全指向
全指向也不是 360° 無死角，看了下 mkh 8020 的圖，頻率越高，有效範圍就越集中於前方，中低頻大體上是一箇圓，高頻就有點像心型了。
Omni mics are often used for picking up ambient sounds, as well as miking a large sound source such as a choir in a recording situation.
全指向多用來拾取環境聲、大型室內器樂合奏。當然也有適用範圍：
全指向主要用在 AB 制式、Decca Tree 这种时间差立体声制式，MS 也可以用全指向做 M 话筒。像 XY 这种强度差制式很少用全指向。ORTF、Din 这种特定的制式也不会用到全指向。单点话筒由于串音问题更是不会用到全指向。
X/Y制式所使用的两支传声器的主轴之间通常要求保持90度到100度的夹角，传声器可采用心形和锐心形指向图形，也可以使用8字形指向图形。但对于不同指向性图形，传声器主轴的夹角不尽相同，下面是一些可供参考的经验数据：心形指向性，一般采用100度，也有采用200度到270度的；锐心形指向性，一般采用100度，也有采用130度到140度的；8字形指向性，夹角必须是准确的90度。这是因为8字形指向性传声器前（0度）、后（180度）拾取的信号是反向的，如果一对8字形传声器主轴不是准确的90度，则在某些方向上将产生相位抵消现象。
無法用於 XY、ORTF。
麥克風
這裏 有各種麥克風型號。
全指向麥克風
Sennheiser mkh
Sennheiser 的 mkh 80 系列，8020 全指向，8040 心型，8050 超心型，8090 寬心型。8060 是槍形超心型。它們之間的比較：
However this MKH8090 is a a little magic: it’s still a cardioid mic but because of its omni characteristics its less sensitive to the wind and handling noise. I use it in the OTRF Rycote basket and comparing to my MKH8040 it has same natural and silky sound but even with smoother central image (speaking film sound). I would recommend it for anyone aiming to record quite and not only background, sfx and foleys instead of MKH 8040. It has the same noise floor and frequency response. ⤴
Ambience recordings from the 8040 often tend to sound more like dual-channel recordings that lack of a well-defined mid signal. ⤴
可能因爲是寬心型，中心聲場定位比 8040 明顯一些。
The 8020 often just sound “big” which is impressive on the first listening but often don’t give me what I need. They deliver a huge cloud of the sounds that are surrounding me but, all in all, the image isn’t well defined. Also, the low end of the MKH 8020 is sometimes very hard to control. Of course, I could apply the Sound Devices’ low cut filters but this doesn’t really affect the pick-up pattern which stays more or less omni-directional. ⤴
而 8020 提供了很宏大的聲場，但聲音不能被很好地定位。而且低頻難以控制。但是這一系列的素質都非常好：
their resistance against humidity and coldness, as well as their high output level. I can achieve nearly noise-free recordings even with the Sound Devices pre-amp cranked to 61.7 dB. I tested other mics under this circumstances and they failed on many points.
不怕潮溼寒冷，底噪非常低。我看官方數據，A level 只有 10 dB。而 DPA 2006 是 16，4006 是 15。
DPA 2006
I have a pair of DPA 2006 C, these are really excellent microphones, and their performance is really not far from the 4006 . Compared to the 4006, the sound of the 2006 is very similar, and certainly doesn’t sound like a cheap microphone . The 4006 has a slightly better transient response and a slightly more open stereo reproduction, but these differences are really not big . The only real weakness of the 2006 is the reproduction of very low frequencies (below 50 Hz), these are slightly lacking compared to other omni microphones like the 4006, the KM183 or even the Line Audio OM1 (very cheap, but really excellent microphone !) .
The 2006 is a true omni microphone, the use of 2 capsules has nothing to do with the directivity, it’s a technique to improve the S/N ratio of the microphone . It took a very long time for me to choose between the KM183 and the 2006 . I finally opted for the DPA, because its frequency response is a very good compromise that allows them to be used in free field and also at a greater distance from the source . In fact, a very versatile omni microphone !
說 2006 底噪大：
Be warned if you’re looking to make field recordings in very quiet surroundings, like wilderness areas, mountain, moorland etc. DPA claim an A-weighted self-noise of 16dB, but also note a maximum level of 18dBA. I found it intrusive recently when recording in the Scottish Highlands, to the point that I only used the recordings made with an AT BP4025 single-point stereo mic taken along as backup.
