Try recording some pink noise, you might be able to detect if there's any filtering being applied between the A/D and the recording.
Or is it the A/D converter that is not on par with the raw image quality on this camera?
|
Try recording some pink noise, you might be able to detect if there's any filtering being applied between the A/D and the recording.
Or is it the A/D converter that is not on par with the raw image quality on this camera?
Ok, I got the Beta firmware, and it sounds like they have improved the audio quality. Here is a quick test I did with the base firmware, then installed the update and repeated.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/88w4jkc3oo...dio%20test.wav
I am using my Riggy in both tests. It is my Sony Shotgun mic about 2 inches from my mouth. It sound much fuller, and less thin. Obviously needs EQ (not the best mic) but at least you can EQ this.. the other tests were nearly impossible to recover usable audio from. I still think that there is more work that needs to be done.. but this first step is a good one.
Thanks so much for doing this test, Mike. The sound is quite different in those two samples, and I prefer the 2nd one, too. I'll leave it to the audio geniuses to analyze them further. Cheers!
I have a Zoom H4n for my DSLR kit, could that be used as a mixer and pre amp? You plug the microphone into the xlr, then from the headphone jack it says line out as option.
So what you are looking at here is are Linear and Log screenshots from a Frequency Analysis for the first part of the word 'two' that Mr Beck says in the WAV file for each of the firmware tests.
Typically audio engineers say 'two' a lot when testing sound as it sort of hits most of the spectral range....I just picked the first half as this has more higher frequencies than the second half and thought it would demo the difference more.
Linear 1.0
Linear 1.0.jpg
Linear 1.1
Linear 1.1.jpg
Log 1.0
Log 1.0.jpg
Log 1.1
Log 1.1.jpg
Last edited by AndrewDeme; 10-17-2012 at 04:51 AM.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread » |