Jeremy Martin wrote:
>
> I was wondering if anyone can help me decide which style of mic I would get
> the most use out of?
>
> I do plan to be recording some bird songs, but what I was most interested in
> were strange bug noises (e.g. siccadas), as well as *anything* else that
> makes interesting noises "up close" in the Telinga's focus. Of course ideally
> I would have both types of mics to choose from, but do you think I would be
> better off with the Dual Science mics, or the Stereo mic?
>
> As I've mentioned in previous messages, I plan to primarily be using these
> recordings in my own electronic music. Some of the sounds I record will be
> used unchanged much, but a lot will be layered with various synthesizers,
> heavily changed by using software plugins, etc. So, a few of the sounds I
> record might be used as an interesting stereo "background" for the entire
> song to go along with, but the majority of the stuff I record will need to
> "sit well in the mix". I probably shouldn't have so many complex stereo
> things going on that it confuses people.
>
> So, which would you recommend I buy first?
When I did the plunge, I bought both the Dual Science and the DAT Stereo
mic. I use the Dual Science just occasionally, the DAT Stereo is my workhorse.
The Dual Science will provide a sharper focus by a little bit, in mono.
The DAT Stereo will provide a slightly broader central focus, and a
surprisingly wide stereo field. You don't think of a parabolic as
stereo, but this is a pretty unique system. The actual field is probably
fairly odd shaped, with a long central area and much closer as you get
well out to the sides. Kind of pear shaped with the stem pointed at the
front axis.
As I noted my primary use for the past 5 years has been in surveying
frogs for a scientific study. As such you might think the Dual Science
would be the choice. But, I found that having stereo was a much greater
advantage than a slight increase in the sharpness of the focus. It's
much easier to pick out the different individual frogs of various
species out of a stereo field than out of a mono one. In mono they all
end up jumbled on top of each other.
And when you are out there recording by the side of the road and the
truck passes by a few feet behind you it sounds realistic in the
recording from the DAT Stereo, if that's a advantage.
Both mics are about the same sensitivity. Although I rarely do so,
pulling the recording from the DAT Stereo back to mono has worked fine
when I tried it.
Note that up close a parabolic is not as sharp a focus. I have used the
Telinga quite a bit down to 10' or so at times. To separate out some
individual frog calling. But you don't get the sharp focus you get at
say, 100 yards. So you may find yourself backing off from some insects
to get the best recording.
I cannot really speak to the mixes you are planning, but if any include
stereo, then I'd definitely recommend the DAT Stereo over the Dual
Science. I expect that will give you the best all around result.
By removing it from the reflector you can use the DAT Stereo as a more
normal stereo mic too. It works well like that.
> I'm going to use a Sony MZ-R55 and DIY parabolic mic for this fall/winter.
> Before Spring I will have hopefully a) convinced myself I want to buy a
> Portadisc and Telinga and stick with this, and b) raised $2500 or so for both
> devices. :-)
That's the way to go about it, find out first on the cheap if you are
sticking with it, then watch your wallet shrink if you do. By spring you
will probably have even more you are drooling over.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|