Indoor Location Recording

For the indoor recording we decided to do a Travis Barker interview. We recorded both with and without windshield in a small enclosed music practise room – D404, and an open corridor with a staircase in D1.

            For the first recording in D404, we did not use the windshield. There was no major background noise, the closest to background noise we had was movement of our feet or hands, which wasn’t very clear in the recording however still noticeable with it’s low frequency. The dialogue of the interview was very clear, however sounding dull with no echo due to the small enclosed room we were in. The only noticeable obtrusive noise in this recording was the removal of the windshield at the beginning of the recording.

            In the second recording, we used the windshield. There was very slight background noise of a nearby class in the middle of the recording, this noise isn’t entirely audible but still noticeable in a brief pause of the dialogue. The windshield made very little difference to the recording as there was no wind or major background noise to withstand, however noticeably the windshield did make the recording sound slightly more muffled than the recording without the windshield.

            After recording these, we tried another area – a corridor in D1 which gained the interview an echo, and made the dialogue seem to increase in frequency. In the first recording of this new area without a windshield, there was interference of a door opening which was subtle in the background, and a man walking down the staircase which became gradually louder as he came nearer the ZOOM H2 recording device, and quietened as he left the corridor. During these interferences the dialogue of the interview became slightly muffled behind these new noises. The second recording, with a windshield, the windshield drowned out the background noises as another door opened loudly with a higher frequency in comparison with the dialogue. There was also movement of our feet which echoed in the corridor but was muffled by the windshield, making the dialogue more prominent.

            The headphones used for the recording to monitor any interfering noises were useful as we were able to pick up on if there was any echo in the rooms we tried, what background noises there were and how it affected the recoding, and to decide before recording where the most suitable area in our locations for gaining different audible aspects would be.

            To conclude, the ZOOM H2 recording device picked up on different background noises of different clarity and frequencies throughout the recordings able to affect the clarity of the dialogue in the interview, the small enclosed area proved to be the best for clarity of dialogue as it had little to no space for audible echo. Whereas the more open area in the corridor proved to be more difficult to record clarity as there was more interference with a range of frequencies, often greatly affecting the recording dialogue. The windshield helped to counter the interferences as it muffled the background noise, making the dialogue more prominent in our recording.