If you can afford the Sennheisers, why not go for them instead? I would have done so if I’d had the money, not getting them was maybe a false economy. Otherwise the Neumann KM183 might be worth considering. It’s just under 11cm long, which is fairly compact. ⤴
The DPA 2006C mics I’d been using proved too noisy, even at 16dBA, for very quiet environments such as moorland, marshland, and the insides of buildings when not a lot’s going on.
有誇 2006 的。但最大的問題是如果要在非常安靜的情況下錄環境聲，底噪會很明顯，比 BP4025 大。還有說有這箇錢爲何不買森海⋯⋯
The question remains as to whether it’s worth spending all that money just to save 6dB of noise over the DPA 2006Cs, which are otherwise very good mics. Perhaps the overall gain should be set lower to begin with and then the mic noise won’t be noticeable.
它們的差距或許就在這 6dB 的底噪上。這篇 很値得推薦。
I mean, wisely invested a pile of money in a pair of Sennheiser MKH 8020 mics. They’re low-noise (10dBA), high-quality mics and at just three inches long are ideal for headworn use as well placing on each side of a homemade acoustic baffle like the Block. ⤴
has a very honest, neutral sound
The best omni’s I have found are the Sennheiser MKH8020, and the Josephson C617 SET. The popular DPA, Schoeps, and Neumann microphones all seem to have an unnatural sheen to which I am particularly sensitive. ⤴
相比之下，簡直對 8020 各種誇。但也有說問題的：
I really dislike the 8020. I have a pair and they are used probably only a couple times per year. They are dark and murky and bordering on muddy in a lot of situations. I purchased them expecting something closer to the 20 or 80/800. Unfortunately, they aren’t even close. ⤴
The 8020 goes right down to 10Hz, which is why some people may think it’s “dark”, so be careful with rumble; but it should pick up all the lower register of the piano beautifully.
8020 太「黑暗」了，因爲高頻頻響弱一些。但又有人反駁：
It is a fantastic mic and not a dark sound as some have claimed (they must have been comparing it to a bright Chinese mic).
之所以㬎𠭁黑暗，是因爲跟那些太亮的中國麥克風相比。
DPA 4060
這一系列是專門用於樂器拾音的微型全指向樂器麥克風。看官方數據，A 底噪達到驚人的 23dB，看來太小也是有弊端的。
奇技淫巧：
@Michèle Peron Amazing soundscape at the „Oktoberfest „ in Munich. Recording with two DPAs 4060 tied up on my shoulders, excellent setup for standing in beer tents full of singing& drinking people
鐵三角 AT4022
AT4022 似乎也不錯：
but if small mic size is not important to you, then consider the less expensive Audio Technica AT4022 omni mic. Vicki Powys has tested these, I think, and rates them.
This microphone is truly wonderful, and -by far- the most transparent omni microphone in it’s price-point. Let me begin by saying this: I’m a classical recording engineer whose projects often include “industry standard” microphones. I’ve been blessed with the opportunity to use some very sought-after mics, by names like DPA, Schoeps, Earthworks, Neumann, AKG, etc. My projects are almost always tracked @24bit/96khz, and my signal chain is as pristine as it can be with the money that I am able to spend on it. Needless to say, my main concern is transparency.This microphone is as transparent as it’s gonna get… In fact, I would wager to say that it holds it’s own against the “major names” of the industry. Is it a DPA 4006? No. But at 1/6 the price, you can’t expect it to be. The AT4022 is a fantastic microphone, especially for those who are looking to record classical music. Get a pair of these, a nice preamp, good A/D converters, and you’re setup for success. Your recording will sound very (and I mean very) close to the original source. Try as you might, you won’t find another microphone with this low of a noise floor, and this accurate of a response, at this low of a price. ⤴
看起來很誘人！！在 這 看到底噪是 13dB。
I think you will be quite surprised at just how good those omnis are. good luck. ⤴
推特上：
——how do the AT4022 stack up against the MKH8020s?
——I’d say they are very similar in terms of sound quality / self-noise in real world field recording conditions. The MKH are smaller and have been built to handle humidity better (but I found a trick to alleviate humidity problems with the AT mics too).
