ErinsAudioCorner

[tomtoo]

There are no steps in the soundfield, yes its all smeared. So this steps are useless if you have no problems with colors. For people with a proplem seeing colors they could be usefull. So i think its good to add them even i dont need or like.
Peace!

 

[andreasmaaan]

Check the above. Turns out, I provide what you guys are asking for. Have been for a while. Just a misunderstanding.

I give two spects (for both horizontal and vertical):
1) Absolute SPL (no steps)
2) Normalized against on-axis (3dB steps)

Since ctrl asked about me providing steps in reply to my absolute SPL spect, I thought he wanted me to make that one in steps which was something others requested I not do back when I was asking for input. And I decided to provide the two versions above.


Now, can we get this car back on the road?

Just to clarify @hardisj, my suggestion did not relate to stepped vs unstepped, but rather to the decibel scale. It's standard practice to provide steps with the normalised plot and not to provide steps with the absolute dB plot - so I 100% agree with you there. Wasn't here months ago so I'm not sure what the discussion was about, but were people asking for a 66dB SPL scale? Seems very strange!

Anyway, carry on

 

[ctrl]

That’s a normalized graphic (notice the bar is referenced to 0).
As I said in my quoted reply, I provide the same thing.

Here is an example:

UPDATE: Missed your post#605, it's a fair compromise.

I suspect that all loudspeaker manufacturers have agreed to vote for a graphic without stepped colors to disguise the radiation of their loudspeakers - the spectrogram conspiracy

If you used the above example in the discussion, I'm not sure how the majority could vote for the version without stepped color.
But I think it's good that you took a vote and respect the opinion of your readers.

It's just a pity that we now can't compare your directivity measurements (and Amir's either) with other websites like for example S&R.
The directivity of the loudspeakers can be compared arbitrarily, since @hardisj represents the normalized sonograms with stepped colors:

 

[somebodyelse]

If you post the raw data people can always produce their own plots in whatever format they prefer, with whatever palette best matches their vision.

 

[hardisj]

Just took delivery of these.
https://www.klipsch.com/products/heresy-iv-floorstanding-speaker

A fellow audio junkie has loaned them to me for testing and review.

 

[Doodski]

Very cool to have the Klipsch in for test. Can you create new topics each time you make a new review? So they are not all in one thread and are searchable by title.

 

[MZKM]

Just took delivery of these.
https://www.klipsch.com/products/heresy-iv-floorstanding-speaker

A fellow audio junkie has loaned them to me for testing and review.


View attachment 87901View attachment 87902View attachment 87903

I don’t think I’ve ever seen measurements from their Heritage line, very exciting.
I so want to know how their $12,000 La Scalas measure.

 

[hardisj]

Very cool to have the Klipsch in for test. Can you create new topics each time you make a new review? So they are not all in one thread and are searchable by title.

I already do. This is just my update and catch all thread.

 

[thewas]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen measurements from their Heritage line, very exciting.

Some German magazines have measured them like for example
https://osirisaudio.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Klipsch-Cornwall-Audio-2020-05_lowres_pdf.pdf
https://osirisaudio.de/wp-content/u...ay-2020-02_lowresTT-Standlautsprecher_pdf.pdf
https://www.pressreader.com/germany/audio/20181207/283394832891101
https://www.testberichte.de/d/einzeltest/audio-492682.html
(unfortunately the last 2 are no free downloads, so I cant upload them here),
but the more detailed measurements and listening reviews of @hardisj are always very welcome.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Erin,

what kind of equipment would you need to improve the audio of your videos? (Do you have a mic jack on your camera? I guess recording audio separately may be too much of a hassle?) The amount of room reverb is quite tiring in the long run after all, plus it confirms the stereotype of audio guys having the worst audio.

I am actually fairly certain that, if you make the need known, someone in your fanbase may be willing to pitch in with any of:
* a basic condenser mic (sub-$100 - what's the US equivalent of a t.bone SC400?), or even just a basic dynamic (even a Behringer XM8500 should be fine on a boom arm where handling noise isn't a primary concern),
* pop filter if required (speaking off-axis may be sufficient),
* a decent enough boom arm (Tonor T20 perhaps) and
* a little mixer (Behringer Xenyx 802 perhaps, which I think is their smallest model with a full 48 V phantom power supply - hmm, these are quite expensive over there, not much of a premium for a Mackie 402VLZ4) plus
* misc. cabling,
even more so if any of these still happen to be gathering dust somewhere.

 

[hardisj]

I use a rode pro shotgun style mic. I keep it off the camera because otherwise it picks up the mechanical noise of the lens' auto-focus (which is very audible thanks to the mic being right next to the lens itself).

I was going to add some absorption panels in the room to help with the reverb. Just haven't gotten around to it, mainly because I haven't gotten any complaints about the audio since I switched to the new mic and placement. I actually thought the audio was getting better.

 

[hardisj]

I did consider getting a wireless lapel. I started looking around a few weeks ago and wanted to get one to try out but (good) wireless lav setups are expensive. By all my research, the ones costing less than $150 are a very mixed bag of reviews and the more well reviewed ones are >$200.

 

[Jdunk54nl]

I did consider getting a wireless lapel. I started looking around a few weeks ago and wanted to get one to try out but (good) wireless lapels are expensive. By all my research, the ones costing less than $150 are a very mixed bag of reviews and the more well reviewed ones are >$200.

If you are going Lavalier, get something good. I use sennheiser ew100 series in the film and tv productions class I teach and they are great, but we also use them for their crazy long through wall pickup distance. I think the ew 112 series has since replaced them, but I would buy them in a heart beat. We also use tascam dr-40 field recorders with all of our microphones. I found they are better than our pro cameras (Sony FS5's and z150's) at collecting the sound.

