Giant Squid vs Audio Technica Lav Test! - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

All Things Audio
Everything Audio, from acquisition to postproduction.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 5th, 2005, 10:25 AM   #16
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Deep South
Posts: 168
Greets, Jay

Frankly, I'm done testing! I just did the test for my own benefit, but figured others could use the information, but after getting the real world results I have, I am no longer in a state of uncertainty!

What I am going to do (probably late tonight...it takes forever for me to upload over 56k coupled with old crappy phone lines) is upload a couple of contrasting real world examples of my subject being recorded with the AT and the GS. The real examples are far more pertinant, since we buy em to use...not to test!
Daniel Runyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 06:59 PM   #17
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lewisburg PA
Posts: 752
I listened to the initial test (albeit on my iBook and not through the monitors attached to my G5) and I liked the AT better.

Why?

Well it's a subjective judgement on my part, but I thought the GS made the ice in the glass sound too bright and out of place. To my ear the AT rendered what I am guessing the space in which the test was recorded actually sounded like. Of course this is a matter of taste, not signal strength etc. -- and that's the point.

I've always considered mics to render various flavours of sound, some suited to one task, mood, setting, etc. and others differently. Hard to judge how "good" a mic is in the absence of knowing what the intended effect is supposed to be.
Peter Wiley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 08:05 PM   #18
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Québec (Canada)
Posts: 133
I agree with you that some mics are better suited to certain tasks, but this test really needs to be listened to on good speakers.

The GS is actually a bit too loud in this test, which causes distortion when the ice cubes hit the glass. On the voice part, however, I much prefer the sound of the GS.

I also find the live concert samples of the omni mics on the GS web site quite impressive for such small devices.
__________________
François
Francois Poitras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 08:29 PM   #19
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Deep South
Posts: 168
Agreed on the too loud....but thats what setting levels is for. I had both of them set to the exact same level (the DVX preamps at mid position) to make sure the test was under totally identical circumstance for each. So, the GS did clip from time to time, but if you were using it real world you would set your levels according to what type of sound you were recording.

Also, if you were recording, you would adjust the mic position to best capture your audio, listening to the difference in frequency pick up as you changed angle and so on....again, I had both of these at (as close to humanly possible without using micrometers or something) the exact same position and angle, so that each would be on a level playing ground. I had the mics pretty close to the glass (on my desk in front of me) and I was sitting in the chair about 1 1/2 feet away (to give you an idea of its voice pickup capabilities), but if I were trying to record ice going into a glass for its own sake, I would pull the mic back a bit, or push it in closer and lower the gain.

Now, I will most certainly agree that different mic's are good for different applications.....absolutely! But my purpose is recording voice, as I would guess that is the most widely used application of lav's, and specifically weddings. As a matter of fact, I really wanted to post this in the Wedding section for my fellow Weddingeers, but thought it would reach a wider peer group here....audio is for everyone!

In end, it's the real world results that count the most, and the real world audio I was getting from the AT was not only pretty bad by comparison, but was a struggle to get even that good....I was constantly having to fight two foes...clipping and weak signal, and there was no satisfactory middle ground. I would have to boost the audio in post and then EQ it to try to falsify the low end of the spectrum, as it had none of its own....the AT was a source of great frustration, and even some footage that will not see the light of day.....sadly.
Daniel Runyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 09:53 PM   #20
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Québec (Canada)
Posts: 133
Daniel, yes, of course, I understand why you set the volume this way for the test. I meant – rather clumsily – to explain why the sound of the ice cubes seemed strange.

Thanks for the tip,
__________________
François
Francois Poitras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 10:27 AM   #21
Trustee
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Burlington
Posts: 1,961
I still say that until you've re-run the basic test twice and switched each mic to the opposite transmitter/receiver system in between, you can't be certain of your test results.
The wireless system has by far the greatest potential to influence the results as any other component in the system.
Perhaps you will get the same results, but until you've ruled out the huge potential influence of the wireless systems and their transmitter input gain settings, you can't be certain of the differences in the lav elements.
Perhaps you'll find that one of your wireless systems is not operating at full quality potential. You may also find that the most important controls of your wireless system, transmitter input gain, isn't set optimally for each lav element and their inherent sensitivity. You may also find that one system was operating on a frequency that was being hampered but not totally disrupted by outside interference.
It's also important when doing more advanced comparisons to take the extra step of using not just equal settings for each device, but optimum settings for each device. Again, you may get the same results as before, but you can't claim it to be true with authority until you've taken these steps.
Jay Massengill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 11:51 AM   #22
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 90
Yes, test 'em without the wireless for any type of comparison!

I didn't catch that, though if they sound half decent, record in mono on the Iriver, and are built like a tank they are sweet!

I think a good test would be on 2 iRivers, side by side, with same bit rate (ie.double bit rate for the (adapterless) non-Squid :) Then perhaps normalize the 2 tracks for equal volume.
Richard Maloney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 12:32 PM   #23
Major Player
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Deep South
Posts: 168
Sorry guys, but right now I just dont have time to be a test machine. I got em in the mail, tested em for my own benefit and shared the results. Have now used them twice in real world environs and the end results match exactly with the test results, so I am no longer in need of tests, as tests come from uncertainty... and I am no longer uncertain!

Maybe someone else that has them can do some testing to your satisfaction, and what I would really like to see are some tests between the GS and other mics (besides the AT830mW) and see how they hold up to a wider comparison. Maybe DSE will give us some worth while info if he gets ahold of some GS's

Not trying to be difficult, but I am very busy and just dont want to put so much time into what is in my own personal view....beating a dead horse!
Daniel Runyon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 9th, 2005, 04:08 AM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bonaire, Ga.
Posts: 356
I put together a quick comparsion of the 830 and the giant squid mic. I was quite surprised how the squid mic compared to the more exspensive 830
http://easylink.playstream.com/foley...s/mic_test.wax
Mark A. Foley is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > All Things Audio

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:03 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network