LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  November 2020

ARSCLIST November 2020

Subject:

Re: Terminological choice

From:

Lou Judson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 21 Nov 2020 08:45:47 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (53 lines)

I am involved in both rescuing, transferring and digitizing recordings new and old, and recording spoken word and music in a variety of settings.
I’m unfamiliar with the area of lingistisc as it is involved with recording, but here is my response:

Having equipment capable of “high quality” should be a given in any recording environment or situation. Over the past 100 years, the “state of the art” has steadlily improved. It is rather amazing to read about acoustic 78s records being A/B’d against a live orchestra and being praised as incredibly lifelike, whereas today it sounds hopelessly crude!

I remember as a budding engineer the transitions from decent quality home reel to reel recorders to more convenient cassettes and then to DAT digital recordings… (leaving out professional studio recorders for the moment). In every case, the most important factor was the microphones and preamp/mixer/amplifiers use as input sources, modified by the placement and the sound out in front of the mic. A great mic two feet away from a voice will have more of the room than a close mic, but a mic too close to the mouth will pick up breaths, mouth noise, and so on. There is a happy medium we all strive for. A cheap cassette sitting on a table is NOT a high quality source, but it can work in a quiet room with good speakers…

I imagine in the linguistic world there might be a dearth of experience and knowledge about placement as referenced above. My wife does transcription, typing the words from a spoken recording, and one of the worst examples of this was an interview where the setting was a noisy restaurant, the interviewer blew on the mic and saw it was recording, them placed it on the back of the booth behind the two voices, where is picked up the kitchen and the crowd beautifully, but hardly any of the interview. That is extreme but it happens!

The mention of a “Rode” mic is essentially irrelevant (Rode makes a wide variety of mics) - I have had good quality microphones reanging from a $17 Sony in 1966 to multi-thousand dollar mics in studios and live recordings. It is independent of the brand - there are good mics from many manufacturers. One ought to never specify a brand over a type of mic. Price has a good bit to do with it, but not everything!

In my work recording audiobooks and radio interviews, we evolved from radio studios with fully professional ($2,000) mic, through remote recordings on hundred dollar mics to (good) cassette recorders to using top quality film sound recorders (NAGRA and Sound Devices), and a variety of mic types. At one point, we discovered the dependable placement using headset mics, like you see on TED talks and such - and we also found that $17 headset mics perform as well (and more reliably) as $600 Countryman headmics! One key to this is that they stay one inch from the mouth and off to the side so no breath pops…

All this might be a diversion, as you ask about terminology. What I would like to see is well-recorded audio on high quality equipment with qualified personnel doing it! And a profesioonal will al;ways monitor “end of chain” so they know it sounds good and was actually recorded! That’s hard in the digital realm, where you can’t hear the result until you play it back…

Also, there is a huge difference between describing the quality of a recording you are presented with, and instructing your people on how the MAKE good recordings!

I hope this helps… It was fun to write, hope it isn’t just a rant.

PS - “High Fidelity” refers more to music and playback than recording spoken word, so I would avoid the term.

<L>
Lou Judson
Intuitive Audio
415-883-2689

> On Nov 21, 2020, at 1:37 AM, Hugh Paterson III <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> In the academic literature (of linguistics) I often read about the
> necessity to record with "high-quality recordings..." and what they
> often mean is all based on technical parameters. For instance using a røde
> mic, and recording to .wav format at something like 48khz/24bit.
> 
> My perspective, and I think some on this list would agree, is that
> technical settings on hardware by themselves do not make a "high-quality
> recording". My interpretation is that "quality" involves so much more in
> terms of sound engineering, such as mic placement, levels like gain (noise
> to signal ratio) etc, and composition of the content.
> 
> So I am writing a brief squib on this issue, and I would like to
> terminologically make a distinction between a "High quality recording" and
> a "a well recorded recording". I am wondering if I should contrast the
> concepts of "High quality recording" and "High fidelity recording"? What do
> you think? Do these terms adequately capture the contrast? Are there other
> terms that should be used?
> 
> 
> all the best,
> - Hugh
> 

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager