions
Date:
Mon, 24 Mar 1997 08:02:53 -0800 (PST)
Brothers
& sisters,
I finally got a chance to use my
DSM-6S mics on 3/20/97, recording
Clan Dyken at the Catalyst, in Santa
Cruz, CA. The band allowed me to tape them, so I didn't have to
stealth;
just sat on a bench-like thing in front of the board & recorded
away. I
did not have either the external battery pack or the D-8 modification,
so
I was a little hesitant to use them; but I'm pleased, for the
most part,
with what I got:
Recording Quality: I thought the resulting tapes were excellent
-- clean
& clear, with decent bass presence & good high end. A
little muddiness in
some places, but I think that was more due to the room acoustics,
than my
mics.
Usability: I could have rigged them to a mic stand that was there,
& all
things considered, that would have been the better choice. But,
I also
wanted to see how they'd work as "binaurals", so I hung them on
my glasses.
They were somewhat uncomfortable & a little distracting, I
thought. I be-
lieve this is something that can be gotten used to, though, &
I think it
won't be a problem for later shows.
Bottom Line: I thought they will do WONDERFUL for the my intended
purpose:
stealthing small jazz outfits in small, smoky jazz clubs. I wouldn't
use
them at any show I'm interested in dancing at, though. Overall,
they were
excellent sounding tapes, & I'm QUITE pleased with my little
$400 wonders.
goddess bless,
bruce
------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: Barry @io.com>
Subject:
Re: CSBs, D8 and "Snaps"
Date:
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 23:09:33 -0500
>> Last night I recorded
a show at a small club. I was running
>> CSBs (battery box) into the line in of my D8 (as usual).
My tape
>> sound wonderful, one of the top 3 recordings I've made
with CSBs.
>> However, occasionaly there are these "snap" sounds on
the recording.
>> Not terribly loud and they didn't apper to affect my
recording level.
>> My peaks were consistently between -12dB and -4dB depending
on the
>> song. This is the second show this has happened
to me, and I've ruled
>> out the tape being the problem since I used two different
brands for
>> the two shows.
>
>I've had the same problem on several recordings using the
CSBs
>mounted to my eyeglasses. With the mics mounted in this
manner,
>you have to be *very* careful about touching your glasses
while
>recording. With mine, just touching them lightly is
generally audible
>on the recording. No surprise since many of us see the
same problems
>using conventional microphones on mic stands (at least without
>shockmounts.)
Same goes for the MarcSound mikes, ultra sensitive to touch or
handling.
However my old Sonic's seemed to be immune to that, some how.
How do
you manage that Leonard?
Now if the lousy rat who lifted them from me July 16 in Austin
(at a Jerry
birthday celebration no less), would just listen to his conscience
and
return them.
:-(
BTW, I didn't see any mention of the Oade stealth mics in the
mic review.
Anybody out there own these? Satisfied? Also didn't
see any mention of
the MarcSounds.
Subj:
Sonic STUDIOS, not Sonic Sense!
Date:
97-03-31 14:34:53 EST
From: bruce.k.com (Bruce N)
To: dat-heads@fedney.near.net
CC: guysonic@aol.com
Brothers
& sisters,
A couple weeks ago, I posted
a glowing testimony on the Sonic Sense DSM-6S Binaurals.
Today, to my horror & embarassment, I discovered that I had
posted about the wrong mics!!!!!
The mics in question are the SONIC STUDIOS DSM-6S Binaurals.
I am FOREVER getting Sonic Studios & Sonic Sense mixed up.....
My fervent apologies, to Leonard & Crew, for mistakenly giv-
ing someone else the credit.
But hey, all that aside... let me tell you all something, I
am absolutely STOKED about my little mics. These SONIC STUDIOS
mics
are THE S**T. I used them to record Zero last Saturday night,
stand-
ing about 6' from the stage, dead-center, & I must say:
THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST AUDIENCE RECORDINGS I'VE HEARD.
Hate to blow my own horn, but I'm not... this mics ROCK. &
I'm not in any way affiliated with Sonic Studios or Leonard in
any
way, except as a VERY satisfied customer. They've got EXCELLENT
re-
sponse on the bass, very tight & clean, yet the high ends
are clean
& clear, crisp & tight, & there's NO sense of flooding
or bass sat-
uration -- & this was WITHOUT a roll-off switch. The 4 AA
batteries
powering my D-8 were fine for the evening, no battery switching
re-
quired; I'd heard they would draw power from my deck, if I didn't
use an external battery box, but such has not been the case so
far,
at the two shows I've taped.