I've tried quite a few of the less expensive ones and I was never happy with their cut out even at close distances. Sennheiser and shure are the only two that I have used that you have to be through many walls and a long way away for them to even start cutting out or have issues. The sennheiser was the better out of those two for lavalier microphones. I never tried the Rode lavalier though, but have been happy with their shotgun microphones.....although the sennheiser mke600 shotguns are a big step up from the Rodes that we have.

 

[hardisj]

sennheiser ew100

OUCH! $599?!

That's at least 2x anything I could afford. And that's the issue... high quality audio capture is not cheap. I'm pretty happy with the Rode Pro I am currently using. I think most of the issues are simply the room. I'll try treating the room first.

But, I do like the wireless lav stuff simply for the freedom it affords you. For example, sometimes I would like to walk around while talking about something. A wireless lav is needed for that. But a good one is not cheap.

 

[andreasmaaan]

OUCH! $599?!

That's at least 2x anything I could afford. And that's the issue... high quality audio capture is not cheap. I'm pretty happy with the Rode Pro I am currently using. I think most of the issues are simply the room. I'll try treating the room first.

But, I do like the wireless lav stuff simply for the freedom it affords you. For example, sometimes I would like to walk around while talking about something. A wireless lav is needed for that. But a good one is not cheap.

The thing is, with a lav, the relative level of reflections vs direct sound will be far lower than with the mic setup you're currently using. So a lav may prove to be more effective, and possibly cheaper, than treating the room.

 

[Jdunk54nl]

Ya...not cheap but we have been using the same sets for about 5 years now without issues (with high school students using them).

Try placing the microphone on a boom (or a cable from the ceiling) that points down above your head. Like this but above the camera view. The directionality of the microphone should then get rid of some of the reverb of the room. Then, quickly removable drapes/blankets/quilts work well too.

 

[hardisj]

The thing is, with a lav, the relative level of reflections vs direct sound will be far lower than with the mic setup you're currently using. So a lav may prove to be more effective, and possibly cheaper, than treating the room.

Yea, that's another reason I like the idea.

And, guys, I know you are trying to help... but please understand I built this channel as a means to provide objective based reviews based on the tools at my disposal. I have purchased the Rode Pro and I did purchase an LED panel for lighting but I don't have the money to add more at this point in time. I only have about 2.6k subs and my videos average about 1k views right now (with the exception of the 10-inch budget subwoofer shootout). There isn't enough money being generated from these reviews. At this point, there isn't even enough to cover a good wireless lav mic. So, while I absolutely agree the quality can and should be improved, I'm doing the best I can with the tools at my disposal at this point in time.

On my list of things to purchase are:

• Additional/Better lighting
• A 50mm prime lens (or, maybe even a better video camera, period). The wide angle I already had and am using is a nice lens but not for shooting YT content. A good 50mm prime lens for my camera is about $300.
• Wireless lav

I just don't have the means to do these things at this point. Maybe if my channel really takes off and I can generate enough revenue to offset the costs. But I try to keep my hobby costs separate from my regular monthly income because I still have the typical monthly expenses and our medical bills (something I won't discuss publicly) are absolutely beyond the norm. Therefore, as it is, I just can't afford these other things that I would like to have. They'll just have to wait.

Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the constructive criticism. And I absolutely agree with all of you. It's just that I can't afford to do these things. Hopefully sooner than later, though.

 

[hardisj]

Ya...not cheap but we have been using the same sets for about 5 years now without issues (with high school students using them).

Try placing the microphone on a boom (or a cable from the ceiling) that points down above your head. Like this but above the camera view. The directionality of the microphone should then get rid of some of the reverb of the room. Then, quickly removable drapes/blankets/quilts work well too.

That is exactly how my microphone is placed.

 

[AnalogSteph]

I use a rode pro shotgun style mic. I keep it off the camera because otherwise it picks up the mechanical noise of the lens' auto-focus (which is very audible thanks to the mic being right next to the lens itself).

Any chance you could get it closer to you than it is? Right now it sounds like it's super far away. I'd try something around half a meter (1-2'). Distance is pretty much the #1 factor when it comes to the ratio of direct and reflected sound. (Which is why people are using lavaliers.) A shotgun can be used further out than a cardioid or even an omni, but there is a limit to everything. Also, try not to point it directly at any wall but always at an angle (maybe 45°). Sideways overhead placement should do the job.

I was going to add some absorption panels in the room to help with the reverb. Just haven't gotten around to it, mainly because I haven't gotten any complaints about the audio since I switched to the new mic and placement. I actually thought the audio was getting better.

It definitely isn't good yet. I would start with the wall you are facing behind the camera, which is likely to reflect a lot of your voice which then is reflected off the wall behind you (trouble spot #2) among others. (Think about both the radiation pattern of your voice and the pickup pattern of the microphone.) Remember it doesn't have to be fancy or expensive, it just has to work - while a spectrally neutral absorption is no doubt desirable, just start out with hanging a bunch of budget-friendly moving blankets and see where that gets you. Look up some videos on how to build a budget-friendly vocal booth, I am sure there are some tricks left to be learned here.

I had some pretty good results with a cardioid mic facing me while talking diagonally into the room, while holding up a blanket (by myself, there are better options for sure). With a mic --> mixer --> headphones chain, experiments like this are super quick and easy.

I also had to think of this video, as the space might be more similar to what you're trying to do:

 

[Cahudson42]

@hardisj

Your videos sound great to me. And it's the great info you offer that counts anyway..