wrote:
> Hello
>
> There doesn't seem to be a record of e-mail messages on the Yahoo
site (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naturerecordists/), so I'm CCing
this to the moderator just in case... if I'm missing something, please
let me know.
There should be, I just checked and they are there. Not sure why you are
not getting them. If you just joined, maybe that's it, though it's
supposed to be a public archive.
There is no FAQ at the moment
> I'm a musician/engineer building a home studio and starting out in nature
> recording (none done yet), and am specifically looking for some mic
advice (I have a
> DA-P1 DAT deck and am looking for a stereo mic). My inspirations for
> nature recording are the geese that stop over here on their way
> north, and the frogs in our backyard which sound wonderful in the
> springtime...
>
> I've narrowed the field/studio mic choices down to a Shure VP88 or a
Rode NT4. The Rode has better specs, but rolls off in the high end; and
there's no environmental specs on it that I can find (the mics seem
fragile). The VP88 seems much more versatile (selectable/defeatable M-S
matrix, rolloff), seems to have good environmental specs, but rolls off
in the low end which seems impractical for "thunderstorms or elephant
snorts" (see this month's Electronic Musician for an interesting article
on nature recording). I also have an old AT801 omni which could be
simultaneously used (e.g. with the VP88 in mono mode) to capture very
low-end stuff, although this is a bit impractical since the point is to
carry only 1 mic around.
>
> I'd love to hear your 'field' opinions on these 2 mics, or any other
stereo mics you might suggest (I've somewhat hastily discounted the
Crown SASS-P 'cos it seems bulky).
At 24dBA, the self noise of the VP88 is pretty high for quieter nature
environments. It's a fairly old design now.
The NT4 has better self noise at 16dBA. It's been discussed in the
group, but I'm not sure anyone has taken the plunge, so kind of a
unknown. Yes, I'd say it's probably less versatile than the M/S approach.
Both of these are going to be only good for fairly close callers without
a lot of amplification. With amplification, even the NT4 will be noisy
if you try to reach out very far. BTW, close to nature recording is
probably out to 20' or better, not the few inches of studio recording.
And long can sometimes approach a mile, though more likely out to a few
hundred yards or so. It is easier to record close in a number of ways.
But it's often not practical. And may involve a lot of careful stalking
if the animals are wary or change their calling in response to your
presence.
Also, with either of these you will be recording a fairly wide
soundfield, more likely to pick up extra noise if it's the calls you
want. But what you want for ambiance. For calls most use either a
parabolic or a shotgun mic. Many continue to work in mono, although
stereo is a bit more common and gaining.
As resident frog recordist in a sea of bird recordists, I have a fair
amount of experience with those. I do better than 90% of my recording of
them with a Telinga Pro V parabolic with the DAT Stereo mic element. I
record almost exclusively in stereo. When I get the chance to record
fairly close I've a number of other choices.
The Crown SASS-P is fairly noisy for nature recording, although it can
be used. Much better is to fit a SASS housing with low noise omni's. The
person who's really used these a lot is Lang Elliott. Recently I got
done making two versions, a version with Sennheiser MKH-110's (that will
do thunderstorms and elephants, the area of infrasound), and one with
Sennheiser MKH-20's:
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/sass_mkh110.html
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/sass_mkh-20.html
These are even more bulky than the original SASS-P, but produce a
excellent widefield stereo of fairly local stuff. It does get a little
extra gain from the boundary effect. You buy the housing and machine
fittings to hold the mics etc. The housing is pretty inexpensive from
Crown as a part.
I also have several M/S setups along this line:
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/ms_mkh30+60.html
M/S is a good way to go. Though you will not hear stereo unless you have
some way of M/S decoding in the field. This is usually not a problem
with the all in one M/S as they generally have a decoder, but more so
with M/S using separate mics. I use a sound devices MP2 mic pre if I
wish to have stereo in the headphones in the field. I record the
undecoded signal and decode in the computer later. It's hard to tell
from a undecoded M/S what it will sound like when decoded to stereo.
I've put up a number of samples recently, here's the list for the most
recent, recording a group of Spadefoot Toads with my collection of mics.
The filenames will tell you which setup:
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.MS.MKH30-40.mp3
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.MS.MKH30-60.mp3
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.MS.MKH80-80.mp3
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.SASS.MKH110.mp3
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.SASS.MKH20.mp3
http://loscan.home.mindspring.com/SP.Telinga.DATS.mp3
Note that all these setups with the exception of the Telinga have fairly
wide to very wide soundfield pickups. The Telinga has far less frogs in
it's recording as it only picked up the middle of this wide group. Which
makes it sound quite different from the others, who also differ from
each other.
And note these are all much more expensive than the Shure or Rode. This
brings up the point of how much you are willing to spend, how high a
sound quality you want, etc. It's a balancing act, not completely
measurable by money spent, though there is that trend. If you have
enough money to do it, the Telinga with DAT Stereo would be a pretty
good choice to start with for recording calls. Not as portable as some
other choices, but will cover a wider range of distance than other choices.
If you are sure you will always be close, then your mic choices are more
open. Many mics will work, each with it's strengths and weaknesses.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|