Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

[tima]

Please, consider MV88+: they added headphone monitoring and improved audio

This mic offers a much broader user base.

 

[bonzo75]

Do we post videos to achieve not just a decent representation but an optimal or best possible phone video? If that is true then no standards are needed -- a person can use whatever equipment and settings that he wants for recording because he is thebest judge of how his in-room listening sounds on a recording. Granted for evaluating changes to a single system only internal consistency is needed.

Or do we post videos to compare systems, gear and rooms with each other via video? This is where standardization comes into play. By using the same recording ancillaries we control at least one set of variables over which we have control. Doing so does not forfeit gauging changes within a single system.

Are videos vanity projects, ends in themselves, or are they shared tools, means to an end?

Exactly. This is not an Audio Research vs Conrad Johnson which is better comparison.

It is to share, like posts. It is ok to share video with a lower quality mic than a higher quality one, provide you give a representation of the system.

Only the trade should be interested in making their videos sound the best to wow from sonics coming out of the laptop/mobile/headphone speaker.

Do you guys post yourselves, or send each post to get proofread and edited before each posting. Please also get the best Canon cameras to take pictures and do a photography course. People will get impressed.

If we go a mic route, I think only people with dedicated rooms who can leave a mic on a tripod sitting there all day will use it. Those who have systems in the living room will have to put it away and after the initial few times will not bother. Most people will not use during travel. I have a Sony camcorder that is wasting away in a drawer somewhere, with a tripod and all that.

 

[morricab]

I will wait for a direct compare between the two microphones -- same system, same music, etc. For me the issue with the IQ7 is that it is Apple only. There is a zoom AM7 for Android, however the compare here claims it is for speech and voice over.

Compare Zoom iQ7 vs Zoom AM7 | B&H Photo

Compare Zoom iQ7 vs Zoom AM7 | B&H Photo

www.bhphotovideo.com

I have a different take: what is the purpose of making phone videos?

First off, I believe a 'decent representation' of in-room sound can obtain with a decent phone alone -- no microphone needed. I know this is true for me and others using only a phone.

Do we post videos to achieve not just a decent representation but an optimal or best possible phone video? If that is true then no standards are needed -- a person can use whatever equipment and settings that he wants for recording because he is thebest judge of how his in-room listening sounds on a recording. Granted for evaluating changes to a single system only internal consistency is needed.

Or do we post videos to compare systems, gear and rooms with each other via video? This is where standardization comes into play. By using the same recording ancillaries we control at least one set of variables over which we have control. Doing so does not forfeit gauging changes within a single system.

Are videos vanity projects, ends in themselves, or are they shared tools, means to an end?

Have a listen to my Munich videos I put up yesterday. I will be posting a lot more in the coming days...all with the IQ7. I found it much superior to the built-in microphone and didn't bother with built-in.

 

[Argonaut]

Exactly. This is not an Audio Research vs Conrad Johnson which is better comparison.

That is exactly how Some viewers will invariably wish to use these videos in order to compare systems containing equipment that they themselves own Or are contemplating owning.

 

[Argonaut]

Have a listen to my Munich videos I put up yesterday. I will be posting a lot more in the coming days...all with the IQ7. I found it much superior to the built-in microphone and didn't bother with built-in.

Quite , for roughly the same buy in as the MV88+ the iTestMic2 negates entirely the variables inherent with disparate devices , not only inbuilt mic’s but electronics as well .

 

[bonzo75]

That is exactly how Some viewers will invariably wish to use these videos in order to compare systems containing equipment that they themselves own.

comparing equipment and systems is part of the hobby. comparing mics is not. These are very different things. The end sonic is very different from representativeness of the recorded system.

 

[Argonaut]

comparing equipment and systems is part of the hobby. comparing mics is not. These are very different things. The end sonic is very different from representativeness of the recorded system.

Sorry Kedar but that makes very little sense, standardising the recording process would allow for a far closer and accurate comparison than not.

 

[bonzo75]

Sorry Kedar but that makes very little sense, standardising the recording process would allow for a far closer and accurate comparison than not.

yes we should I agree

 

[tima]

The iTestMic2 is IOS only.