還有：
@Magnus Bergsson AT4022 is a great mic for silence nature recordings. But MKH20 have much better musical sound quality, especially at low freq
沒有近講效應：
There are many positive reviews of the at4021, check out Mike Jasper’s article in Tape Op 2009. Most of the positive comments also apply to the at4022 (the omni version of the at4021). I record acoustic music only, and I need to record the natural sound, as clear and detailed as possible. For my purposes the at4022 is my go-to mic for an sd omni. In addition to recording soloists or pairs, I sometimes record larger groups, and here again, the at4022 excels. One reason I like this mic so much, is that I have had excellent results close micing instruments (avoiding proximity effect), but equally good results when positioned well back. ⤴
ORTF 麥克風
現在組合好的 ORTF 麥克風，似乎只有 Schoeps MSTC 64U 和舒伯樂 superlux s502。
神奇的是 Superlux S502 几乎就是 MSTC 64U 的翻版……据说以前是 Schoeps 的代工，然鹅价格相差巨大……是因为专利垄断还是别的什么原因？
Superlux S502 在研发的时候给我发过样音，听起来好像确实很难分辨 ⤴
I tested it. Much better sound that I what I was expecting. I did not perform any direct comparison but I think that it is better than the usual 300€/$-a-pair candidates like Oktava MK-012 and Rode NT5 when used in the same ORTF configuration.
No one felt Superlux is better compared with Schoeps in my experience. Most people don’t feel obvious difference when testing under ordinary environment. Difference become apparent when background noise is very low.
When they know the price, everyone was shock. Either this one is too low, or the other one is too high. ⤴
似乎聲音差別並不大，最大的不同是舒伯樂的底噪大一些。然而它們價格差了十多倍。
I was randomly reading a forum post at gearslutz.com and I came across a thread about the Superlux S502. People were raving about it and they posted some sound examples. It’s pretty damn amazing for the price! I’ve used this mic for many of the videos on the site. I’ve miked grand pianos, upright pianos, drums, percussion and more with this cheapie and the results are spectacular! Now, I’m not going to say that this mic would win the A/B comparison against the Schoeps which costs over 20 times as much… What I am saying though, is that for the price, I haven’t heard anything sound this good…even at twice the price! ⤴
大小振膜的區別
和直观想象不同的一点是，振膜面积并不显著影响麦克风的灵敏度。现在手机里的硅麦克风振膜直径不到 1mm，灵敏度和传统电容麦克风相当。
如 @汤伟彬 所说，大振膜底噪低，小振膜高频响应好是最主要的区别，当然小到一定程度，空气腔体的赫姆霍兹谐振成为限制高频带宽的瓶颈。除此以外，小振膜一般对机械噪声的抑制比较好，比如笔记本的硬盘噪声、键盘噪声等等。
至于瞬态响应，麦克风和扬声器存在根本性的不同，麦克风完全工作在弹性控制区，声压对于麦克风可以认为是准静态的，因此在工作区间内瞬态响应几乎不成为问题。并不能想当然的把扬声器瞬态特性的规律套到麦克风上——网上很多貌似很有道理的文章都是这样。
另外麦克风并不担任修饰音效的角色，这一点也是跟扬声器、受话器不同的。在足够好的测试环境下，麦克风的频响在工作频段内是相当平直的——这同样是因为麦克风工作在弹性控制区——所以麦克风的作用仅仅是忠实的记录声音，麦克风对声信号的变更那不叫“修饰”，而是叫线性失真。而不同品牌、规格的扬声器/受话器总是有各自不同的频响特性，形成不同的听感。当然扬声器/受话器也能尽可能将频响做平直，叫做监听音箱/监听耳机。
其他
新聞聯播用的是 Schoeps CCM 4 系列，有可能是 CCM 4 UG。
C214 是一款很经典的话筒，但是很可惜我没有用过（只用过 C414，这个很赞），具体可以看看官网的话筒参数和一些评价；RODE 的话筒，我自己用过 NT1A（录人声的大振膜电容话筒）和 M3（小振膜电容话筒），以及 NT4（XY 立体声制式话筒），可能 rode 还有更好的产品但个人感觉都很普通，所以我认为如果你经费足够的话，选择 C214 比较合适。
