Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

In article , Don Pearce
scribeth thus
tony sayer wrote:
I've been in some of the best studios in Detroit. One of them shared a
building with an auto body repair shop. Go figure.
LMFAO !

I know several recentish studios supervised by my 'mate' that have had whole
building EMC screens installed.

They really -necessary- these days?...

Can't think of any reason to do this other than being sited next door to
a megawatt AM transmitter. And then the right solution is to go
somewhere else.

d

Quite.. I was playing around the other day with a 5 watt Handportable in
a studio.. Not a murmur anywhere except for the phone on the desk and
this of course is at field strengths that perhaps it would take a meg
outside to produce;!..
--
Tony Sayer

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Eeyore" wrote in
message
Arny Krueger wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote
Eeyore wrote:
David Looser wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote

130 dB takes an aircraft carrier launching jets, etc.
It also causes real pain (not just discomfort) and
temporary damage to the hearing. If continued for any
length of time (minutes) the damage is permanent.

It caused me no pain at all. A sense of awe for sure,
and a skin rash. And no, I didn't continue it for long.

The idea of 130dB (peak) causing direct pain is IMHO
associated with the noise of the majority of kinds of
things that are most likely to create 130dB ! In
itself it doesn't hurt.

Interesting bit of research here - throws some bright
light on trumpet loudness too.

http://www.mne.psu.edu/psgdl/Pandya+Settles-JASA.pdf

"A fortissimo middle C and a mezzo-forte high G both
produce roughly a measured 100 dBA rms level at 1.23
m..."

Every time you double the number of trumpets, you add 3
dB.

2 trumpets - 103 dB
4 trumpets - 106 dB
8 trumpets - 109 dB

And that is at 4 feet. If you record 4 trumpets with
one mic, the mic might be 8 feet from the bells of the
horns, which knocks off an easy 3-6 dB.

Close-miking isn't your thing then ?

It depends. Close-micing would be one mic per trumpet. Normally, a section
composed of 4 trumpets would be miced with one mic, maybe 2.

Distant micing would put the mics a dozen or more feet away from the
trumpets.

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

In article ,
Arny Krueger wrote:
And that is at 4 feet. If you record 4 trumpets with
one mic, the mic might be 8 feet from the bells of the
horns, which knocks off an easy 3-6 dB.

Close-miking isn't your thing then ?

It depends. Close-micing would be one mic per trumpet. Normally, a
section composed of 4 trumpets would be miced with one mic, maybe 2.

Distant micing would put the mics a dozen or more feet away from the
trumpets.

Close miking rarely captures the real sound of the instrument. It may be
necessary for pragmatic reasons but that's all.

--
*Why is the third hand on the watch called a second hand?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"tony sayer"


I know several recentish studios supervised by my 'mate' that have had
whole
building EMC screens installed.

They really -necessary- these days?...


** When were the laws of physics repealed - Tony ?

GSM phones are the number one culprits for breaking into audio equipment of
all kinds. You can ban them from the studio itself, but how do you keep all
of them at a safe distance all of the time ?

Then there are VHF and UHF two way radios that travel around in commercial
and private vehicles - even the briefest injection of the signal from one
means having to redo something.

EMC screening is just as important as ever for a serious recording facility.



...... Phil

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Don Pearce = Charlatan "
tony sayer wrote:

I know several recentish studios supervised by my 'mate' that have had
whole
building EMC screens installed.

They really -necessary- these days?...


Can't think of any reason to do this other than being sited next door to a
megawatt AM transmitter.


** Wot a know nothing, moronic ******.




...... Phil

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

Eiron wrote:

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Eeyore" wrote

Many acoustic instruments can produce nearly 130dB close
up. Why do you think rock drummers go deaf first ?
Because of sustained loudness above 100 dB.
100dB average for a couple of hours a day, maybe a couple
of days a week does NOT make you go deaf.

Here are the OSHA standards, which many authorities say still permit ear
damage:

90 dbA for 8 hours,
95 dbA for 4 hours,
100 dbA for 2 hours,
105 dbA for 1 hour, or
115 dbA for 15 minutes.

The UK limits are 85dbA for 8 hours per day,
with the exposure time halved for each 3dB increase.
Still too much, in my opinion.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20051643.htm

Recall that the BRITISH limits are bases on IMPULSIVE sound like steel presses
and are therefore a tad more conservative.

There's VERY POOR correlation with music sources.

I wrtote to the then local large council venue about this around 30 yrs ago as
a result of which they did not install 'sound limiters'.

Graham

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

tony sayer wrote:

I've been in some of the best studios in Detroit. One of them shared a
building with an auto body repair shop. Go figure.

LMFAO !

I know several recentish studios supervised by my 'mate' that have had whole
building EMC screens installed.

They really -necessary- these days?...

On YES ! Especially near railway tracks (due to track signalling) ! I wonder if I
can find some sample files for you. I must have looked like Dr Who himself
wandering around the site with pickup coils, amplifiers and headphones and
nodding occasionally to my colleague.

Graham

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

Don Pearce wrote:

tony sayer wrote:
I've been in some of the best studios in Detroit. One of them shared a
building with an auto body repair shop. Go figure.
LMFAO !

I know several recentish studios supervised by my 'mate' that have had whole
building EMC screens installed.

They really -necessary- these days?...

Can't think of any reason to do this other than being sited next door to
a megawatt AM transmitter. And then the right solution is to go
somewhere else.

WRONG !

But then you're probably looking in the wrong frequency bands. AM's almost ****
all.

Graham

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
WTF no-one chose a sensible sampling frequency and a half sensible
bit depth is forever beyond me.

20 bit and 60 kHz would have done nicely.

It was designed around the semi-pro video recorders of the day.

Not at all. Both Ampex and 3M had reel-to-reel digital recorders
with higher sampling rates.

Which part of 'semi-pro' did you miss?

What has 'semi-pro' got to do with decent music production ?

The requirement was for a reasonably easily transportable machine - that
didn't need its own truck complete with air con. ;-)
And U-Matic satisfied that.

VERY briefly. Tried playing any of those tapes recently btw ?


Graham

Dirty Digital [sic.]
 

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

Eeyore wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
30-ish dB.

Good Lord ! You're WAY off the mark. 30dB is NOISY to me. I'm talking
about proper commercial high-end music recording facilities that have
cost MILLIONS to build.

You need to visit some top London studios I know. The silence is
deafening.

With the ventilation running?

Yes. They learnt how to fix that easily 30 years ago.

********. With respect. ;-)

I have copies of Studio Sound from the era.

Ever heard of Sandy Brown ?

Graham