The only complaint I have about them is relatively minor,
& that is: when wearing them, you can't really dance. Dancing
means
lots of head-swinging, & I doubt that would go over well on
the re-
cording. But it CAN be worked around, although the fix might then
cause them to be not so FOB-able anymore. But, for what I bought
'em
for -- stealth taping in small jazz clubs -- I doubt I'll find
any-
thing in the $400/pair price range that compares. I've heard both
the
MarcSounds & the Core Sounds, & I think these are better-sounding.
Of
course, they are more expensive, but for a DAT-taper, I doubt
that's
much of a hassle; & they aren't THAT much more expensive.
Besides -- the results are WORTH IT. If you're a DAT-taper,
YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELF to check these out, if you haven't already.
goddess bless, & THANX AGAIN, Leonard!!!!!
bruce
========================================
<<
------------------------------
From: Huntley <chuntley>
Subject:
mic comparison
Reply-To: chuntley@ us
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 1998 18:06:49 -0800
Leonard Lombardo wrote:
>
> I would suggest to Len that he use better judgement (this
time) than his
> prospects for certain types of mic variations are currently
showing.
> Profiting from a customers lack of knowledge when requested
seems OK at first,
> but there is always a price that's paid paid by the supplier
of such gear even
> when the customer is warned.
>
Okay, look. For some people money IS a consideration.
People who have
it really seem to have a hard time comprehending the idea of NOT
having
it. I've asked many people for advice on mics, who keep
telling me that
you really need to spend extra money for quality and you will
be glad
you did. I don't doubt that. The problem is that not
everyone can
spend the extra money.
I, for one,
have been interested in ordering a pair of mics, and have
looked into both the SP's and Core Sounds.
I do believe that the CS mics are probably a very good quality
mic, and
very much worth their price tag. However, I DO NOT HAVE
the necessary
$250. Leonard, can you comprehend that? I have a low-paying
job, and
nearly every cent goes toward rent, food, and paying off loans.
I
recently purchased an MD recorder despite the fact that I could
barely
pay for it. I did so because music is my one true passion,
and
therefore I consider this a sound buy. I now need a microphone,
and can
either spend $100 on a fairly good stealth one, or use this tie-clip
mic
that will sound like shit. I would like to spend $250 for
the CS, but
literally CANNOT! Therefore, I need to buy a cheaper version,
and will
therefore go with the SP's. (And by cheaper, that is not
meant as a
slag on SP's. I am referring to price alone, as I cannot
know for sure
which brand is truly better without comparing both for myself)
This
does not mean I am an uninformed, unknowledgeable consumer.
I have
researched it as best I can. I would be greatful if Mr.
Moskowitz were
to offer a less expensive, unmodified version of his microphone
for a
lower price. I do not believe he would be "profiting from
a customer's
lack of knowledge." Spare me the condescension.
------------------------------
>>
I
started into this mic business with the same passion you're now
expressing; I totally am empathetic to your needs and limitations.
I appologize for the tone that really was meant for the attitude
presented by Len; his intentions were ok but, I believe a bit
misguided by gaining a customer at what cost.
I have a recently acquired set that is quite a bit 'old' and really
was an attempt to supply a left channel to a right channel that
is still operating well enough. The left channel cord had
gotten broken too near the pickup to repair so a match from old
stock was researched and was possible for this customer as an
option if a new mic set was unworkable. He opted for a new
mic as he had gotten a whole lot of recording done over many years
with the original set.
As a result, I still have the repair solution to this older set
and would be willing to offer it refurbished for $100 to you.
This mic set, even though quite used, will still give you much
better recording quality than any of the options available at
twice the cost.
I will pro-rate warranty thisDSM set for a year and if it fails
during this time, I will refund you the purchase price minus $10
for every month over 2 months of good use. If it fails within
two months, full refund or applied cost to a new model (or another
more recent used set if available) will apply.
Your mini-disk if a Sony, will power this set but at somewhat
reduced performance from using a PA-6 powering adapter ($75).
Results will still be quite satisfactory or I'll refund your purchase
within 2 months if not quite pleased.
If this seems fair and affordable, then give this a go.
This is not one of those deals that makes good business sense
for me to do on a regular basis (my risk/cost is way high for
this reworked used product that has really no risk to yourself)
but, I am also a taper and like to be at least as good to the
tapers as they have been to me over the years of supporting me
at this form of vocational income.
Let me know and I will finish the repair on this set. You
can later get a powering adapter (there might be a used one if
I can dig one up from somewhere for $35).
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
===========================================
Subj:
Re: mic query
Date:
02/25/98
To: howardc@
In a message dated 98-02-25 07:16:09 EST, you write:
>
Thanks for the reply,
I'm getting such conflicting information from people I'm getting
more
confused then ever. A lot of people are telling me your mics are
the best,
while others say the Cores are better, even though they are cheaper.
I've included some comments from the Core Sound web page which
reflect some
of the opinions I've received and while I don't want to encourage
you to
just down a competitor, i'd appreciate any comments you have that
address
the concerns reflected by these comments.
