Can you personally detect any difference between these four sound effects?

They are all recording a glass of water being poured into another glass, then the two glasses being tapped together, and then the glass getting flicked with a finger. However, they are unfortunately recordings of different occurrences of those events - they weren't all recording at the same time. Note: A computer is humming in the background.

(Try not to look at the sound URLs, as they contains spoilers )

Sound A

Sound B

Sound C

Sound D

Listen to the sounds before reading the below, please.

============================================

I was reading this thread, and I didn't want to derail the thread off of Promit's questions, but I had some questions of my own.

GroovyOne was the one who recorded and posted those sound effects in this post. I didn't want to link to the post until after you had a chance to listen to them though. Obviously this isn't a very good blind test, but it's something at least. If someone is ambiguous about whether they can hear the differences or not, then, for the average consumer, it shouldn't matter too much - how well the sound effect fits into the game with the rest of the sounds might matter more than the quality of the mic used to record it, maybe. Though obviously, every little bit of added quality helps, what I'm wanting to know is, with diminishing returns, does a more expensive microphone improve the quality of the sound significantly, or is it a way to eek out an extra tiny step of improvement on top of everything else?

Here's the actual mics used:

[spoiler]Sound A - Sennheiser MKH-60

Sound B - DPA-4011

Sound C - Sony PCM-D50 stereo

Sound D - Rode-NT3[/spoiler]

I'm not much of an audio-lover (I listen to music almost exclusively as background noise, though sometimes I listen to it for the music itself); I can't notice any change in quality between those four recordings, though the Sony PCM-D50 sounds quieter. I'm just playing it over the generic standalone speakers Dell sent with my old computer, glued upside-down to the bottom of a shelf behind my monitor (incase being upside-down matters) - I'm not noticing any significant difference except for the differences that occur as a result of not recording the exact same event.

Since I don't know what any of those actually are (except I knew what he meant by a portable recorder), or their prices, this was basically a (clumsy) blind sound test for me and they might as well have been labeled A, B, and C. They all sound fine, but if I had to choose one that sounds "the best", I think the Rode-NT3 sounds just a tiny bit "fuller" in breadth of details it's picking up - but that might just be my imagination. I can't decide whether it's a good "fuller" or not either (i.e. whether I prefer it over the others or not).

I can't notice any significant difference in quality between the "Sennheiser MKH-60" and the "DPA-4011". I can't tell the difference between those and the Sony PCM-D50 either, once I double the speaker volume when playing the Sony sound effect, so they are at roughly equal volume.

Me not noticing the differences may be because the low volume I normally listen at cuts out some of the finer detail - I can't hear the computer humming at all in any of those recordings, until I turn up the speaker to 3x the normal volume I listen at. I suppose that's one thing to consider - I'm sure plenty of consumers probably blare their volumes loudly.

When listening to them with the headphones I normally use (a cheap $10 Gumy headphone), I can't notice any quality difference between all four.

As someone who was planning to buy one of the Zoom portables to record sound effects for my own game, I'd like to know... can the average consumer (or even slightly-above average) tell the difference in quality between those four above microphones? Do you have to have better speakers or $300 headphones to notice the difference?

If you can notice the difference, does it make the others sound terrible in comparison? Would you be annoyed at the audio of a game if it included sounds recorded by one of the lesser microphones?

Listened to the sounds on Audio Technica ATH M50 Headphones at mid volume.

I could hear the humming only slightly in recording A at first listen.

There is definitely a difference in sound quality but it's subtle.

A & B sound very similar to me frequency wise, but A is picking up a lot more of the computer noise.

C sounds slightly muffled in the upper range.

D has a lot more bass and high end.

I want to add that I am in no way an expert and don't have particularly trained ears :D Also the fact that those were different recordings probably has to do with some of the differences.

As to which one is the best? I don't know. It probably depends on the context in the game and the type of sound that you want to record.

I listenned to it on crappy laptop speaker because I only have that right now (will listen more when I can), but basically to do a test like that you really need to record the same thing with the four microphones at the same times because even excluding frequency differences and stuff like that they don't sound the same in the first place.

By that I mean the water pouring "pattern" is different and the glasses sounds are different too. So it would be pretty hard to say if a microphone picked up say more mid range because maybe the take happened to have more of it.

