Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6  (Read 1748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« on: January 27, 2020, 10:45:31 PM »
a few tracks from UM 2020-01-25, we were FOBish (~9ft stand) on the rail halfway back on the floor

sax rig: MMC 4011> MMP-C  bodies > Sax SX-M2D2 > lightning to metarecorder at 24/48 >audacity (vol. adjustment)> .flac
zoom rig: MMC 4011> MMP-C  bodies > Zoom F6 @ 32/96 > soundforge (vol adjustment, resample, bit depth converter) > .flac

also i swapped the channels on one of the set of files as we were slightly off center and you can hear that the imaging was opposite


foobar ABX plugin is in the .rar (file>preferences>components>install>reboot.... load files in playlist>select the 2 to compare > right click > utilities >ABX compare)

they are distinctly different i picked 8 out of 8 on each trial. but which sound do you prefer, and why?

EDIT:updated link

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RpIVLb2QKeZf-0ghQJkei3iSm_d7qHJK/view?usp=sharing
« Last Edit: January 28, 2020, 03:13:50 PM by jerryfreak »
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline dactylus

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (54)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5368
  • Gender: Male
  • Saint Paul, MN
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2020, 04:32:27 AM »
Google forced me to "log in" and now hit me up with this via e-mail:

Access was denied and the e-mail from Google says:  "is that not downloadable on your end?"

« Last Edit: January 28, 2020, 04:36:43 AM by dactylus »
hot licks > microphones > recorder



...ball of confusion, that's what the world is today, hey hey...

Offline dactylus

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (54)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5368
  • Gender: Male
  • Saint Paul, MN
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2020, 04:36:08 AM »
From Google help:

Can’t open a Google file or folder

If a file won’t open, a few things could be wrong:

The file owner didn’t give you permission to view the file.
You're signed in to a different Google Account.
Your access could be denied because someone removed your permission to view the file.

Get permission to open a file
Open the file.
On the "You need permission" page, click Request access.
The owner of the file will get an email asking for approval. After they approve your request, you'll get an email.

If you need access right away
Contact the owner of the file and ask them to give you access.
hot licks > microphones > recorder



...ball of confusion, that's what the world is today, hey hey...

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2020, 01:05:49 PM »
Google forced me to "log in" and now hit me up with this via e-mail:

Access was denied and the e-mail from Google says:  "is that not downloadable on your end?"
That email was from me actually I uploaded it in the airport and it was goofy I was able to download it myself as a test (under my permissions), i might need to go back and redo
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline dactylus

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (54)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5368
  • Gender: Male
  • Saint Paul, MN
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2020, 01:52:32 PM »
^
Thanks!
hot licks > microphones > recorder



...ball of confusion, that's what the world is today, hey hey...

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2020, 03:00:01 PM »
try now guys
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline heathen

  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2945
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2020, 04:57:29 PM »
Looks like a solid comp...I'll give this a shot tonight.  Thanks for doing this!
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: AT4050ST | AT4031 | AT853 (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3 | Sennheiser e614 | Sennheiser MKE2 | DPA 4061 | CA-14 omni Pres: CA9200 | DPA d:vice Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2020, 05:00:18 PM »
Looks like a solid comp...I'll give this a shot tonight.  Thanks for doing this!

it was sheer blind luck that we both were running 4011Cs into separate, relatively new pieces of gear, so we took advantage

i also ran 4011ER into the zoom, in a slightly tighter pattern

old and in the way has a shot of the mics , the two sets of 4011Cs were in an almost identical PAS config
« Last Edit: January 28, 2020, 05:28:51 PM by jerryfreak »
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline heathen

  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2945
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2020, 10:56:47 PM »
What's the deal with the two pairs of files (the educated guess files and the 2x2 files)?  I want to make sure I don't prematurely listen to something that might skew my results because I want to do this as blind as possible.
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: AT4050ST | AT4031 | AT853 (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3 | Sennheiser e614 | Sennheiser MKE2 | DPA 4061 | CA-14 omni Pres: CA9200 | DPA d:vice Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2020, 10:59:21 PM »
What's the deal with the two pairs of files (the educated guess files and the 2x2 files)?  I want to make sure I don't prematurely listen to something that might skew my results because I want to do this as blind as possible.

theres two sources for each song (and those are umphrey's song titles in case you weren't aware)

A and B sources may be the same between the two songs... or they may be different....
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline heathen

  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2945
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2020, 11:05:09 PM »
What's the deal with the two pairs of files (the educated guess files and the 2x2 files)?  I want to make sure I don't prematurely listen to something that might skew my results because I want to do this as blind as possible.

theres two sources for each song (and those are umphrey's song titles in case you weren't aware)

A and B sources may be the same between the two songs... or they may be different....