 

[Argonaut]

“ The newest version of the iTestMic2 with USB-C connector for the latest models of Apple iPad and iPhone. Also works with Windows and Android devices.”

 

[Argonaut]

Making wobbly youtube videos is of course not its raison d'être , one also acquires an excellent solution to measure ones room and transducer response .

 

[morricab]

comparing equipment and systems is part of the hobby. comparing mics is not. These are very different things. The end sonic is very different from representativeness of the recorded system.

Not further away than the raw built-in phone microphone.

 

[PeterA]

I will wait for a direct compare between the two microphones -- same system, same music, etc. For me the issue with the IQ7 is that it is Apple only. There is a zoom AM7 for Android, however the compare here claims it is for speech and voice over.

Compare Zoom iQ7 vs Zoom AM7 | B&H Photo

Compare Zoom iQ7 vs Zoom AM7 | B&H Photo

www.bhphotovideo.com

I have a different take: what is the purpose of making phone videos?

First off, I believe a 'decent representation' of in-room sound can obtain with a decent phone alone -- no microphone needed. I know this is true for me and others using only a phone.

Do we post videos to achieve not just a decent representation but an optimal or best possible phone video? If that is true then no standards are needed -- a person can use whatever equipment and settings that he wants for recording because he is thebest judge of how his in-room listening sounds on a recording. Granted for evaluating changes to a single system only internal consistency is needed.

Or do we post videos to compare systems, gear and rooms with each other via video? This is where standardization comes into play. By using the same recording ancillaries we control at least one set of variables over which we have control. Doing so does not forfeit gauging changes within a single system.

Are videos vanity projects, ends in themselves, or are they shared tools, means to an end?

These are good questions. Some share videos to document progress, not necessarily for vanity reasons. Others use them as tools to share and solicite advice from others about set up. Some use them for marketing purposes. Some tell us repeatedly that they are best used only for making direct comparisons when switching one variable. And others think they all suck.

I think there are a variety of reasons we make and share them. I do it to learn, share music and system changes, document progress, and because it can be fun. I am fascinated by how the topic seems to be increasingly popular and relevant.

 

[Rexp]

I use videos to narrow down which digital sources I should seek out for audition. If the Youtube version of a track beats my Tidal/Qobuz playback I take note. I've also found some great music selections.

 

[hopkins]

I use videos to narrow down which digital sources I should seek out for audition. If the Youtube version of a track beats my Tidal/Qobuz playback I take note. I've also found some great music selections.

Hi, can you give me an example of a YouTube recording with a digital source sounding better than a stream of the same track?

 

[hopkins]

One of these videos is recorded with the iPhone mic and the other video is recorded with the MV88.

Am i really the only one hearing a significant left/right imbalance on your recordings with the Shure mic? Seems to me like the right side mic is defective. Same thing on the Carol King track.

 

[PeterA]

Am i really the only one hearing a significant left/right imbalance on your recordings with the Shure mic? Seems to me like the right side mic is defective. Same thing on the Carol King track.

i’m only able to listen to these through my iPhone right now and I don’t know the music at all so I do not hear a channel imbalance. It seems odd that you would hear it and Ron would not especially since he replays these videos through his main system.

 

[hopkins]

I extracted the audio from the Vimeo video (using this https://tuberipper.com/294/site/vimeo) and opened it with audacity. There is no doubt there is a problem with the recording. Playing it on my desktop speakers it is obvious as well. I guess it is less obvious when playing it on a phone's build-in speakers. Perhaps Ron did not replay these last videos taken with this mic through his speakers.

 

[Rexp]

Hi, can you give me an example of a YouTube recording with a digital source sounding better than a stream of the same track?

Here's a Cyrus Chestnut/Anita Baker track about 8 mins in: Edit you will have to search HEADquarter Audio, under their Munich coverage part 7

 

[Rexp]

Am i really the only one hearing a significant left/right imbalance on your recordings with the Shure mic? Seems to me like the right side mic is defective. Same thing on the Carol King track.

Agreed, assumed it was a set up issue.