森海 8060：
I couldn’t be happier with it. It’s really light, small and it sounds big. It sounds like a more refine version MKH416. Small footprint was a key factor for me - I needed something small to go with my more portable M/S setup - and it did work out nicely. It’s quite crisp in the higher mids (kinda like MKH416 but less harsh) ⤴
反正很好就是了。
The first rule of CONTACT MIC club 〔有關接觸式麥克風的〕
制式
10 Microphone Placement Techniques for Acoustic Guitar 這裏介紹了 10 種錄音制式。
這人在 ORTF 中間加了一個全指向：
I’m sure this has been done before, but I just did a quick test with an ORTF rig plus an omni mic centered between them and was very happy with the results. ⋯⋯I used a pair of line audio CM3s for the ORTF setup, and a Schoeps CMC6 MK2 omni for the center. ⋯⋯What I found was that the addition of the omni tended to push the image a little more center, and it added tons of information in the middle that now feels missing with a straight ortf setup. It also (of course) greatly contributed to the low end. ⤴
對於錄樂隊，有人用兩個全指向組成 ORTF：
What you are really getting is a closely spaced ab pair with perhaps a touch more separation in the high frequencies. Which can sound good if done right. You are getting a nice sound with a very narrow sound field as if recorded at a distance. I suppose that found be useful for some types of ensembles or instruments. Though for orchestra a bit more separation would be my preference. It is not something I would really think of trying. The narrowest I have used ab spacing is about 30cm ⤴
人頭錄音
3Dio 應該是最著名的，裏面塞的是一對 DPA 4060。
The Free Space Pro II comes with two matched, integrated DPA 4060 capsules mounted at the opening of the ear canal.
Pro-quality DIY lightweight stereo rigs、DIY stereo microphone housings 外國人眞會玩。兩支全指向，分別平行和有一定角度（卽 AB 和 ORTF）：
There is a very slight but discernable difference, with the angled sound being more spacious when listening through headphones.
看來可以自己做一箇。
SASS：這箇 網葉 是官網。雖然已經歇菜了。
Iso-binaural Environmental Stereo, a DIY soundscape microphone array 更方便！彷彿打開新世界大門！
IRT Cross
這種制式是 Günther Theile 發明的，‘a former chairman of the“Institut für Rundfunktechnik”in Munich’.
Schoeps 官網 和 DPA 官網 上有詳細介紹。這種土豪設備不是我們玩得起的，也不是一般人聽得起的，還是不要想了。
錄音機
底噪
這箇網葉是錄音機 底噪、動態範圍一覽。我們的 Sound Devices 的底噪是最低的，只有 -130dBu，確實令人驚嘆。而頂級錄音筆索尼大法 D100 則是 -127dBu，也很不錯了。另外很火的 Zoom H5，-121dBu，差距有點大了。
這箇 視頻：Mixpre3 底噪：-82.1，h5：-68.7。這箇 視頻：Mixpre 就算把增益調到正常的 50db 以下，放大之後還是沒有底噪。大韋 提到 mixpre 底噪很低很低，比其他牌子都低。
I never tested this on the Zoom F8. But I bet you the F8 and MixPre-3 will be very close. Both devices have very good audio quality. To be honest, it matters much more which mics you use and how you place them. In practice it will be impossible to tell the sound of a MixPre-3 or an F8 appart. In my opinion, things like usability, form factor and features are the deciding factors between these two devices.