A lot of them seem to be from people using the D7. Was there any
problem
with that machine that might cause the problems reported?
Also, Len at Core has said that they have a battery box with bass
roll-off
switching available any day now so this puts all the manufacturers
on a
fairly even footing. Aarrgggh. I seem no closer to being able
to make a
decision. If only I could afford to put the money up to try them
all.
Though even if i could, I don't go to enough shows to be able
to try them
all out anyway in the time allowed.
Finally, will powering your mics from the PA-6LC3 give the same
quality as
the mod-2 modification or is there some differences between the
two?
REPLY: The only real difference would be that this powering adapter
always provides some bass rolloff. Going direct would have
the advantage of full bass bandwidth.
Thanks again. Everyone is trying to be very helpful and informative,
but it
seems the more I hear the more confused I get.
- Howard
I'd appreciate any comments on the following:
USER COMMENTS FROM CORE SOUND:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
R.A., a DAT user from North Carolina, writes:
They sound great, I'm extremely pleased! Wish to hell I'd bought
these
instead of the Sonic Studios in the first place. I've been fighting
those
mikes since last June, recorded 15 or so shows with frustrating
distortion
almost every time. Yours work better.
...I had the D7 in my pocket, and I'd take it out periodically
to set the
levels, slip it back in my pocket... and then when the music seemed
to be
getting louder, pull it out and gasp in horror as I saw themeters
hitting
0db. With the Sonics I would have had a very poor tape, but with
the CSB's
it is better sounding than the Sonics with good levels. ...
Hey, thanks for making these great mikes.
Bill, a DAT user from Massachussetts, writes:
I'm glad I finally ordered your mics. I've used them for the past
month or
so, and have been very pleased with them. I wish I had discovered
your mics
before I bought the Sonic Studios - yours cost less, and they
are better. I
run the mics into your -12 dB attenuator cord and then into my
Casio
DA-R100 with -20 dB. I have not heard any distortion at all -
very unlike
the Sonic Studios.
Thanks for the mics - they are great! I will recommend them to
people over
the Sonics!
W.S., a DAT user, writes:
You might be interested to know that I talked with a taper who's
trying to
run Sonic Studios into a D7. After numerous pairs of mics, he
still has
distortion problems. Of course I told him I use Core Sounds without
any
problem! And they're 1/2 the price!
J.B., a DAT user, writes:
Hey! I'm loving the CSCs! That pickup pattern is really ideal
in
less-than-ideal situations!
Just thought you might want to see what some other traders were
saying
about my recordings with your mics. This guy uses Neumann KM184s
on a
regular basis as well.
[Quoted from mail he received:] "...got your tape today. I think
it sounds
great! At first i thought it was lacking bass but two minutes
into it I
realized that it was just good clean sound! These are the Core
Sound Cards?
How much are they?? I may rather stealth with these rather than
sonics."
>>
Hello
Howard,
I'm very sorry to see that an intelligent market search for opinions
and experience has created a great amount of confusion.
This may be due to some sources being not limited to actual truthful
comments. I've seen many 'planted' CSB user raves
that also offer a CSB tape made in 'trade for....' . At
first glance, this seems normal for the DAT-Heads digest but,
after a regular half a dozen or more of these appearing nearly
identical worded posts in succession of every other digest, it
becomes apparent that these are a marketing formula tack that
at least 'encouraged' by affiliates of CS; the mailing source
of some of these are also somewhat suspect.
NOTE: The DAT-Heads marketing list that shows most of the DAT
related support businesses has stopped listing CORE as a mic supplier(!)
and I think this has been at least because of the less than honest
approach to marketing. This has occured in the last few
years or so after LEN at CORE has been given full listing as mic
supplier for almost 5 years previous. IT DOES MAKE
YOU WONDER!!
There has been more than one person mentioning that Len at CORE
creates at least some of his own user comments!!! These
same comments have been on his site for a very long time and the
'tone' and language of the ones that directly down Sonic Studios
seem (at least to me) to be from the same person if looked with
the perspective of a hand-writing analysis.
I have been supplying DSM microphones since 1985 (far longer than
any of the 'other' businesses that were inspired to follow) and
have maybe 100 written comments on satisfaction with the DSM product
and service. While some are very enthusiastic, I don't have
the kind of 'tone' that is represented in the CORE site and it's
extremely rare to find any of them (some also CSB owners) really
bad-mouthing CORE, they just don't go out of their way to say
things like that. About the only comments that mention CORE
from recent customers are more in the form of liking the DSM product
better and maybe a rare ' glad to not have to use those anymore'
remark. I do have these from REAL people but stopped
supplying these comments unless permission was directly granted
to use full names or if the comment was actually published for
general viewing in a magazine.
There are now enough tape traders using DSM microphones that private
type user comments are now far less valuable to the researcher
than the experience of an actual traded series of consistantly
good sounding tapes from honest unbiased sources. For
you and those just getting into the hobby, finding truthful information
is more challenging and in this case, bound to be confusing.
Professional users are another matter, a lot of them have taken
the tack of 'best kept secret' so that their competition has less
advantage! Wyle Stateman of Soundelux (seen in many recent
film credits) is just one of many who's taken this stance while
also telling me that DSM are his favorite field mics; takes
them everywhere.
It may help to note that when ROCK venues started getting much
louder (bigger speakers & amps in the PA market; users acquiring
moree effective earplugs), there were some DSM microphones
with too high a sensitivity, presenting audible mic limited overloads
and/or overloading the deck's limited input range with too much
signal. The solution was much lower gain mics and listening
to the results from user tapes when problems occured. These
overload problems have been solved for over 5 years now and maybe
that's why comments seemed to be from users of the older D7 decks
which were much more easily overloaded than the previous D3 DAT
model.
I hope this helps you in making the best descisions for your situation.
Let me know what more can be done to assist.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
====================================
Subj:
Re: mic query "The continued.......!"
Date:
02/26/98
To: howardc@
Hello again Howard,
I'll address the issues & questions as best I can in the body
of your mail.
In a message dated 98-02-26 07:00:34 EST, you write:
<< Subj: Re: mic query
Date: 98-02-26 07:00:34 EST
From: howardc@
To: GuySonic@aol.com
At 16:21 25/02/98 EST, you wrote:
>
> Finally, will powering your mics from the PA-6LC3 give the
same quality as
> the mod-2 modification or is there some differences between
the two?
>
>REPLY: The only real difference would be that this powering
adapter always
>provides some bass rolloff. Going direct would have
the advantage of full
>bass bandwidth.
>
>
Isn't
it possible to have no bass roll-off using this powering adaptor?
REPY: Not with this adapter, only by direct DSM mic connection
to the Sony deck Plug-in-Powering feature or with another model
of PA- adapter.
>Hello Howard,
>
>I'm very sorry to see that an intellegent market search for
opinions and
>experience has created a great amount of confusion.
Me too.
>
>This may be due to some sources being not limited to actual
truthful comments.
>I've seen many 'planted' CSB user raves that also offer a
CSB tape made in
>'trade for....'. At first glance, this seems normal for the
DAT-Heads
>digest but, after a regular half a dozen or more of these
appearing nearly
>identical worded posts in succession of every other digest,
it becomes
>apparrent that these are a marketing formula tack that're
at least
>'encouraged' by affiliates of CS; the mailing source of some
of these are
also
>somewhat suspect.
>
>NOTE: The DAT-Heads marketing list that shows most of the
DAT related support
>businesses has stopped listing CORE as a mic supplier(!) and
I think this has
>been at least because of the less than honest approach to
marketing. This
has
>occured in the last few years or so after LEN at CORE has
been given full
>listing as mic supplier for almost 5 years previous.
IT DOES MAKE YOU
>WONDER!!
>
Yes it does, though I hadn't noticed the fact. They still appear
on the
vendors links page.
COMMENT: Yes, CORE is still listed as a supplier of cables and
'other stuff', but no longer mentioned as a mic supplier in the
last 2-3 versions of the market posting!
Though
he may be using a "less than honest approach to marketing" it
doesn't imply that he is trying to push an inferior product on
an
unsuspecting public.
COMMENT: When honesty is not the best policy in marketing,
it's suspect (to at least me) on where the line is going to be
drawn with other customer important issues in the future; specially
appropriate consideration for sole ownership company operators
where the engineering, marketing, and customer service is really
done by this same individual.
There are too many people using his mics (and presumably very
happy with
them) for this to be the case. And i have to reiterate that I
like the
sound of what I have heard on their sampler tape. Yes, I know
these will be
carfully chosen recordings
REPLY: Even a generally bad sounding microphone can be made to
sound very good under special circumstances. Making a demo
tape as being a 'representative' of as what mic generally sounds
like is what the listener of these tapes 'thinks' he's hearing
is misleading and seems typical of the CORE marketing approach.
I refuse to allow any misrepresentation of any of my products
to prevail, even if it generates 'sales'.
>There has been more than one person mentioning that Len at
CORE creates at
>least some of his own user comments!!! These same
comments have been on his
>site for a very long time and the 'tone' and language of the
ones that
>directly down Sonic Studios seem (at least to me) to be from
the same person
>if looked with the perspective of a hand-writing analysis.
>
hmmmm, wouldn't like to say. However, comments saying how good
his mics are
is one thing, but those comments that pick on a particular competitor
(always you it seems) are a little unnecessary. Most people would
comment
out the competitors name i would have thought.