I'm an idiot.  Sorry!
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: AT4050ST | AT4031 | AT853 (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3 | Sennheiser e614 | Sennheiser MKE2 | DPA 4061 | CA-14 omni Pres: CA9200 | DPA d:vice Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05

Offline heathen

  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2945
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2020, 11:40:52 PM »
I'm going to PM you my thoughts so as to not influence anyone who hasn't had a chance to listen yet. 
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: AT4050ST | AT4031 | AT853 (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3 | Sennheiser e614 | Sennheiser MKE2 | DPA 4061 | CA-14 omni Pres: CA9200 | DPA d:vice Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05

Online aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2886
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2020, 12:03:06 PM »
First, thanks for taking the time and trouble to post this comp!
 
Second, I have some major caveats to note: I listened on my work computer, with a crappy sound card, using inexpensive in-ear headphones, and I only listened to 2 x 2. That being said, I was 16 for 16 using ABX comparator. After listening, I looked at the amplitude statistics and noted that sample A was ~ 1 dB average RMS louder than sample B (for Educated Guess, sample A was ~ 0.7 dB average RMS quieter). So I preferred A (for 2 x 2), which had better vocal clarity and high end definition, but that may have been affected by the volume difference. Also, my playback is kind of light in the bass range, so I would have had trouble hearing differences in that range.

Long and short: I would like to equalize the volume and listen on my nice cans, DAC and headphone amp and see if that changes my initial impression...



Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2020, 12:46:39 PM »
The peaks were similar on both one just has very different dynamics than the other. I can normalize them to the same RMS.
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #14 on: January 29, 2020, 02:26:53 PM »
Thanks for putting this up.  Will give a listen and post my impressions once I get a chance.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2020, 07:02:41 PM »
here is a reup with all tracks normalized to 18.00 dB RMS

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Dkvmohp99O8D8M71PJMw417Q3uoWszBS/view?usp=sharing
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Offline voltronic

  • Trade Count: (34)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3104
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2020, 07:07:16 PM »
Thanks for posting.  I will listen later on through my good DAC and cans...
DPA 4061 | Line Audio CM3 | Naiant X-Q | AT 853  //  Naiant PFAs | Shure FP24  //  Zoom F6 | Sony PCM-M10
MOTU M2 | KRK Rokit RP5 | Sennheiser HD 650

Team Line Audio

Online aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2886
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #17 on: February 02, 2020, 02:47:59 PM »
Out of curiosity, when will the "great reveal" take place? 

Offline jerryfreak

  • Trade Count: (30)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4207
  • high desert for life
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2020, 02:59:01 PM »
i guess now is as good a time as any.

Educated Guess A (/C) = sax
Educated Guess B (/D) = zoom

2x2 A (/C) = zoom
2x2 B (/D) = sax

there is some debate as to whether i used pop/wind screens on the zoom recording, which might be partially responsible for the HF difference

i thought I did, OAITW says i didnt. he has the only photo and i think he might be thinking of my 4011ER setup which was also clamped on his stand (which is my SRS kangol mount which has a relatively wide clip (axially) on a small active/capsule setup, and doesnt leave much room for screens to stay on.)
« Last Edit: February 02, 2020, 06:35:53 PM by jerryfreak »
my facemask is a windscreen

People whose posts I wont see:
capnhook, daspyknows, Melanie, morst, Rob D., Scooter123, Sloan Simpson, Walstib62

Online aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2886
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #19 on: February 04, 2020, 10:52:18 AM »
^ Thanks! The differences weren't so stark after the volume leveling, but I could still distinguish them pretty well. I need to listen on my nice 'phones [EDIT: and speakers] to see which (if either) I prefer.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2020, 10:57:48 AM by aaronji »

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #20 on: February 07, 2020, 12:27:05 PM »
I'd stayed away from the thread until this morning after finally getting around to having a good listen last night. I don't currently have internet/computer or the stereo setup at home, so I transferred to SD and listened via R-44>Senn HD650.  Honestly I was somewhat surprised to find such clear and significant differences.  Although I did no formal ABX, I found it easily to constantly identify one vs the other, with a substantial personal preference for "Educated Guess" sample C and  "2x2" sample D.

Similar to the SoundDevices/Sonosax comp of a few years back, I hear far greater 3-dimensionality and source differentiation in the Sax samples, aspects I'm most interested in with regards to these kinds of comps.  I hear the timbral differences as well, but IME that can be altered relatively easily afterwards whereas the previous mentioned aspects cannot.  If I had my editing setup working I might try and see how close I could get the Zoom samples to sound like the Sax samples, which is a technique I find particularly useful for more precisely identifying the differences and determining how relevant they may be "in the bigger picture", inclusive of post-recording workflow.


Upon making that judgement, the following thoughts came to mind:

First, that I'm somewhat curious to hear a F6/SD comp, as both similarly lacked the sense of openness, depth, dimension and source differentiation I hear from the Sax.  In direct comparison would they sound similar or different in that way.. along with any other differences.