I've been doing foley at least once a week (sometimes all week), for about 10 years now. When you're doing this kind of work, the general quality of an individual effect may seem like it doesn't matter that much. But those effects build up in layer upon layer and in the final product there is a huge difference between good audio and bad audio. If you do it really well, the average consumer won't even think twice about it; if you do it badly they will notice. That's the point you're, making sound that feels so natural people just see it as an organic piece of the work.

As for the equipment, every microphone has it's own uses. There is a reason that DPA and the Sennheiser cost a grand more than the Rode; they are better quality and they are far more versatile. The Rode has it's uses, but they are limited.

Now you may think, 'hey I'm listening on some cheap speakers or headphones, how will I even know the difference?' When sound design is edited, it's done on ridiculously expensive and perfect sounding monitors. However when it's mixed you're doing that with the average consumer in mind. The final mix is done on equipment like the Sony MDR-7506 Headphones and Yamaha NS-10M monitors. These are great for monitoring mixes not because they sound great, but because they are great at sounding average. So in the end the point isn't to make a mix that sounds great on great hardware, you're making a mix that sounds great on what the people listening will actually have.

So if you're doing it right, people won't say 'wow that footstep, or that laser blast, or that car engine sounds great', they won't even notice it at all, because it sounds natural and you're immersed in the environment.

i'm not going to contest CCH or anyone else in the industry, we all have our POVs.

mine is that i've been entrenched in audio s/w industry for a while as well, but my interest is less in sound quality and more in memetics, the ideas people have about culture and how that interacts with the medium... specifically, to deauthorise authoritative sources and reauthorise local sensibility.

as a result of my objectives, which are definitively anticommercial, i have made a great number of enemies in the audio industries, who do not appreciate me saying "you can do that with a bent fork and a bottle of bleach" when they are charging $599.

it is the interest of professionals and hopefuls to maintain the perception of hard to attain qualities, and certainly, and practiced person has skills which are appreciable.

as a noncapitalist potentiator, my interest is in dissolving this appearance of inaccessibility /"quality", and to assert that hopefuls practice the fine art of fenangling their way to objectives instead of feeling dependent on capital requirements. your pristine engineered sounds will be played back on a multitude of hyped out consumer level systems. if buying your sound guy a $900 mic helps them feel like they can really get to work, maybe it's a good investment :p

i cut my hardware teeth in the mid 90's.. before that, i was using any beat up radio shack crap i could get. in the mid 90's sites like the gas station and dancetech were focused on exchanging h/w solutions on minimal budgets, anyone who put time in then would have a vocabulary of odd devices with superlative odd features. to me, it was cool to lower the noise floor of 80's crap.

but my generalised advice is, don't worry too much about it. i used to have a room filled with keyboards. those crap illuminati folks kicked my ass for trying to empower the impecunious so my studio now is a 1.6g netbook with a 2001 graphics chip and a wacom graphire 3 tablet, which is pretty much fine because it's what i do with it that counts :p

the realistic (radio shack) stereo electret i have or had probably got more use than the rode, octava and AT mics because of less fuss to pick up and use.. the recordings from it are all crisp, clear and low noise.

i'll slither away back into the gutter now where all the other scumbags who think people just spend too much money and are psychologically limited by their artificial dependence on consumerism, with my nasty ass little realistic electret :)

one thing is for sure - if you're dealing with humans, at least humans in moneyed countries, you want a big ass expensive looking mic with all the fancy things.. don't try to make a pop screen out of shadecloth or nylons, people will be all like, "this guy? bugger off" and then one night you go to sleep and they're outside your window with torches, crucifixes and pitchforks.

perception and authenticity may be different, but for many people, perception is as deep as they are ever going to go, so sometimes you have to do things on their terms.

Thanks for your feedback everyone.

When you're doing this kind of work, the general quality of an individual effect may seem like it doesn't matter that much.

But those effects build up in layer upon layer and in the final product there is a huge difference between good audio and bad audio.

That's a good point - I hadn't thought about what occurs when layering the sound effects to create new ones, or when all the sounds being played by the game get mixed together coming out the users' speakers. Errors might compound.

As for the equipment, every microphone has it's own uses. There is a reason that DPA and the Sennheiser cost a grand more than the Rode; they are better quality and they are far more versatile. The Rode has it's uses, but they are limited.