>About the only comments that mention CORE from recent customers
>are more in the form of liking the DSM product better and
maybe a rare ' glad
>to not have to use those anymore' remark.
I've received emails from what I believe to be genuine people
(unless you
are contacting satisfied customers to tell me how great our mics
are) some
of whom have always used DSM's and some who have swapped from
the Cores.
One guy said that making the change gave him back the excitement
and
pleasure he had missed when using the Cores. It wasn't that the
Cores were
particularly bad, he said they gave a good recording it was just
they
sounded very safe and slightly dull, whereas yours make recordings
sparkle.
(His words not mine).
However, only the opposite note, some people have said that your
mics seems
to unnaturally boost the high frequencies which makes recordings
sound
harsh and brittle!!!
You see my problem. If the last comment is true, it probably isn't
what I
want.
REPLY: I have never heard that kind of remark and would
not have a clue about the source if I had not received last year
two recordings (one a DAT and the other a 'bootleg packaged'
CD supposedly both DSM recordings). Both these recordings
could easily be described as the above! In addition, all
the dimensional aspects of these recordings has vanished if they
were there at all!!!.........How could this be??
After recovering from the shock, I thought about how could such
a fine microphone produce (under any circumstance) such garbage.
There ARE things that can happen to a DSM microphone ....
during the recording .... and/or in............... 'post production'.....!!!
1) The user can position the mic or use them in a way that eliminates
the dimensional sound cues with mounting in other ways than recommended.
This may explain some of the loss of spatial sound, but not the
loss of tone.
2) With the advent of CD-R and computor software to manipulate
the sound, many with no taste or ears use these tools to mangle
the sound to their 'taste' by eliminating the bass completely
and boosting the high frequencies in multiple bands of a graphic
type of equalization.
This would also eliminate or greatly reduce coherent phase information
resulting a recording with no dimensional sound and produce a
recording with no natural tones.
This is what has got to have happened to these recordings.
I know better after having used these mics for thousands of recordings
under all circumstances.
BOTTOM LINE: A recording may not tell the truth about the
microphone used, ONLY the overall taste of the recordist who passes
such to others. A special circumstance recording can make
a microphone sound exceptional or awful. Post Manipulation
of the recording can entirely change the tone character and spatial
qualities (usually for the worse, especially when overdone).
>There are now enough tape traders using DSM microphones that
private type
user
>comments are now far less valuable to the researcher than
the experience
of an actual traded series of consistantly good sounding tapes
from honest unbiased
>sources. For you and those just getting into the hobby,
finding truthful
>information is more challenging and in this case, bound to
be confusing.
>
Yes. A number of people admit that the Cores do produce good recordings,
just not as good i.e. they don't have the depth and presence that
your mics
can produce. Though whether that difference is worth the extra
$300 or so
is what I'm trying to find out.
REPLY: A sense of Quality seems mostly acquired with experience
................ "Life is too short not to purchase the best quality
you can afford"
Starting with the best known afforded recording system value supports
the development of an ear for sound quality and a more lasting
appreciation for the resulting recordings. This does seem
to be exactly what this long discussion is about!
>It may help to note that when ROCK venues started getting
much louder (bigger
>speakers & amps in the PA market; users acquiring more
effective earplugs),
>there were some DSM microphones with too high a sensitivity,
presenting
>audible mic limited overloads and/or overloading the deck's
limited input
>range with too much signal. The solution was much lower
gain mics and
>listening to the results from user tapes when problems occured.
These
>overload problems have been solved for over 5 years now and
maybe that's why
>comments seemed to be from users of the older D7 decks which
were much more
>easily overloaded than the previous D3 DAT model.
>
This
is what I was hoping you'd say and what I assumed. It's odd that
the
Core comments that down your mics all refer to people using the
older D7.
At the time they were maybe very valid problems, but I would have
hoped
they were sorted out now.
Looking at the spec sheet for your mics there seem to be models
handling
massive SPL's (I presume without distortion), way over the limit
of
anything I've been aware of listening to.
In the Guiness Book of Records (I don't know if you get that in
the USA)
the loudest concert on record (before they stopped measuring it)
was Iron
Maiden at the Donington Festival here in the UK. I was at that
show and the
sound was measured at 128db at the Soundboard and that was in
the open air.
Your mics are rated well over this so the only problem I see is
with them
overloading the input stage (can this happen going line-in or
only mic-in)
on the recorder, which I presume prevents them from powered correctly.
REPLY: Most of the 'Loud' energy from such venues is 98% BASS
and using the Bass reduction adapter will help prevent the deck's
mic input from overload. DSM mics are generally not high
enough output or not suitable for Line input, but are designed
to operate within the limits of the deck's mic input specifications
when the proper microphone model is chosen for the application.
>I hope this helps you in making the best descisions for your
situation. Let
>me know what more can be done to assist.
>
Possibly.
I've had a email from a guy who is recording the band Dream
Theater in Belgium who I like, with some DSM's tonight I believe,
so I'm
hoping he might be willing to send me a copy so I can hear what
the mics
are like. They are typical of the sort of band I will be recording
i.e.
very very loud rock (though not pain threshold loud). If i can
get to hear
this tape, it will probably help me a lot.
QUESTION: Could this be Anders?
I think the only thing I could ask is it would be nice if you
offered a
sampler tape in the same way that Core do. I know it's not ideal,
but I
have no DAT's to trade yet, so getting hold of recordings of bands
I know
with the various mics is difficult. A sampler tape at least gives
some idea
of how the mics sound.
I think I'd probably be happy with whatever I get and it really
comes down
to money. The Cores may not be the best around, but whatever Len's
marketing ploys are, it seems difficult to deny that they are
good mics to
go for if you really can't afford anything else.
Thanks for being so patient with my numerous questions. I really
appreciate
it.
- Howard
>>
Please be assured, I have not contacted any of my customers to
reply to you.
Perhaps this inquiry could be documented and put on my web site
for others with your permission??? It would seem useful
to others if presented in an honest way (might need some editing
to reduce length?) and help reduce some of the confusion that
has existed for
many years; seems to not be getting a whole lot better.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo, Sonic Studios(tm)..."Making Audio History With
DSM(tm) Microphones"
TEL: 541-459-8839 /\ FAX: 541-459-8842 /\ USA Free: 1-877-347-6642
Informative WEB SITE: HTTP://WWW.SONICSTUDIOS.COM
======================================
<<
Subj: DSM mics
Date: 98-04-03 01:57:01 EST
From: (Roberto A)
To: GuySonic@aol.com
Which capsule model do your mics use, do you use the same Panasonic
caps that others use. Thanks.
>>
Hello
Roberto,
Yes & NO. I start with a type of Panasonic made capsule
(usually special ordered) and that's where any similarity ends.
DSM mics use a formula of electrical/mechanical/acoustic techniques
to make a very unique microphone that sounds and performs like
no other mic available. You're attempting an apples to oranges
comparison that will not produce an understanding of what the
DSM mic is really about ! .......... it's a formula........
not at all a particular capsule.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------------
=================================
<<
Subj: Re: DSM mics
Date: 98-04-05 03:39:25 EDT
From: .ca (Roberto )
To: GuySonic@aol.com (GuySonic)
Thanks for the reply. I've only heard one show with one
of the Sonics
and the detail was unreal, the guy also ran it through a BBE 462
Maximizer to make it sparkle. I thought it blew away the
CSB's
especially in terms of treble and more crystalline detail.
CSB's really
lacked treble as well as airiness it seems, also too much mike
self-noise. Len is a good marketer, constantly preying on
newby tapers,
it's a shame people are wasting expensive DAT decks on low fidelity
mics
like CSB's.
Sounds like you don't modify the caps themeselves, Len's mod kinda
sucks
the life out.
Headroom though could be better on all binaural mics. Thanks
again. Why
don't you post more to the newsgroups and DAT, Len is a very smooth
marketer, what a shame people are wasting high fidelity recorders
on low
fidelity mics with no treble.
>>
Hello
Roberto,
Everything is considered with the DSM formula, including the physical
modification of the capsule itself. I do post often if appropriate
but don't use the baited post method to then respond with a marketing
post as Len and others seem to too often do.
I rely on the tapes being traded and word-of-mouth from others
to spread the good word. Your participation with this is
appreciated only when appropriate.
Downloadable MPEG-3 sound clips will soon be available at my site
so check back and download the Windows decoder and some good DSM
sound recordings.
I don't
know what the maximizer does and haven't heard this 'effect' processing
myself. Is this a software processor or only a hardware
type??
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------------
==============================================
From:
willard >
Subject:
Stealthing Larger mics/Am I crazy
Date:
Thu, 26 Mar 1998 11:40:16 -0500
What 'larger' mics do people stealth with aside from the
CoreSounds/Sonic Studios - basically I am wanting to upgrade from
my CoreSound Cardioids (which I have gotten some fantastic recordings
from)
and am wondering if I should go to the B&K omnis that CS/SS
are selling
($900-1400) or something else (if so what), I know it depends
on usage
so I would like to be able to stealth these things in pretty tight
situations for primarily louder rock shows - and mostly smaller
venues.
I would be very interested in what people have to say.
thanks
Will
>>
Hello Will,
The DSM-6S/L or EL models are far superior to the Core product
and at excellent value for price. The DSM-9M (based on DPA-4061)
might be an improvement in smaller size and sound quality over
the DSM-6S but, the much higher cost makes it not as good a value.......
still worth the asking price .....