Second, I started thinking about the Zoom F8 I currently use.  It is presumable that the F6 sounds similar to F8, yet I hear attributes that are similar to the Sax aspects in my recordings using the F8.  In fact, some of the aspects I value most about my own recordings are these.  I recognize that this is an important attribute and intended goal of my oddball microphone setups (in the case of the F8, I'm using all 8 available microphone channels for specifically designed microphone arrays, of which at least 6 are active while listening back directly in stereo or in making a 2ch mix).  When I do that and solo various 2ch pairs I typically think "OK good.. yet definitely lacking in those aspects in comparison to a combination with the other channels of the array".  This makes be wonder if I may be in effect using these multiple microphone arrays partly as work arounds for the insufficient presence of this aspect in the signal chain I'm using? What would happen if I recorded using my array and an all Sax signal path?  Would it be that much better still?  Perhaps too much overcompensation?

Interesting to think about, even if 8 channels of Sax is beyond my reach.  Up to this point I've thought of OMT multi-microphone arrays as a way of achieving a somewhat more-complete translation of the complex acoustic soundfield at recording position.  While that remains true, and provides other valuable options not-directly related, I now realize I may also have been unknowingly compensating for a lack of certain aspects in my signal chains in addition to arranging multidimensional pickup of a complex acoustic.

As the years roll on I increasingly realize:
That we all don't value the same illusions equally.
That there are multiple roads toward the creation of a deeper illusion.
How complicated, multi-dimensional and inter-related all of these disparate aspects are with each other. 

Thanks for the comp, especially as the seed sparking awareness and contemplation of these things for me.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13796
  • Gender: Male
  • Gunther Theile nailed it!
Re: comp: Sonosax SX-M2D2 vs Zoom F6
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2020, 11:09:12 AM »
Continuing that idea..

I hear greater 3-dimensionality and source differentiation, aspects I'm most interested in with regards to these kinds of comps.  I hear the timbral differences as well, but IME that can be altered relatively easily afterwards whereas the previous mentioned aspects cannot. 

This makes be wonder if I may be in effect using these multiple microphone arrays partly as work arounds for the insufficient presence of this aspect in the signal chain I'm using?

I've mostly thought of the OMT multi-microphone arrays as a way of achieving a somewhat more-complete translation of the complex acoustic soundfield at recording position.  While that remains true, and provides other valuable options not-directly related, I now realize I may also have been unknowingly compensating for a lack of certain aspects in my signal chains in addition to arranging multidimensional pickup of a complex acoustic.

^ ..or rather, aware of such compensation when making decisions about them at one time, if now something I'm starting to recall in depth once again.  Thinking back, I realize the attributes mentioned above are very similar to the ones I identified in a series of critical listening tests I made about 6 years ago as part of a decision process informing the re-working my rig, with the intent of shifting from what I still consider my personal reference directional microphone pairs - Microtech Gefell M21 supercards & M94 cardioids - to 4 or 5 miniature DPA 4098 supercardioids - with support from a pair of wide omnis either way. 

Comparing straight 2-ch stereo pair recordings of MG M21 and DPA 4098 and ignoring or compensating for frequency response differences, primarily in low-frequency extension (primarily the Gefells being flatter with a more extended bass response, although the presence of omnis in the array makes that inconsequential), I much preferred the MG M21 for the same reasons as mentioned above - a significantly increased sense of depth, 3-dimensionality, source differentiation, and a sort of smooth and refined overall cohesion.  All aspects that tend to be associated with top-quality microphones.  However, when used as I intended in the multichannel arrays those differences were no longer remained as significant, so much so that I had difficulty telling them apart after making the response compensations.  As such I held no reservations about making the switch.  The motivation for it was practicality - the MG's being significantly larger, heavier, more vulnerable, more valuable, and would not allow me to further extend and explore the multichannel array ideas I had in mind.

Because I was achieving the same aspects in my recordings as a product of the multichannel array configuration rather than via the attributes of a higher-quality single-pair, and because from that point I continued making recordings primarily in that way, I sort of put those straight 2-channel comparison differences out of mind.. or rather, mentally filed that information separately from what was currently relevant and foremost in mind.

I'm now more clearly realizing that those particular attributes represent something of a common arc throughout my own pursuit of making the kind of live music recordings I want to hear.  And that there is more than one way to get there, with each approach that is capable of doing so having different tangential strengths and weaknesses.

Apologies for a somewhat OT drift, although I consider all this sort of the underlying meta-topic relating to identifying what the differences we hear are and what value those differences represent.


Edit- Went back to find some of what I posted about this back then..
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=96009.msg2093969#msg2093969


« Last Edit: February 11, 2020, 11:33:44 AM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.074 seconds with 63 queries.
© 2002-2020 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF