Hello fellow binaural-microphone lovers, or, welcome to those who are new to this type of recording. This is a long overdue post that I've been meaning to publish, but alas I kept getting delayed. I wanted to create this thread to give a nod of approval from me for the BACCH-BM Pro microphones that are made by Theoretica Applied Physics. Like with all binaural audio recordings, headphones or earphones are required. ^_^ First of all, thank you to @jude and @AxelCloris for letting me use these microphones for a few weeks. It was interesting trying to come up with some tests to demonstrate the performance of these microphones compared to my Sound Professional SP-TFB-2 microphones, which I have been using for many years now for an assortment of purposes: ASMR videos on YouTube, sound tests at local meetups, general '3D Audio' examples. https://www.theoretica.us/bacch-bm-pro.html Frequency Range: 20 Hz - 30,000 Hz (+/- 1 dB, w/ EQ) S/N Ratio: re. 1 kHz @ 1 Pa (94 dB SPL) 67 dB Sensitivity: -35 dB re. 1 V/Pa (±3 dB); 17.8 mV/Pa Equivalent Noise Level: 27 dB(A) Phantom Power: +48 V https://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/SP-TFB-2 Frequency Response: 20-20,000 Hz Signal To Noise Ratio: Standard Sensitivity 60dB/High Sensitivity 62dB Open Circuit Sensitivity: Standard Sensitivity -42dB/High Sensitivity -30dB Maximum Input Sound Level: 105dB/120dB Dynamic Range: 81dB/96dB Power Requirements: 2-12 VDC "plug in power", power from Battery Module, or phantom power with power converter adapter For all of my recordings below, I used a Zoom H4N Pro as my recorder. Unless otherwise stated, these were at 24-bit/96 kHz. Each file has an amplified waveform via Audacity such that it doesn't clip, and each file has ReplayGain tags in the metadata in case anyone wants to do an ABX test with Foobar or something similar. Honestly, I had never heard of Theoretica Applied Physics, nor the BACCH moniker in my search for binaural content. It was only until CanJam SoCal 2017 that I discovered them. The representative there gladly let me record a demonstration between the BACCH-BM Pro and the SP-TFB-2 at the CanJam showfloor right then and there. For both sets of the recording, I had the binaural in-ear microphones in my ear, sitting down on a chair, and the representative walked around me. Unfortunately I don't have the original audio files... Spoiler: My Impressions ...but I think the YouTube video still demonstrates how effective the BACCH-BM Pro mics are at capturing the space of the large venue, as well as capturing the details of the people and sounds around me. As for the time I got to borrow the BACCH-BM Pro microphones from jude, I decided to visit The Source AV, also in SoCal, since they have a variety of nice and quiet theater rooms to do tests in. Thank you to @TSAVAlan for helping me set up the theater room for the test demos below. I first did a multi-channel movie test since this could help the listener understand what the room might sound like. Like the theater room was in-person, there is a lot of bass and bass rumble. I chose this scene from 'Guardians of the Galaxy 2' because it has a nice combination of loud and quiet moments, as well as sounds presented in the 5.1 channels. I know these microphones are meant to go inside of one's ear, sitting at the pinnae. However, I have always found recordings done in this way to sound a bit weird to me relative to how I perceived them in reality. A good example of this is when I use these microphones to capture sound from various headphones: the resulting audio ALWAYS sounds waaaay off. Because of that, I did two types of recordings for this first test: one with the microphones placed in a foam dummy head, and another with the microphones placed in my pinnae. If everything was theoretically correct, the recordings from the microphones placed in my pinnae should sound more accurate, to my ears at least since they were placed into my ears. This is what the room looked like: This is where the microphones were placed. If the microphones were in my ears, I slouched on the couch to a similar height as