看來 Mixpre3 和 zoom f8 底噪近似，最主要的是人機工程。不得不說，mixpre 用起來非常舒服。
Sound Devices
音頻應用上：
SD 是典型美国设备，注重实用和性能，不象日系那样抠门和人机工程混乱，因此 SD 在野外录音圈子里是第一位的，缺点就是贵，甚至 overprice 了。
新的mixpre等于买调音台/话放送录音功能，-3阉割了一些有用的功能，就国内差价来说还是-6划算一些。虽然-3已经能满足绝大部分的需求了，三路而不是两录录音能解决90%录音
之前听说过 SD 的 6 系列录音机，有什么 664、688、633。据说国内的高成本电视剧有超过 90% 都是 664。但都太贵，都 3、5 万的样子。SD 突然出了个接地气儿的 MixPre3，价格一下便宜这么多，没敢轻易出手。
Mixpre II 最近上市了，一箇亮點是 32bit，其實上半年 Zoom 新品也出了 32 bit，不知道他們是不是被 Zoom 刺激了。
From what I have been able to gather, none of these machines actually use 32-bit floating point converters. They use several 24-bit integer converters at different gain levels and then the data is combined and converted to 32-bit float. So I guess it will depend on the implementation to some extent. Sound Devices patented their method, I think, so it will likely be different in other brand’s recorders. ⤴
似乎是「假」32bit，是用的數箇 24bit 音軌整合成一箇 32bit 的，所以不會爆音。
其他
有哪些値得推荐的录音笔？姜翛嶰 zoom h4n, TASCAM dr100,ROLAND R26 都是我推荐给在校学生完成学生同期声录音作业的录音机，许多同期声录音师也都会拿他们在现场采集一些环境声，价格爷在 2k 左右，非常实用了。同级别我只推荐他们。看有朋友提到 sony d50 那玩意还是听歌比较好。tascam 倒是一块非常棒的录音机，特别是同价位下他的话放非常好，接 416 之类的话筒完全没有任何问题。听歌也是利器之一，只是待电方面略显不足。如果题主仅仅是用内置麦的话问题不大。罗兰的相对中规中矩，在时码上可能会有点问题，录音时间长了一会会存在声音与画面对不上的问题，如果不用做同期声录制也没什么太大影响
h4n 话放不如 dr100 的好…这点还是要明确下，不过质量不错
想便宜，tascam 的 DR70，四路够用，声音不差，缺点是没有时间码同步，不过国内价格高了点，这东西国外只卖 170-200 刀，宝上还在卖 2000+人民币。。。TEAC/TASCAM 被收购后产品线有些混乱，基本算国货（中国设计中国制造），已经和日本没太多关系了
日本的录音机实际使用过，从 zoomH4n 一直到现在的 H6，感觉话放太差了，采访录个环境声还凑合，眞干活就废了。所以还是想入个顺手，更专业的设备。
我使用过的那些录音机 2013 秊的帖子，很有年代感，那時候一箇 R44 要七千塊⋯⋯
看到了 Zoom F6 今秊新品，最大亮點是 32bit 浮點的超高動態。他錄音的時候過爆了，調低就沒問題，太低了，調高 98db，也沒問題，聲音跟原來一樣。所以更加印證了我的想法，前期只需要把點評調低，後期增加增益一點問題沒有。而且不是觸摸屏，哈哈哈 mixpre 完勝！
目前最理想的解决方案就是使用 32 位浮点运算格式的音频格式 (最先由 SonicFoundry 制定). 这种格式并不是说采样是 32 位的，而是指内部运算是 32 位浮点的。这种格式可以完美记录下任何一个采样点，一旦 CLIP 也不做任何削波处理，而是记录下 CLIP 数据在 0dB 以上的真实情况并且保留下来。目前最理想的解决方案就是使用 32 位浮点运算格式的音频格式 (最先由 SonicFoundry 制定). 这种格式并不是说采样是 32 位的，而是指内部运算是 32 位浮点的。这种格式可以完美记录下任何一个采样点，一旦 CLIP 也不做任何削波处理，而是记录下 CLIP 数据在 0dB 以上的真实情况并且保留下来。
難怪可以爆了調低
16bit & 24bit
16 位整数有 65536 个不同的取值，动态区间是 96dB。 如果能够完全利用起来，其实已经足以满足人类对动态范围的需求。 当然，由于输入的音量太小，或者制作方或者用户对声音进行音效处理（压限，EQ 等等），还有制作方为了在进行音效处理时不会因为偶尔产生的过大音量造成破音而留出的保留位等等，这 16 位的整数并没有被完全的利用起来。极端的情况甚至只用了 8，9 位或者更低。这样就会造成动态区间不足而导致细节丢失，临场感不足等等问题。 另一方面，整数格式的数字信号处理，不可避免的会产生误差，在只利用 8，9 位整数的情况下，产生 1 位的误差就会产生 -50dB 左右的噪音，如果误差更大，噪音就更明显。 所以，16 位整数的保存方式确实带来了很多问题。