Only one customer with DSM-9M experience......... found it not
sensitive enough (for pure acoustic instrument/vocal) but considered
it to sound better to him than equally priced Sony MS-5 model.
For your requirement, it would be good choice for being able to
handle very loud sources without strain........ + enough output
for line level input.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
---------------------------------------
<<
Subject: recording church organ
From:
Jonesy
Date: Fri, 8 May 1998 15:03:56 +0100
I am faced with the task of recording an old church pipe organ.
This is totally new to me (normally a spoken word man!)
From what i've read it comes down to two methods.
1. Use a crossed pair of cardiod mics
2. use a pair of omni mics spaced according to the posistion of
the
pipes.
I thought maybe a binaural arrangement in the best listening place?
Anyone have any ideas???
Huw
>>
Hello
Huw,
Ambient Stereo recordings (such as you are attempting) are most
challenging unless the microphone AND method allows good assessment
of by what you're actually hearing in any chosen mic'g position.
The binaural method allows this, but doesn't translate well to
other than headphones only recordings....... speaker playback
of binaral mostly causes abberrations of tone and image
........
Another technique using the DSM mic/method has the highest probability
of success over any other recording approach............
My site listing of professional users and magazine reviews helps
greatly to verify this........ as well as recent St. James
Cathedral sound clips (.MP3 Downloadable with player) where 5
pipe organs were played.
Questions are always welcome.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------------
<<
Subj: Re: recording church organ
Date: 98-05-11 02:34:53 EDT
From: excelsm@aol.com (EXCEL SM)
To: guysonic@aol.com (GuySonic)
If you want to capture what you hear, I would recommend using
the Earthworks TC
30Ks or TC 40Ks Omni mics, they are very accurate from about 9k
to 30k or 40k
with clean impulse response and extraordinary bass response.
James McCloskey
EXCEL SALES AND MARKETING CO.
Pro audio, video and computers
1 (810) 677-2799
>>
Eric's
mics are indeed excellent......... the problem is with the method
of using them for stereo applications..... he does offer
a good matched set but spaced omni's are problematic in definition
of ambient space....... . the only way to get coherent ambient
recordings is to use a 'psycho-acoustical' method (the DSM approach
has the most advantage here)....... the DSM microphones use the
same starting capsule as the earthworks (but different acoustic/electrical
treatments) in a more usable stereo form factor and offers better
electrical match to the portable DAT decks currently available.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------
<<
Subj: Re: room mics for drums?
Date: 98-05-19 09:48:42 EDT
From: chris
To: guysonic@aol.com (GuySonic)
CC:
GuySonic wrote:
>
> In article <1998051910483401.GAA23309@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
thilof@aol.com
> (ThiloF) writes:
>
> >Subject: room mics for drums?
> >From: thilof@aol.com (ThiloF)
> >Date: 19 May 1998 10:48:34 GMT
> >
> >i'm looking to get a pair of mics specifically for room
micing of drums
> >i hear pzm's are a good choice for that task
> >i know crown and AT make them (model #'s??)
> >what other choices are there?
> >where do i place them to get a good overall balance and
a good stereo image
> >match to the overheads?
> >i've never really used room mics before so please enlighten
me on all aspects
> >on it
> >
> >the room is about 25 x 15, 10ft ceiling ,carpeted, textured
drywall and
> >removable absorptive panels
> >
> >thanks
> >>
>
> Jim Keltner has used Sonic Studios DSM mics as both headworn
and placed
> 'PZM-like' against the studio wall (during a Bob Dylan LA
studio session) with
> stated excellent performance for drums and room ambient stereo
> performance........ Bob briefly auditioned the 'wall' recording
on Jim's car
> stereo system and liked the results enough to seriously suggest
that Jim do the
> recording engineering for future sessions!
>
> More details on DSM mics on my web site listed below.
>
I listened to some of those recordings on the web site and wow!
Very
nice! I was wondering if by chance you've heard of anyone
using the DSM
mics for micing guitar amps for more accurate recordings of what
the
guitarist actually hears from the amp. I can get pretty
good sounds
with SM-57's, 421's, ect...but it would be very nice to get a
good
detailed stereo sound without all the fuss moving around room
mics and
dealing with phase problems ect.... I've gotten interesting
results
using PZM mics on guitar cabinets but I'm still looking for something
a
bit more accurate, and the DSM mics seem to be pretty damn accurate.
Oh, I'm recording mainly heavily distorted guitar sounds (death
metal,
heavy metal, alternative, ect...)
Any thoughts on using the DSM mics for this purpose?
Thanks for any info.
Chris G.