the foam dummy head. And here is the associated equipment in the room: BACCH-BM Pro in the foam dummy head (FLAC, 1:47 in length, 28 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!6VhkSYLb!YKcwWEQ8X40ZlhauKzYjeDmvb4oRN_yLqoktNbuvYME BACCH-BM Pro in my pinnae (FLAC, 1:47 in length, 29 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!SRg2GIZD!mN1QmMIQ1kKVOBDLhI5eDFIuf1KATtyF9meeF2_4SVI SP-TFB-2 in the foam dummy head (FLAC, 1:47 in length, 30 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!3Eh2DAgJ!VqnJQbXfXTR04ayv-_AU917llLdoD4gWmJlfvfUDcJ0 SP-TFB-2 in my pinnae (FLAC, 1:47 in length, 31 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!TMxWTK7Q!HrQfX-Cx5NMhixax-q3uJd8uwkePZ2am3n6936SnoKg Spoiler: My Impressions At least for me, the BACCH-BM Pro microphones, again, captures the space of the room much more accurately than the SP-TFB-2 microphones. To me, the SP-TFB-2 has always seemed limited in its ability to present sound in front and behind me, as well as convey the sense of vertical space. The BACCH-BM Pro to me fills in those gaps much more. It's still not perfect, as Gamora's voice should sound more centered than it is in the recording, but it's still much better than the SP-TFB-2's center imaging. The second test I did was place both microphones in the foam dummy head, placed the head in the middle of the room, and walked around the room at various positions and at various distances. This kind of test is what one might expect for a binaural test recording, not unlike those of Chesky Records for the 'Dr. Chesky's Ultimate Headphone Demonstration Disc' album. Here was the setup in the room: ^ the random objects on the floor and table were markers for distances and angles My microphones' setup: The left-side of the foam dummy head: The right-side of the foam dummy head: BACCH-BM Pro in the foam dummy head (16-bit/44.1 kHz FLAC, 6:00 in length, 28 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!aQhETCiR!svnIon9wLXkGU1Jq6VkUyz6n7X5Ngs2tQqStcwxc2a4 SP-TFB-2 in the foam dummy head (16-bit/44.1 kHz FLAC, 6:00 in length, 31 MB in size): https://mega.nz/#!XVoC3AYS!WegqGvTvBOnlgNWCgPxm7HcidRmKsYgWUlnDXlWNyog Spoiler: My Impressions and Overall Conclusions Again, I think the BACCH-BM Pro microphones sound crisper and more detailed, as well as being able to convey my positions much more accurately than the SP-TFB-2 microphones. I think from all of the tests I've heard with the BACCH-BM Pro, I'm convinced that they are a superior microphone to more accurately capture the environment they are recording. Rightfully so too since these microphones are 33+ times more expensive than the SP-TFB-2. Specification-wise, they may seem like they're on a much more level playing field, but as you can hear from the recordings, they are more different than alike. It has been an interesting experience getting to hear the two, literally, side-by-side in a controlled environment. This experiment has opened my eyes for a higher-fidelity in-ear binaural microphone that fills in the gaps that I always thought were missing from the SP-TFB-2 microphones. What's weird to me though is that the SP-TFB-2 files are all larger in size than the BACCH-BM Pro ones. Maybe it's because the SP-TFB-2 recordings have more noise? BACCH-BM Pro (foam dummy head) BACCH-BM Pro (my pinnae) SP-TFB-2 (foam dummy head) SP-TFB-2 (my pinnae) Walking Demos: BACCH-BM Pro SP-TFB-2 Anyway, will I buy the BACCH-BM Pro microphones? Eeeeeeeeeeh.....maybe not. I don't use my current binaural microphones nearly enough to justify the price, even if that price means I get much better fidelity of sound. For what I use the microphones for, I would rather spend my money on a 3DIO binaural dummy ear microphone. Thank you again to jude for generously allowing me to test these microphones, I really appreciate it! I hope these binaural audio demos inspire some discussion as I think binaural microphones in general are underappreciated. I have always thought '3D' audio was fascinating and it all started with the infamous Cetera Virtual Barbershop. ^ wow that video is from nearly 12 years ago!