It makes sense that different mics are better in different situations - as a non-audio person, I hadn't considered that before.

i'm not going to contest CCH or anyone else in the industry, we all have our POVs.

mine is that i've been entrenched in audio s/w industry for a while as well, but my interest is less in sound quality and more in memetics, the ideas people have about culture and how that interacts with the medium... specifically, to deauthorise authoritative sources and reauthorise local sensibility.

as a result of my objectives, which are definitively anticommercial, i have made a great number of enemies in the audio industries, who do not appreciate me saying "you can do that with a bent fork and a bottle of bleach" when they are charging $599.

I'm generally of that opinion myself, that skill matters far more than tools, but I've also used enough tools (just not in the audio realm) to know that good tools do matter as well.

In general, the higher quality you get, the price jumps more significantly while the quality steps up in smaller increments. A more expensive tool might cost twice as much, but only be 10% better, and the next tier might again double the price, but only add another 5% of added quality.
These costs are sometimes actually worth it, despite the diminishing returns. If a third monitor on your computer and a more powerful processor costs you an extra $2000, but makes you slightly more efficient, over the life of two or three years, it may actually pay for itself.

The point is not, "How much can I afford? Let's spend it!", but "What are my goals, and what level of tools do I need to accomplish that, given my current skill level?". So I was more wondering, with the audio mics, how noticeable the quality increments are,

So I was more wondering, with the audio mics, how noticeable the quality increments are,

Yes there are diminishing returns just like with most equipment. I have some really nice mics that I got in the $300 category that are comparable to $3,000 mics. So you can do good work with a minimal investment. As your skills improve it is absolutely worth the investment to upgrade, that is when you can start really making a difference with the better equipment. I think the break down in cost vs quality would be something like:

Less than $200 not suitable for audio work

Huge increase in quality to

$200-$499 suitable for hobbyist work

Moderate increase in quality to

$500-$999 suitable for paid professional work

Small increase in quality to

greater than $1000 top end professional gear

There are tons of exceptions to that of course. The Shure SM57 is about $100 and it's the perfect snare drum mic. The Blue Bluebird is $300 and it sounds fantastic on acoustic guitar. I could go on forever about this but In think my list above is a fairly good representation of cost vs quality increments on general audio equipment

Thanks, that's basically what I was wanting to know. I appreciate the time you've spent in going into detail in your responses.

To some degree the mics will color the sound a little - like in this example, the PCM-D50 recorder is quite sparkly it grabs a lot of high end. The Sennheiser picks up a little more detail and the room noise. But you can see from the recordings, mic choices produce slighly different results.

What is the most most important thing when recording foley is to collect your sounds so the raw material is easy to work with.

1. Clean noiseless sounds - creating an as silent as possible environment - you can always EQ or process the sounds to fit together better but removing background sounds is difficult.

2. Reverbless sounds (unless it is a creative choice or you need the sound in a particular acoustic setting where you need the natural room reverb sound) - you can always add reverb to some degree - but removing it is difficult

3. Collecting different perspectives - up close and slighly furhter away sounds will record differently. Up close there's such a thing called Proximity effect"

So I wouldnt' focus so much on what microphone sounds best - but what microphone will work for you in your recording environment to get you the sounds you need at the best quality that you can record at - hence rent your equipment before buying it and experiment with a few different mics.

If you go with a few different types of mics at different distances - using your ears to place them during your recording session - you will get a decent set of sounds to work with. If you have one mic, at one distance - you will have to struggle with multiple recordings, more editing time, more recording time - and less variation in your recordings meaning - more post processing to make things sound similar in the same world. $30 for an extra mic per day, or $??? / hr to edit, process, record a smaller amount of workable material.

All sounds you gather with a mic are never final assets that get added to a game / cutscene. You will always need to process the sounds - clean them up, fit them to what is happening visually through trimming, fading, cleaning, eqing.

I have never used a recording just as is - even footsteps and perhaps this is what you're worried about trying to find the right mic that sounds fantastic right off the go?

hence rent your equipment before buying it and experiment with a few different mics.

If you're in the states the people at SweetWater are always happy to come by and demo gear for free. They have reps for just about every major city. They can usually cut you a deal too if you decide on something you want to buy.