Taperssection.com

Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: Rick on August 18, 2005, 07:59:32 PM

Title: 722 Low Cut Compare
Post by: Rick on August 18, 2005, 07:59:32 PM

If your interested I tried out the Low Cut option on the 722

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=17395

Source : DPA 4022 > Sound Devices 722

01: Low Cut 40 Hz, 12 db/oct
02: Normal
03: Low Cut 40 Hz, 12 db/oct
03: Normal

Size: 11MB

I should have tried 80 Hz too, but oh well :)

Comments would be cool.

Title: Re: 722 Low Cut Compare
Post by: fozzy on August 18, 2005, 08:03:58 PM

When i get around to it I'll have another source MBHO > 722 of the same show.  no lowcut

Title: Re: 722 Low Cut Compare
Post by: dklein on August 21, 2005, 11:28:03 AM

In both cases I think the low cut was welcome.  On sample 02, it definitely helped cut what sounded like wind rumble.  On both tracks it removed the 'pressure' feeling that I get on my playback system from the low end (which incidentally bugs me about almost every live recording I download).  I think many people don't ever hear the true low end in live recordings (we're talking almost subsonic) and consequently don't see the need for low cut / hpf filters.

Definitely try the 80 Hz next time - while the 40 improved things it still wasn't enough for me.  fwiw, in a full band/p.a. recording environment I usually run the 12dB/oct 75Hz HPF on my V2/KM184 combo.

Title: Re: 722 Low Cut Compare
Post by: Nick Graham on August 22, 2005, 06:30:04 PM

Quote from: dklein on August 21, 2005, 11:28:03 AM

I think many people don't ever hear the true low end in live recordings (we're talking almost subsonic) and consequently don't see the need for low cut / hpf filters.

Paging Nate Fisher....Asian Yum Yum you have a call waiting...

 :P

Title: Re: 722 Low Cut Compare
Post by: dklein on August 22, 2005, 08:31:20 PM

ok, I haven't watched the last two episodes yet.  Will that make sense to me afterwards 'cause it sure doesn't now!