Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy4
I would disagree with the idea that two different mics only relay time domain information. It's pretty obvious to me that you are capturing information from two entirely different portions of the instrument. It doesn't take much thought to realize that all of the qualities that we attribute to an acoustic instrument change dependent on the perspective point.
There just isn't any free lunch.
|
Yes of course and perhaps a bit to declarative of a statement. But to just clarify, I did not did say "two different mic's" I said "two mics". And went on to include some caveat's, to that statement. And now with the part I was not addressing (the different discrepancies) that matched pair might pic up as opposed to a duped single mic technique. The statement is indeed perhaps not accurate in totality.But none the less I still think the significantly largest amount of perceived difference in a stereo recording is time domain and panning.
What would be a truly interesting and confirming test. That would indeed put all this to rest. Would be a blind listening test with a single mic and a pair of the same mics.
Do a time slipped dup of the single with some slight eq. differences, then a stereo track of the pair run dry. Then see if in reality that first, the difference can be consistently identified, and also then if identifying which is actually which, can be accomplished consistently.
Lastly and perhaps it goes without saying he other factor in all this the context of use. If the intended use is for a solo acoustic instrumental track then I think squeezing the last few percent of quality out of stereo recording is certainly the primary goal . As soon as we start adding other instruments into the mix, the priority then begins to shift and increasingly so as more instruments are added.