Crazy idea?

[Robert Lane]

I've got a small location-audio rig I'm putting together based around either the Sony D50 with the XLR-1 adapter or, the Tascam HDP2 (haven't demo'd both yet).

I've got a fresh pair of AT-8035's I purchased for outdoor location work specifically because of the price-point and off-axis rejection characteristics. However I did a curiosity-test; I put an AT-8035 up against a Bluebird just to see what the real differences were. Turns out they both have about the same off-axis rejection but the Bluebird has much more gain and sensitivity requiring less INPUT gain from the preamp on the D50 and, they seem to have more definition also. Probably because we're talking about the difference between a large-diaphragm and small condenser module.

So the crazy thought is, would taking a pair of Bluebirds in the field for location work (albeit rigged with foam and muff from WindTech) not be a good fit, especially for high SPL environments such as machinery, or would the traditional shotguns be a better fit? (I'm thinking the BB might be well suited to quiet-environment sounds such as nature).

Crazy or "sound" idea? (pun intended)

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

I've got a small location-audio rig I'm putting together based around either the Sony D50 with the XLR-1 adapter or, the Tascam HDP2 (haven't demo'd both yet).

I've got a fresh pair of AT-8035's I purchased for outdoor location work specifically because of the price-point and off-axis rejection characteristics. However I did a curiosity-test; I put an AT-8035 up against a Bluebird just to see what the real differences were. Turns out they both have about the same off-axis rejection but the Bluebird has much more gain and sensitivity requiring less INPUT gain from the preamp on the D50 and, they seem to have more definition also. Probably because we're talking about the difference between a large-diaphragm and small condenser module.

So the crazy thought is, would taking a pair of Bluebirds in the field for location work (albeit rigged with foam and muff from WindTech) not be a good fit, especially for high SPL environments such as machinery, or would the traditional shotguns be a better fit? (I'm thinking the BB might be well suited to quiet-environment sounds such as nature).

Crazy or "sound" idea? (pun intended)

Robert,

While off-axis rejection is important, the big difference may be in the quality of the off-axis signal. Usually, SD mics are preferred over LD mics because off-axis from LD mics is wonkier than that of SD mics.

Some say it's due in part to the unflattering off-axis micro environment created by the LD headgrilles. I have a tendency to agree.

I've made some nice recordings with Neumann TLM 103 coincident pairs that didn't sounds very wonky, if at all. The TLM 103 is a wide cardioid and the headgrille is pretty transparent.

Regards,

Ty Ford

[Robert Lane]

Thanks, Ty. Wonky? That sounds more like trying to walk while intoxicated more than an audio characteristic. (laughs) I'll take your word for it.

I did speak with Blue; they indicated that any large-diaphragm mic would be good for low-noise, ambient recordings such as nature sounds etc, or of course anything vocal/instrument which is more controlled but high SPL environments could flatten the pickup element.

So like a lens for a camera I'll treat my mics as task-specific and keep the AT's for the loud stuff.

[Ty Ford]

Originally Posted by Robert Lane

Thanks, Ty. Wonky? That sounds more like trying to walk while intoxicated more than an audio characteristic. (laughs) I'll take your word for it.

I did speak with Blue; they indicated that any large-diaphragm mic would be good for low-noise, ambient recordings such as nature sounds etc, or of course anything vocal/instrument which is more controlled but high SPL environments could flatten the pickup element.

So like a lens for a camera I'll treat my mics as task-specific and keep the AT's for the loud stuff.

Robert,

Does BLUE make a SD mic?

Regards,

Ty Ford