Is there any chance anyone knows a website with some varied NT3 demo
sounds, or even some work done with a minidisc?
The -20 DB shelf might turn on automatically with the recording auto-
level... that is why i thought of upgrading md's to one that has it...
I've almost reached a decision i think on my first ever pro-ish
microphone... as it's mainly for audio production and ultra clear
sounds, i value a mono NT3 over the competition. the ECM-ms957 sounds
really good but i think that the instrument mic - NT3 may be more
sensetive and balanced while compromising with stereo. i expect it
also has quite a strong character but seems definately one of the
best poissible mics for the price. that said there are some Behringer
C1000S's giong even cheaper than the NT3, that allegedly sound as
good at least, yet are less sensetive and loud. I might go for a
C1000s if i get a second hand deal. the c1000s even has a cardioid to
hypercardioid switch.
wind should be ok as i'll be monitoring simultaneously and there is a
wind sheild included, with alot of indoor work. i wonder how these
would do for distant sounds like crows or birds, next to each other?
also i just tested the on board preamp with a crystal clear soundcard
signal, and i've got to say it is fairly noticeable, especially on
quiet recordings. there must be a constructor around with a preamp
that boosts to the same level as the on-board one, but with much
lower noise level. perusing the posts on preamps tho it seems that
everyone, even dat users, tend to use onboard preamps over the on
line 9v options such as core-sound and sound professionals, and
engeneers on the mic construction's solutions.
one of my first trips with this cool sampling gear with be a rural
zoo, to sample all the monkeys and tropical birds, wooohoo d:D
Thanks alot !
Ant
> Rob Danielson wrote:
> > Walt wrote: Please see inserts
> >
> >
> >>Rob D. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> For stereo on this budget, which can make the recording process
and
> >>> end results more engaging, I'd consider two Rode Nt3's
condensers.
> >>> They're acceptably quiet, robust, ruggedly made and best of
all, they
> >>> put out more signal than other low end mics so that one does
not
> >>> have to turn up the MiniDisc mic preamplifier as high and
introduce
> >>> more noise. The Nt3's run a 9 volt battery or phantom power
should
> >>> you do buy a preamp down the road. ~$160 each last time I
looked.
> >>> They do show up on eBay. Enclosed headphones a must for
evaluatiing
> >>> micing positions.
> >>> Rob
> >>
> >>I take it you would use these for stereo by coincident miking?
> >
> >
> > X-Y makes the smallest rig. a lttle less phase interaction
>
> Size of rig is part of the reason why I'm going with M/S setups.
But
> without a low cost figure 8 that's kind of ruled out for budget
stereo.
> Unless you go with all in one mics like the Sony. Even there it's a
fair
> hop up in cost to the next higher level in all in one M/S.
>
> >>What
> >>angle would you use
> >
> >
> > Adjustable of course, I use between 30 and 90 degrees. Smaller
angles
> > for closer phenomena
> >
> >
> >>, and what size of stereo field would you expect them
> >>to cover?
> >
> >
> > depends on angle of course. There seems to be pretty consistent
tonal
> > colorarion to about 90 degrees with about a 60 degree X-Y angle.
My
> > students use 90 degrees a lot because its more dramatic.
>
> I'd expect at 90 degrees you would see some "hole in the middle"
begin
> to show up.
>
> >>As hypercardioids they are probably not going to be all that wide.
> >
> >
> > For location ambience, I point them wherever the interesting,
higher
> > hz sounds are coiming from cuz the lows get in from all sides
> > anyways. To get a whole frog pond or a field of birds,
hyper/uni's
> > never work too well, but being able to get more wood frog and
less
> > peeper, they work nicely.
>
> That was my feeling, a lot like the MKH-30/MKH-60 M/S setup I made.
Kind
> of a in between setup. Wider than using a long shotgun or
parabolic. But
> a lot narrower than the SASS or such like.
>
> >>I noted one reviewer saying a single mic was heavy for hand
holding. So
> >>with stereo I assume you are planning on using the setup only on
a stand?
> >
> >
> > a board with 20 penny nails and rubber bands about 9" by 12' is
the
> > smallest footprint we use.
>
> Is this a hand held outfit, or a "stand". And how do you handle
> windscreening around that? I'm still mumbling about how to set up
my
> pair of MKH-816's for stereo. Suspension and windscreen are the big
problem.
>
> >>How wind sensitive and humidity sensitive are these mics?
> >
> >
> > not bad on wind with normal fake fur jackets. I've used them on
a
> > heavy dew night without cracklin. soaked wind screen et al.
> >
> > Considering how much we type about this, we really should do a
> > "lowest noise/$ " website or collection of links incorporating
the
> > d-y-i and lower cost items.
>
> Indeed. Info about humidity, wind sensitivity, even self noise is
often
> lacking in most info sources. What is needed is a mics for nature
> recording page. That could cover all ranges of mics. Many of the
nature
> recording equipment pages are either very dated, or highly oriented
to
> call recording using relatively expensive mics.
>
> There is, of course, the problem that nature recordists are a
diverse
> bunch. What one of us likes another may not. But it would sure be
nice
> to have a database of some kind on the specs that count for us. I'm
sure
> there are lots of other mics than Sennheiser's that will do nicely,
but
> particularily in the high price end it's a risk without knowing how
well
> they will handle our recording environment.
>
> Walt
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|