Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Daniel Rudrich]

Well to clarify and bring into context, I don’t own a NT-SF1, so I can’t 
confirm that.
I just mentioned the possible artifacts which can (don’t have to) occur with 
time-frequency domain processing.
And I also wrote that adaptive, signal dependent processing is the way to go to 
get the best out of FOA. A student of ours (IEM) just recently released his 
AdaptiveBinauralDecoder plug-in as a Beta version. Also adaptive and FOA.

Daniel


> Am 17.12.2018 um 20:28 schrieb Len Moskowitz :
> 
> I wrote:
> 
> 
>> There has been a report that the encoder introduces unpleasant sonic
>> artifacts if the NT-SF1 is in motion during recording. Links to
>> recordings made that way were posted on Facebook, and I've heard them.
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Rudrich confirmed that the Rode plugin produces artifacts when the 
> microphone is moved.
> 
> 
> On Facebook he wrote:
> 
> 
>> You can actually see those artifacts with encoding two sinusoids in different
>> directions and look at the visualization. When you change the frequency of
> 
>> one, there seem to be three sources.
> 
> 
> Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
> Core Sound LLC
> www.core-sound.com
> Home of OctoMic and TetraMic
> 
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Len Moskowitz]

I wrote:



There has been a report that the encoder introduces unpleasant sonic
artifacts if the NT-SF1 is in motion during recording. Links to
recordings made that way were posted on Facebook, and I've heard them.




Daniel Rudrich confirmed that the Rode plugin produces artifacts when 
the microphone is moved.



On Facebook he wrote:


You can actually see those artifacts with encoding two sinusoids in 
different
directions and look at the visualization. When you change the 
frequency of



one, there seem to be three sources.



Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of OctoMic and TetraMic

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Ralf R Radermacher]

Am 15.12.18 um 01:46 schrieb Jack Reynolds:


We also tested the Zoom H3VR and a few of my prototypes and I was surprised how 
different they all sound


That sounds quite interesting. So, let us have the whole story if you can.

Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Jack Reynolds]

They are quite different, so it’s hard to say which was better initially. 

The rode has more apparent depth, which is probably due to its lower noise 
floor and higher sensivity, but it’s difficult to tell how much difference the 
A to B filter is making. 

Hence A-Format files might give you a better idea of the original character of 
the capsules. 
We also tested the Zoom H3VR and a few of my prototypes and I was surprised how 
different they all sound 

J

Sent from my iPhone

> On 14 Dec 2018, at 17:22, amfmail  wrote:
> 
> B format preferred.  Which mic was best/accurate sounding?
> 
> 
> Sent from cell phone
>  Original message From: jack reynolds 
>  Date: 12/14/18  11:03 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: 
> Surround Sound discussion group  Subject: Re: 
> [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1? 
> I have some recordings made with both microphones, plus a few others. I
> will post soon with any luck.
> 
> Would raw A-Format be preferable?
> 
>> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 11:21, Ralf R Radermacher  wrote:
>> 
>> Is there any comparison online between the two microphones mentioned in
>> the title? Haven't been able to find one.
>> 
>> Ralf
>> 
>> --
>> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
>> Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
>> Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
>> Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
>> ___
>> Sursound mailing list
>> Sursound@music.vt.edu
>> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
>> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 07889727365
> 
> 02036861372
> 
> 3 Swimmers Lane
> Haggerston
> London
> E2 8FR
> 
> 
> www.facebook.com/reynoldsmicrophones
> 
> www.sohovr.co.uk
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20181214/e504c203/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.
> -- next part --
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: 
> <https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20181214/bed838bc/attachment.html>
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
> account or options, view archives and so on.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Len Moskowitz]

Steve Boardman wrote:



Apparently it uses adaptive parametric processing, ala Harpex. ...


Apparently so.



There has been a report that the encoder introduces unpleasant sonic 
artifacts if the NT-SF1 is in motion during recording. Links to 
recordings made that way were posted on Facebook, and I've heard them.




This report is yet to be duplicated.




Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)

Core Sound LLC
www.cores-sound.com
Home of OctoMic and TetraMic.
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[amfmail]

B format preferred.  Which mic was best/accurate sounding?


Sent from cell phone
 Original message From: jack reynolds 
 Date: 12/14/18  11:03 AM  (GMT-05:00) To: Surround 
Sound discussion group  Subject: Re: [Sursound] 
Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1? 
I have some recordings made with both microphones, plus a few others. I
will post soon with any luck.

Would raw A-Format be preferable?

On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 11:21, Ralf R Radermacher  wrote:

> Is there any comparison online between the two microphones mentioned in
> the title? Haven't been able to find one.
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
> Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
> Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>


-- 

07889727365

02036861372

3 Swimmers Lane
Haggerston
London
E2 8FR


www.facebook.com/reynoldsmicrophones

www.sohovr.co.uk
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20181214/e504c203/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/private/sursound/attachments/20181214/bed838bc/attachment.html>
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[jack reynolds]

I have some recordings made with both microphones, plus a few others. I
will post soon with any luck.

Would raw A-Format be preferable?

On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 11:21, Ralf R Radermacher  wrote:

> Is there any comparison online between the two microphones mentioned in
> the title? Haven't been able to find one.
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
> Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
> Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>


-- 

07889727365

02036861372

3 Swimmers Lane
Haggerston
London
E2 8FR


www.facebook.com/reynoldsmicrophones

www.sohovr.co.uk
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Jörn Nettingsmeier]

On 12/13/18 11:12 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:
Yes, but the Sennheiser has electret capsules while the Rode is a 
'real' condenser mic. I do agree that electrets have come a long way 
in recent years. Still, I'd like to know how they compare beyond 
their noise level.



On 12/14/18 10:47 AM, David Pickett wrote:
B&K / DPA have been using electrets for more than 30 years.  O 
course, these are perhaps not the same as one can buy for peanuts at 
Alibaba!


The Ambeo uses Sennheiser K-14 if I remember the number correctly. They
work very well. I guess unless you want to use a mic in really hot
conditions like close to incandescent stage lights (where an electret
might lose its charge) or at extremely high SPL (where you might want to
use higher polarization voltage on the diaphragm), there is really no
problem. Haven't used the Sennheiser mic since I tested a prototype
several years ago, but it held up very well. I don't buy this "real 
condenser" lingo.


My subjective experience with the Sennheiser was this:

* slightly worse localisation than the Tetramic
* slightly nicer tone color out-of-the-box than the Tm (but then there's
always EQ and tastes differ)
* significantly quieter than my Tm
* more "neutral" and a bit less "in-your-face" than the ST450 (which
sounds very cinema-y to me)
* much nicer and more professional package than my first-generation Tm,
easier to have confidence in...
* less bulky than a similarly rugged ST450 because no pre-amp box
* lighter on the boom than a ST450, but nothing beats the Tm here (if
you keep the PPAs down at the or on the recorder)

Can't say anything about peak SPL handling, I mostly did street and
nature atmos while testing.

The prototype ate through batteries like crazy due to its phantom 
current requirements. I was told there is a fix coming in later batches 
of the series, don't know what became of it. If you get the chance to 
test one, do run it on batteries and see if it's a problem for your use 
case. This is only really relevant in comparison to the Tm, the ST450 
uses a lot more power due to external preamp and capsule heating.


Best,


Jörn


--
Jörn Nettingsmeier
Tuinbouwstraat 180, 1097 ZB Amsterdam, Nederland
Tel. +49 177 7937487

Meister für Veranstaltungstechnik (Bühne/Studio), Tonmeister VDT
http://stackingdwarves.net
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Steven Boardman]

Hi Stefan

One can use multiple instances to create as many beamformers as one needs
to upmix or extract. One doesn't need to be constrained to 7.1 or 5.1
positions, as all beamformers can be moved. Although in pairs and a
separate centre channel, which is a pain.
As i mentioned earlier, it good at this, a lot better than the usual
virtual first order mic. As one can suppress the rear lobe. It is
definitely sharper as well.
I can't compare it directly to Harpex as i don't have the full Harpex
version, just the algorithm in Blue Ripples Harpex up mixer. (which i use
all the time)
The Rode plugin is free so try it. I am not sure why, as I think users
would pay for its decording. I am now using it regularly.

Best

Steve

> .”
>
> - - - -
>
> They don’t mention this, in fact this seems to be a kind of Facebook
> speculation...
>
> Other sources:
> https://digitalfilmmaker.net/rode-soundfield-nt-sf1-ambisonic-microphone/
>
> So in my understanding you can’t simulate a high-resolution ambisonics
> to 5.1 decoding (for example) with 5 virtual shotgun mikes. Because
> the “shotgun capsule responses” won’t add up to a 5.1 microphone at
> all... (The 5.1 mike capsule responses should be rather cardioid, and
> a coincident stereophonic 5.1 microphone ain’t be good either.)
>
> It is even less clear how a supposed new parametric ambisonics
> decoding process should work, because such a thing is neither
> explained nor even mentioned by Rode - and I don’t see any function to
> test...
> Do I miss anything? Of course it would be quite sensational if Rode
> should have invented a new form of FOA upsampling AND would give this
> away “for free” in some plugin. (AND then not promoting this
> sensational feature...)
>
>   But I highly doubt it...
>
> Best,
>
> Stefan
>
> P.S.: But in case I should be wrong, it would have been me to provoke
> a reaction from Rode which would < unveil > a very hidden and
> insignificant superresolution feature.  😎
> .
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[David Pickett]

B&K / DPA have been using electrets for more than 30 years.  O 
course, these are perhaps not the same as one can buy for peanuts at Alibaba!


David

At 23:12 13-12-18, Ralf R Radermacher wrote:


Am 13.12.18 um 22:44 schrieb Len Moskowitz:


They're both similar in that they are both first-order microphones


Yes, but the Sennheiser has electret capsules while the Rode is a 
'real' condenser mic. I do agree that electrets have come a long way 
in recent years. Still, I'd like to know how they compare beyond 
their noise level.


___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Stefan Schreiber]

Citando Steven Boardman :


“Apparently it uses adaptive parametric processing, ala Harpex.

 In fact one can use the plugin on b-format too. Which means with a little

 jiggery pokery it is possible to upmix, in a Harpex style for free.

 I haven’t used it like this, as i have the blue ripple Harpex upmixer. But

 i have used it to beamform a hyper cardiod without rear lobe with great

 success.”


- - - -

They don’t mention this, in fact this seems to be a kind of Facebook  
speculation...


Other sources:
https://digitalfilmmaker.net/rode-soundfield-nt-sf1-ambisonic-microphone/

So in my understanding you can’t simulate a high-resolution ambisonics  
to 5.1 decoding (for example) with 5 virtual shotgun mikes. Because  
the “shotgun capsule responses” won’t add up to a 5.1 microphone at  
all... (The 5.1 mike capsule responses should be rather cardioid, and  
a coincident stereophonic 5.1 microphone ain’t be good either.)


It is even less clear how a supposed new parametric ambisonics  
decoding process should work, because such a thing is neither  
explained nor even mentioned by Rode - and I don’t see any function to  
test...
Do I miss anything? Of course it would be quite sensational if Rode  
should have invented a new form of FOA upsampling AND would give this  
away “for free” in some plugin. (AND then not promoting this  
sensational feature...)


 But I highly doubt it...

Best,

Stefan

P.S.: But in case I should be wrong, it would have been me to provoke  
a reaction from Rode which would < unveil > a very hidden and  
insignificant superresolution feature.  😎

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Stefan Schreiber]

<
Citando Gary Gallagher :I don't know the  
Sennheiser Ambeo, but the Rode NTSF1 is a gorgeous


... " Eschewing the matrices and correction filters of previous  
generations, it utilises

 state-of-the-art frequency-domain processing to deliver unparalleled

 spatial accuracy at all frequencies." Does that register with anyone?



 Gary





- - -

Well, I hope at least the person in the PR department who wrote this  
will know what this citing (in bloomy language) could mean...


But of course everybody wants to have “state-of-the-art” processing &  
products. Got it...


If the spatial accuracy at all frequencies is “unparalleled”, you  
either believe it and order - or you don’t.


😉

Seriously: The citing is pretty meaningless without any given further  
explanations, or say: < evidence >.


Stefan
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Steven Boardman]

Apparently it uses adaptive parametric processing, ala Harpex.
In fact one can use the plugin on b-format too. Which means with a little
jiggery pokery it is possible to upmix, in a Harpex style for free.
I haven’t used it like this, as i have the blue ripple Harpex upmixer. But
i have used it to beamform a hyper cardiod without rear lobe with great
success.
The jury isn't out yet, on what it is exactly doing to the NTSF1 A-Format
to B-format conversion. As it appears not to be matrixing at all, but doing
some parametric processing too.

Steve

On Thu, 13 Dec 2018, 22:49 Gary Gallagher  I don't know the Sennheiser Ambeo, but the Rode NTSF1 is a gorgeous
> sounding mic. The Zoom H3-VR is also a good mic, clean sounding but not as
> rich. It is, however, incredibly compact, I took one overnight hiking
> recently. As an aside could someone with the technical expertise decode
> this paragraph from the Rode on their new soundfield plugin - " Eschewing
> the matrices and correction filters of previous generations, it utilises
> state-of-the-art frequency-domain processing to deliver unparalleled
> spatial accuracy at all frequencies." Does that register with anyone?
>
> Gary
>
> .
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Gary Gallagher]

I don't know the Sennheiser Ambeo, but the Rode NTSF1 is a gorgeous
sounding mic. The Zoom H3-VR is also a good mic, clean sounding but not as
rich. It is, however, incredibly compact, I took one overnight hiking
recently. As an aside could someone with the technical expertise decode
this paragraph from the Rode on their new soundfield plugin - " Eschewing
the matrices and correction filters of previous generations, it utilises
state-of-the-art frequency-domain processing to deliver unparalleled
spatial accuracy at all frequencies." Does that register with anyone?

Gary

On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 09:12 Ralf R Radermacher  wrote:

> Am 13.12.18 um 22:44 schrieb Len Moskowitz:
>
> > They're both similar in that they are both first-order microphones
>
> Yes, but the Sennheiser has electret capsules while the Rode is a 'real'
> condenser mic. I do agree that electrets have come a long way in recent
> years. Still, I'd like to know how they compare beyond their noise level.
>
>  > Neither of the two is provided with individualized calibrations - they
>  > use a single generic calibration for every instance of the microphone.
>  > This is not optimal.
>
> Speaking of which, I'd suppose that this also applies to the Zoom H3-VR
> although they could theoretically supply each unit with its own built-in
> calibration data.
>
> Ralf
>
> --
> Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
> Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
> Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
> Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
> ___
> Sursound mailing list
> Sursound@music.vt.edu
> https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here,
> edit account or options, view archives and so on.
>
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Ralf R Radermacher]

Am 13.12.18 um 22:44 schrieb Len Moskowitz:


They're both similar in that they are both first-order microphones


Yes, but the Sennheiser has electret capsules while the Rode is a 'real' 
condenser mic. I do agree that electrets have come a long way in recent 
years. Still, I'd like to know how they compare beyond their noise level.


> Neither of the two is provided with individualized calibrations - they
> use a single generic calibration for every instance of the microphone.
> This is not optimal.

Speaking of which, I'd suppose that this also applies to the Zoom H3-VR 
although they could theoretically supply each unit with its own built-in 
calibration data.


Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

Re: [Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Len Moskowitz]

They're both similar in that they are both first-order microphones

NT-SF1 is slightly smaller and lighter than the Ambeo.


 Length (millimeters / inches)



TetraMic: 133mm / 5.2"
   OctoMic: 128mm / 5.0"
   NT-SF1: 193mm / 7.6"
   Ambeo: 215mm / 8.5"



Weight (grams / ounces)



TetraMic: 85gm / 3 oz.
   OctoMic: 150gm / 5.3 oz.
   NT-SF1 315gm / 11.1 oz.
   Ambeo: 410gm / 14.5 oz.



You can see a side-by-side photo of the four here:



   https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2462399327110451

Neither of the two is provided with individualized calibrations - they 
use a single generic calibration for every instance of the microphone. 
This is not optimal.


Neither is designed to be re-calibrated as they age and drift.

A recent test posted on Facebook showed that the NT-SF1 has slightly 
lower self-noise. See the details here:


   
https://www.facebook.com/groups/SpatialAudioVRARMR/permalink/1530228073787181/



Len Moskowitz (mosko...@core-sound.com)
Core Sound LLC
www.core-sound.com
Home of OctoMic and TetraMic
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.

[Sursound] Comparison Sennheiser Ambeo mic vs. Rode NT-SF1?

[Ralf R Radermacher]

Is there any comparison online between the two microphones mentioned in 
the title? Haven't been able to find one.


Ralf

--
Ralf R. Radermacher  -  Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog  : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web   : http://www.fotoralf.de
___
Sursound mailing list
Sursound@music.vt.edu
https://mail.music.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sursound - unsubscribe here, edit 
account or options, view archives and so on.