为了解决这个问题，声音素材的制作方，一般使用 24 位的整数作为保存格式，动态区间一下子扩展到了 144dB，即使之前 16 位时实际只使用了 8，9 位，现在也能有 96dB 以上的动态范围，基本解决了动态不足的问题。 不过，很显然，单纯的扩张位数，只是一种指标不治本的做法，现在很多音效处理插件，会对声音作出很大的改变，所以，在 pc，mac 环境下的大部分音效处理软件，以及他们的音效处理插件，都会在内部处理中先转化成 32 位或者 64 位的浮点数再进行处理。 所以，使用浮点格式（或者至少是 24 位以上的整数格式）来保存声音素材，对于正确还原声音动态以及减小音效处理时产生的误差，还是十分重要的。
經歷
干货：录音师 Paul Col 谈外景录音（野外录音、户外录音） 箇人經歷
录音大师 Gordon Hempton 眼中的声景录制 箇人經歷
歙县石潭实地录音小记 A Field Recording Trip to ShexianShitan 文件分享沒了
大自然聲景：
一直到开始赏鸟，我的内心似乎又回到了初次聆听八部合音的震动。只是这样的情境，是来自于那些隐身在灌丛后，还有浓密枝叶缝隙间的骚动，我专注地搜寻，仿佛有种深不可测的好奇紧紧地攫获了我。在野外采集自然声音，绝对是脱离一般人的舒服圈，我所面临的，是既无特定模式，也无特定旋律，四面八方而来的不确定，但这却不可思议地带给我一种前所未有的安定感，我几乎可以听见心中的欢贺声。
1977 年刚开始投入“自然笔记”制作的那一年，我“听声辨鸟”的功力并不好，那些在野外收录的声音常常让我十分困扰，也不知道该如何解惑。我唯一找到的鸟音图鉴，是由刘义骅录制、玉山公园所出的
山之籁 ，总共记录了二十多种鸟鸣声，对当时的我来说简直是如获至宝。另外，杨懿如在阳明山公园所出版的青蛙赏音图鉴 ，对野外录音辨识也有极大的帮助。接着风潮唱片开始结合音乐与自然天籁推出环境音乐作品，通过徐仁修、廖东坤、孙青松、吴金黛等人的野地录音，搭衬着优美悦耳的演奏音乐，果然引起相当大的“风潮”。
城市声音被忽略的听觉风景，三联生活周刊 16 年第 27 期
王婧时常会带着学生去做“声音行走”，一边走一边聆听和录音。一次行走过程，学生最大的收获是学会如何聆听。王婧告诉我，最开始学生总会寻找一些“奇异景观”的声音，比如浙大里有一片湖面，湖上有黑天鹅，有的同学就会去录鹅的叫声。“这还是视觉逻辑下的倾听。图像是具有表意性质的，声音经常是弥散的、激发式的，没有明确的指向意义。并且看就是几秒钟就能获得信息，听则需要花费时间。”另一位学生去录了食堂里炒菜师傅摆弄炉灶的声音，从点火、调大、拧小再到关火的全过程，这在王婧眼中，因为具有聆听的耐心而十分难得。
寺院古刹的保护又是一例。哈尔滨工业大学建筑学院的张东旭博士专门研究过汉传佛教的寺院声景。他发现在寺院所有的人为声响里，敲钟声最受到青睐。他特地去观摩辽宁千山龙泉寺每日晨钟暮鼓的仪式，描述说：“一面敲，一面诵经，同时掌握节奏，颇能显现住持者的个人魅力;早晨是先钟后鼓，钟声未绝，鼓声就起，傍晚则相反。钟鼓交替，声响回荡，不绝如缕。”不过，能完整保留下钟声的寺庙已经越来越少。“像是位于市内的沈阳慈恩寺因为扰民缘故，取消了钟声;同样的原因，开封相国寺将钟鼓都挪到一层大殿里来敲，声音只局限于寺庙周边。”
与之相反，另外一个位于北京郊区西山的龙泉寺，僧人们希望钟声能波及更远的信众，于是找到了燕翔，希望他能够从声学角度帮助完成一口新钟的设计。“我无能为力，”燕翔说，“寺庙前方一片度假中心的高楼挡住了钟声的传播。唯一的办法，就是造一口巨钟。这样成本庞大，敲钟者还可能被震晕。”
2020-06-02 @ 中国新闻网：#微视界·微记录#【#录音小哥收集自然声音治疗失眠# 】声 〔採訪聲谷〕
Understanding and Harnessing the Freedom and Power of Field Recording 〔這人的設備看起來不是特別專業〕
對錄音師 Stephan Marche 的採訪：
So, the most inspiring part of being a field recordist is to go out and listen carefully before opening the equipment bags at all. What “normal” people mainly perceive with their eyes, a recordist needs to anticipate from his experience and dedication to the thrilling and often mysterious world of sound. You need to be open-minded and creative, always ready to go outside when other people are sitting behind their warm stove. You must be willing to walk along forbidden paths or to climb down to dark caves or canyons. It is also important to be highly flexible in terms of time management. As we are often recording random events that cannot be controlled by ourselves, we have to be patient on one side but act quickly on the other side.
