|
|
Posted by carlmart on 10/30/06 13:39
Spex wrote:
> But my point is that I have yet to hear the point that the compression
> does show its teeth. I'd like to hear a sample of MP2 falling apart.
>
> Do the group a favour and make two recordings with the HDV camera you
> have/or going to use. Record a section of spoken word in HDV then
> switch the camera over to DV/DVCAM mode and record the same phrase or
> whatever in PCM.
Several points over this question:
1) I am not going to download any tests I do. If anyone doesn't believe
my findings that's their problem. This is not a science congress where
I have to submit so many samples to prove what I say.
2) I don't care for the PCM recording in the DV camera. What I am
proposing is a separate recording system.
3) The audio recording is MPEG1, not MPEG 2. The HDV video is MPEG2.
Still compressed though.
4) Audio is made of subtleties. The number of them you can pick up and
record are what separates mics, preamps and recording types. Subtetlies
that even usual measurements many times do not quantify. The master
recording should have all these subtetlies. A linear recording will
ALWAYS be better than a compressed recording, no matter how intelligent
this compression is. Why would I pick a compressed recording (HDV) when
I can have an uncompressed one (CF portable recorders) with very little
work?
5) I don't look down at users that are OK with MP3 or compressed sound
on their portables. I myself use a compressed MD walkman on my flying
trips (better than MP3). But as a master recordist I want the best
recording I can get. And I am trying to talk to the people that also
think like that. That I discriminate people that do not think that way,
I don't think so. But you seem to feel menaced by proposals that differ
from what you believe.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|