Padrick Dunn, Pieper Plant Rig Test

DIY Stereo Boundary Mic Rigshttps://pantherfile.uwm.edu/padunn/media/rob2.mov?uniq=1aspm6

All three




Side facing baffle

A.) Localization: Out of the three tests that I picked it seemed
that the side facing baffle was the best for localization. In that
you could hear the sound go from one end to the other. You know
where the sound is coming from when it starts at 8 and ends at 4.

B.) Depth: It seemed as though the side facing could not capture the
deapth like the triple boundry rig. But at the same time you could tell
which sound of the nails was closer than the other.

C.) Architectural: You could tell that we were in an inclosed place but it
seemed that the triple boundry could capture that a little bit better.


Triple Boundry-EMS 158 PZM's 48" above floore

A.) Localization: It sounded as if the triple boundry was a little
dull compaired to the baffle. The sound was also lower in quality compaired
the other two.

B.) Depth: Out of the three rig that I picked it seemed the triple boundry
could capturet the depth the best. You could tell how far back the nail was
compaired to the others.

C.) Architectural: Out of all eight nail sounds it seemed as though 11,12,13
were the most distinct. You could really get a feel for the area.


Parallel boundry, sound pro lavs 1.5" inset

A.) Localization: When it comes to location this was the last rig I would pick
only because the sounds were all mixed together. At points 11,12,13 all
sounded the same in terms of location.

B.) Depth: Their was a little depth but not like the triple boundry. The best
location to get depth in the parallel boundry was to the side at the times of
8,9,3,4.

C.) Architectural: Out of all three this could capture the best architectural layout.
It gave it a feeling of open-ness and let you fell how open and empty the place was.
For some reason 11,12 were the best places to how open the room was.