For instance, I remember my recording sessions for the Wind Turbines library – a project that was strongly depending on external conditions. I could only record through the nights or on early Sunday mornings because at these times I didn’t have to be concerned about disturbing airplane or traffic noise. Also, birds and insects turned out to be a problem. I really like the dawn orchestra but in this case I almost got sick of their twittering. I had to wipe many files from the recorded raw material due to unwanted side noises I could not prevent. So it was me who had to adapt to the general circumstances. I really like these challenges because this demonstrates the tininess of a single person in contrast to the entire environment – no matter if is natural or man-made.
說得非常好，很有長者娓娓道來的感覺。
沒記出處：
He made the point that fledgling recordists often produce work where the levels are too high, rather than expecting listeners to adapt to lower volumes. This is a mistake I make from time to time and it’s a good principle to be reminded of: let quiet sounds be quiet.
Sounddevices 對 flyway 的採訪。第一步就是走出去，到大自然中去。
Frenzy 的录音，有一个叫 luck，單支話筒架在樹莓藤條上，正好天鵝飛過。能體會到這驚喜。
其他
呼吸声不奇怪，如果你听古尔德，还能听到各种哼哼唧唧
以前，90 年代前的确各部门自己摆不同话筒，大会堂扩音，同传，机要部门，中央电台，电视台转播，媒体分送信号，还有中央新闻新闻纪录片厂，八一厂影片拍摄的同期录音等。如每家或其中几家再设置备份话筒就更多了。以后就净化到有限数量的几个，并且外观定制看不出明确品牌（其实 schoeps 心，797 壳），然后系统多备份。
冀虹《2019 央视春晚音频系统构成及制作解析》 ● 对于 PAN 到后方的部分传声器的高音要进行适量的搁架式衰减，模拟出来自后方的声音音色。处理方法是直接根据话筒所处的位置来设置 pan，后方的高音要衰减。
弦樂錄音：
弓弦乐器是通过两端固定的琴弦受到弓子的摩擦或手指的弹拨而振动，振动发出的声波通过共鸣箱加以谐振，产生谐波并扩大音量通过发音孔传出去。因此，弦乐器的发声可以被分解为弓弦摩擦、弦振动、腔体震动几部分，录音师所需要的音色正是由它们按适当的比例混合而成。这个适当的比例原本可以通过话筒摆位来获得，但残酷的现实却把话筒“固定”在琴上。如此近的拾音距离，我们只获取了完整音色的一小部分，琴身腔体的共振几乎没有，丢失了很宝贵的泛音成分。因此，单个弦乐器的声音听上去干瘪尖涩，距离圆润动听有很大差距，并且几十个类似音质的信号叠加后，发出的弦乐声部的音色可想而知
kinghand 录音技术讲座，2007-05-13
cubie《改造指向型麥克風（二）：自製麥克風防風罩》2010-06-09 ● 自製毛衣。但現在用不著，直接淘寶。
2020-06-28 朋友圈：
如果当年邹思玮没把 SE 创办到国外，并且起个中国的名字（比如得胜，ISK），那么有可能他们会和爱克创一样惨！PS：国内厂商看中了国内音频市场“不懂装懂”的暴利市场—-图为邹思玮和 Neve 老爷子
2020-04-29 晚上看了兩個多小時錄音的書，基本上都是對我沒用的。《一平方英吋的寂靜》、《大自然聲景》還好，提到錄製動物，把錄音機隱藏好，人躲得遠遠的，但不知道用什麼辦法監聽。感覺自己完全做不到這樣啊，好難。《音效聖經》還挺有意思。《大自然聲景》錄音聽了下，很不專業啊，經常有爆掉的，還有很大風聲，肯定只用了海綿套。