Dear Walt,
Thanks again for the helpful answers. I will comment again in CAPS below ( I
AM NOT YELLING AT YOU!). I hesitate to post this on the list server because
some of the questions I have will be very basic to many, but the DELETE
button is, thankfully, easy for all to use!.
In a message dated 5/26/02 11:30:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
writes:
> It should. You would still have a remaining dynamic range of greater
> than 60 dB. The Portadisc is rated at a dynamic range of greater than 94
>
OK. HERE IS DUMB QUESTION # 1. WHAT DOES THE ABOVE MEAN? DOES THIS MEAN THAT
WITH THE HHB AS LONG AS YOU RECORD ABOVE -94 dB THE MACHINE WILL BE ABLE TO
CAPTURE THE ENTIRE SIGNAL?
>
> The critical question is what's the dynamic range of the call and of the
> mic. You can fiddle around trying to figure the numbers, but I suggest
> you just try it. I normally set mine up for a max dB of -20 dB, but may
> go greater if not sure of the max level I might see.
>
>
>
The portadisc can
> be set to give you a running max level readout in numeric form, useful for
>
I GUESS YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE LEVEL INDICATOR? IS THERE SOME SPECIAL
SETTING FOR THIS OTHER THAN THE PEAK HOLD METER SETTINGS?
As I noted the Y splitter will
result in a few dB loss which would be in both the mono and stereo. I
avoid even that by always recording in stereo, and if it's a mono mic
just plugging it in one channel. Software in the computer can put it on
both channels.
IF I AM USING A MONO MIC, BUT WANT TO RECORD IN STEREO AND HAVE THE SIGNAL
RECORDED AT DIFFERENT VOLUMES FOR THE RIGHT AND LEFT CHANNELS, I GUESS I NEED
TO KEEP USING THE Y CABLE?
Note it's also possible that the noise is from a noisy pre or whatever.
It could also be from the external pre you are using or it's interaction
with the portadisc. The portadisc is rated at greater than 89 dB signal
to noise, and the mods done to yours are supposed to have increased
that, made it even quieter.
Fundamentally digital recordings are actually quieter and clearer as far
as unwanted noise. Tape has a bunch of noises that digital does not have.
THIS IS WHY I AM PUZZELED THAT THE SPECTRAL ANALYSIS AND MY OLD EARS DETECT
GREATER NOISE WITH THE HHB THAN THE TCM 5000 WHEN USING IDENTICAL RECORDING
EQUIPMENT AND RECORDING SITUATIONS? IT JUST DOES NOT SEEM THAT THIS RESULT
SHOULD OCCUR? I NOTED FROM PAST CORRESPONDENCE THAT THERE WAS SOME CONCERN
OVER THE NOISE LEVEL WITH THE HHB, BUT THE NEW SOFTWARE VERSION ( WHICH I
HAVE) SHOULD HAVE CORRECTED THAT?
Note what I said, the louder parts of the sound at those high
frequencies are not filtered out.
THIS SEEMS TO AGREE WITH WHAT I HAVE SEEN ON THE SPECTROGRAMS.
I HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRING DATA FROM MY HHB TO MY HARD DRIVE VIA MY PANASONIC
3200 DIGITAL AUDIO TAPE DECK. I HAVE USED ANALOG OUT OF THE HHB TO ANALOG IN
TO THE DAT. THE DAT IS CONNECTED DIRECTLY TO MY SOUNDBLASTER LIVE SOUND CARD
VIA COAXIAL CABLE. DOES THIS SEEM LIKE A PROPER WAY TO GET THE MD DATA INTO
MY COMPUTER? SHOULD TRY TO IMPORT TO MY COMPUTER DIRECTLY WITH USB
CONNECTIONS. IT SEEMS LIKE I READ USING USB WAS A PROBLEM FOR SOME...THE DATA
TRANSFER RATE WAS TOO FAST AND THE COMPUTER COULD NOT RECEIVE IT CORRECTLY?
LAST QUESTION: WHEN THE remaining POWER IN HHB BATTERY PACK IS GETTING LOW
DOES IT USE MORE ENERGY TO POWER DOWN/POWER UP CONTINUOUSLY (EVERY MINUTE OR
SO)..OR WILL LESS POWER BE USED LEAVING THE MACHINE ON.
THANKS AGAIN FOR ALL YOUR INSIGHT,
JOHN
John V. Moore Nature Recordings
John V. Moore Nature recordings
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|