>>
Hello
Chris,
The DSM-6S/L (low sensitivity) might be an ideal fit for recording
exactly this type of sound............ more like you're
hearing it at any particular positioning....... but as a stereo
2-track. Headworn or dummy head baffle (DSM-GUY and perhaps
more practical .... the new Lite-GUY...... mounts on standard
5/8" stand or boom...... not shown on the site as yet) mounted
DSM mics should prove effective and very versatile.
Using an upgraded portable D100 or M1 Sony DAT is a natural DSM
powering and high quality mic preamp (with line outputs) that
also serves to grab DSM stereo sound samples/live performances
outside the studio environment.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------------
<< Subject: Room mics
From:
Tim ms.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 07:37:38 -0700
Hi -
I'd like to record jazz combo rehearsals. My goal is to
set
up a single room/ambient mic someplace non-intrusive, attach
it to a Sony D8 portable DAT, and press record. Of course,
the sound quality isn't as important as capturing the essence
of the music for later review - what was swinging, what wasn't,
why.
Does anyone have suggestions for a budget mic ($200ish or
much, much less) that would work for this? I've heard good
things about AKG C1000s. I tested out the "new" Radio Shack
boundary mic. The idea of just dropping a mic onto the floor
or taping it to a wall is very appealing. Had it been a
$20
mic, it would have been a done deal. For $60, though, it's
a bit iffy...
thanks,
tim
--
Tim P
>>
Although you're looking for cheap and not expressing interest
in sound quality, you might consider a few more things if going
through the trouble of setting up any quick and simple acoustic
session recording.
First, listening to any session tape that doesn't sound like what
you've already heard (with out straining at is mostly going to
be a very 'dry' experience.......... not fun....... more like
busy work ......... And after a while, interest in recording and
listening to most session tapes will come to a quick halt........
what's going to be lost is a very valuable and (potentially) enjoyable
after/before session activity.....
.... THE POINT:.......the recordings should sound as good as practical
(without any time consuming fussing).......... Jim Keltner (Top
10 rated studio drummer) once related a Dylan session tape he
recorded (as the drummer) by placing the two DSM mic pickups a
few feet apart................ taped to the wall about midway
up............
Later,........ when Dylan heard this recording.......... he was
said to be most excited as actually hearing what was only attempted
with the official SASS mic'd version.
Not only will those involved with any session be more likely to
look forward to a bit of session recording listening,... and growing
with knowing where you've been, .......... it's quite possible
to occasionally get a really good take that worth keeping'........!!
Details on my web site................. Questions always welcome.
==================================================
From: jbf <>
Subject:
mic stands?
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 1998 17:13:46 -0500 (EST)
i'll be going to eastern africa for nine months with dat gear
in tow and
was wondering if anyone had info on a portable mic stand. i'll
be using an
at825, taping in the field, probably with little time for setup
and all
that. something collapsible would be great, and homemade is fine
as well
(i'm trying to cut costs). i'll have a small photo tripod, so
if i can
adapt it to hold a mic, that would be good. thanks, john
>>
Hello
John,
You're bound to be not using this system much if in the field.......
at least after a short while ...... mic stands of any design are
a drag to pack, unpack, setup, use, repack, and carry to the next
location............... also, the 825 has been used by 100's of
my customers (as their 1st mic) and is now either sold or sitting
somewhere collecting dust!........................ I'd suggest
a re-think of proper field gear for practical and performance
issues................ over 80 of my DSM customers have trekked
Africa (and just about every other jungle'd continent) with the
DSM's and a portable Sony DAT deck............. check my web site
for details listed below.............. this might be the only
chance for a long time to get the fantastic and rich sounds available
in most areas of Africa............ don't go shortsighted into
this potentially rewarding recording excursion with outdated/not-practical
equipment.......
Sorry about
the direct talk here, but you're in for a disappointing time with
the way you're going.
Suggestions.......... Sony Portable D8 or D100 (or M1) DAT deck..............
external 25 hour BC-1 battery system (4 C Alkaline)..................
DSM-6S/EH or DSM-1/M mics......................... WHB headband
windscreen......................... you'll record everything you'd
expect (and much more) but, with unexpected quality and ease.
Best Regards in Sound & Music Recording,
Leonard Lombardo
----------------------------------------
<<
Subject: M-S mic suggestions
From:
"Dave .net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 1998 14:31:03 -0700
Hi there,
I do audio for wildlife documentaries, and I've persuaded my current
client
to do MS on their next piece.
I'm looking for a mid priced MS mic or Cardiod-Figure 8 pair for
field
recording of ambiences.
I'm probably spoiled because I've been renting a Sanken C-MS7
and I dig it
(although it could be quieter)
I'd like to purchase the Sennhieser MKH 40 / MKH 30 M-S
pair, as I used a
pair of MKH 50's recently and loved them, and the option of MKH
| |
