tony baylis wrote:
>
> I have been reading with interest the discusions on
> whether ATRAC is obtrusive etc. Having used DAT (no
> ATRAC?) and MD (with ATRAC), I have found that when
> using MD as long as there is a reasonable signal to
> record the resulting sound is great. The only time it
> seems to let me down a little is when recording quiet
> atmospheres. By this I mean when the ambient noise is
> very low and there are few other sounds to record.
> When listning to these types of recordings I feel that
> there is a lack of presence when compared to a similar
> recording done with DAT. It has to be said that to
> most people who are not sound recordists, havn't a
> clue what you are talking about if you make this
> comment. This is a fairly rare occurance as it is not
> very often I find myself in a situation where this
> difference would be at all noticable. Not very
> technical I'm afraid, but I thought I would make this
> point in case there are people out there who are
> coming to the conclusion that MD has inherent problems
> that are so significant that they hesitate to aquire
> one yet DAT is beyond their pocket.
Finding a site quiet enough for this is the real problem! And then
having equipment that's quiet enough to feed it to the recorder!
It's like a tempest in a teapot, or maybe only a teacup, perhaps even
just the teaspoon... If that!
I believe what you are finding is something I've noted in the past.
ATRAC, from some recorders, particularly versions pre 4.5 would show a
loss of the quietest sounds above 16kHz when looked at on sonograms.
These are sounds that are 50 dB or more down from the main sounds of the
recording at those frequencies when I've taken the trouble to work it
out carefully from the sonograms. As I've noted, unless your equipment
is top notch, these tend to be a large part the noise being produced by
mics, pre's and such like, or unwanted wind noise. And, thus, for those
who have less top notch equipment or recording conditions, this may
actually help.
And I'm not sure if the above is ATRAC or something else connected with
particular MD recorder models, or maybe found in other digital methods,
including some "uncompressed" recorders. And lack the interest to chase
it down much more.
And if you actually can hear this low level high frequency stuff,
consider yourself blessed with well above average hearing and excellent
listening equipment. Protect that hearing well, and enjoy it, soon
enough time will take it down a notch or two no matter what you do. Then
what you will be "hearing" at such levels will only be what your brain
invents, and it's very good at it...
Every possible recording method has technical problems. There is no
perfect recorder. This is not some secret! Choose either MD or DAT on
whatever logic trail or lack thereof you wish to follow. Both will
record natural sound quite well if handled reasonably, and both can make
a mess if handled poorly. If you spend your time worrying about it when
you are not in the actual process of choosing and buying a recorder, you
are wasting time you could be out recording. Or your hobby is not nature
recording but technical electronics testing. A interesting thing, but
different from the preoccupation of fishing a natural sound out of the
outdoors with a microphone and recorder...
If you are in the middle of deciding on a new recorder, my sympathies,
it's information overload time. I hope these sorts of discussions have
helped a little. Or maybe time to throw darts at a board or consult a
psychic, or all of the above, whatever. Believe me, you are lucky to be
doing it now, there are good recorders to be had.
For anyone who thinks I choose a HHb Portadisc when I last bought a
recorder because of great amounts of exotic technical study, sorry, no.
I did read the specs carefully, but... The critical things were the
yellow, switchable illumination of the display, the large, robust
controls, the solid case, the use of AA batteries. I already trusted the
technical aspects of MD as a result of considerable experience. I was
tired of itty bitty buttons and the tiny, fragile switches under them,
the clouds of insects around my headlamp and hitting my mic while I
looked at the unilluminated display, the thin case and so on. And that
tells you what I really love about the Portadisc. And I get a pro level
set of electronics and internal hardware, and a bunch of bells and
whistles thrown in as a bonus! Feed it a decent signal and it records it
without a lot of fuss and bother. That's what a recorder is about.
So, everybody! Get out there and record something! That's where the
challenge is! I don't care what recorder, get the best recordings it can
give you!
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|