PLEASE NOTE MY NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS / PRIÈRE DE NOTER MA NOUVELLE ADRESSE ÉLECTRONIQUE
Thanks a lot for all the responses so far (and there've been more that came just to me). I'm encouraged by this, as there are clearly a few people who've found that their informants weren't as bothered by head-set mics as one might have thought they would be.
To cope with the fact that some people _might_ be bothered by head-set mics, another thing that Bartek Plichta recommends (if you have the money, of course!) is to buy two of a good mic that is available in both head-set and lavalier configurations. Then you can use the head-set version if your informant is happy with it, or the lavalier if they're not. One example is the AudioTechnica BP892 / 896, where the 892 is an 'ear-set' mic and the 896 is a lavalier, both based on the same apparently excellent mic:
http://bartus.org/akustyk/BP892/index.php
and another one, by now, might be the Sanken COS-11D:
http://bartus.org/akustyk/COS11D/index.php
(at the time of Bartek's review, this mic was available only as a head-set, but they promised that it would be available by now as a lavalier as well; I haven't checked yet whether it actually is).
Another solution to the problem might be what Vineeta Chand suggested, fixing a lavalier mic more-or-less parallel to the ground (though she cautioned that she wouldn't trust her data in the particularly low-frequency range, not (only) because of this configuration but because of general background noise, which is everyone's problem!). This solution would get away from the problem of (excessive) damping by clothes, which is presumably part of the deal with many lavalier mics, as a frequent configuration for them is perpendicular to the ground. I suppose it depends on the brand of mic and the type of tie-clip you have.
But this leads to my other question: I was originally concerned about low-frequency emphasis by cardioid mics, which I wanted to avoid. A few people said that they had successfully used omnidirectional lavalier mics. But don't omnidirectional lavalier mics become effectively cardioid if one side of them is damped by clothing that they're fixed close to? Of course, reception patterns are to do with the construction of the mic too - probably mostly that - but can anyone say how its reception is affected by what it's placed close to? I'm not a sound technician or a physicist, so my expertise runs out before we get to this stage. I'm not talking about improving the signal by placing the mic closer to the subject's mouth - I know about that - but about what difference it makes if the mic is fixed against clothing (as they often are) or horizontally, comparatively far from the clothing it's clipped to.
Please keep responses coming about this and also about my first question (socio / dialectological experiences with headset mics, and recommendations if you have them)!
Damien
--
Damien Hall
University of Kent (UK / Royaume-Uni)
Leverhulme Early Career Fellow, 'Towards a New Linguistic Atlas of France'
Projet de recherche: 'Vers un Nouvel Atlas Linguistique de la France'
English Language and Linguistics, School of European Culture and Languages
Section de Langue et Linguistique Anglaises, Faculté de la Culture et des Langues Européennes
########################################################################
The Variationist List - discussion of everything related to variationist sociolinguistics.
To send messages to the VAR-L list (subscribers only), write to:
[log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe from the VAR-L list, click the following link:
http://jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=VAR-L&A=1
|
