Doug Von Gausig wrote:
> I am a little dismayed at the direction this group has taken lately towar=
d
> discussions of equipment almost exclusively. If I were a new recordists
> trying to get a handle on how it's done and I read this list I might assu=
me
> that equipment is much more important than it really is. Mics are
> important, of course, and the recording medium matters, but what really
> makes you a recordist is recording!
>
> Any mic feeding any medium will do the job. The most important thing is t=
o
> get out there in nature and start recording. Record everything you hear -=
> from the front, from the side, in the bushes, in a field, with cassette
> tape, MiniDisc, DAT, cheap mics, stereo, whatever - just record. It is fa=
r,
> far more important to get some experience under your belt than it is to u=
se
> the "right" equipment.
>
> As the ad says: "Just do it".
>
> Worrying about the right equipment and its arcane specifications is
> important only after you have developed your recording skills out in the=
> field. When you are ready for expensive equipment and pre-amps and M-S
> stereo setups, you'll know it. For now, have fun.
I will say first I agree, by far the most important thing is to get out
there and spend the time recording. And the quality of the recording
will depend far more on your experience and the environment. Though a
person with no equipment still does have to make a decision on that
first equipment. You can't "Just do it" if you have nothing. Even for a
beginner it's worth a little study, just don't get bogged down. Whatever
you get you may very well end up outgrowing. Just part of how it is.
As far as why the group has been headed off in this direction, I believe
it's partially due to where we are drawing new members. In the early
days of the group almost all new members were fairly exclusively nature
recordists. Now we are drawing in quite a few from the studio/music
recording world. People from that world have different perspectives, and
virtually no outdoor recording experience in nature recording, though
they may be very expert in their own field. In addition their ideas of
how you record are quite different. In the world they come from we find
it's extremely common to have mics on each performer, if not several
mics. And assemble the soundfield by mixing. With lots of modification
of the original recordings. In doing that, mic characteristics tend to
become dominant and a major focus. There are whole books giving mic
recommendations by exact model for each instrument. These folks as they
move into nature recording bring with them their techniques. Many will
speak of the final product they put out as a composition, and build it
with mixed recordings.
Nature recordists, on the other hand, have traditionally done each
recording with one or two mics, often working with just one mic for
years. They craft the recording on the spot with little or no post
processing. As close to original as possible. Here, learning how to work
in the environment is paramount. Watch someone like Lang Elliott wade
into the swamp over and over to get his "performers" just right and you
will get a good idea how it's done.
There is nothing wrong with either approach. Those of us who do nature
recording have pointed out that it's a learned craft in which the
characteristics of the equipment are only a fairly minor part. That the
real test of equipment is to use it. Only when faced with buying new
equipment do you even pay attention to all the specs, etc. Then you
always try to get the best deal for the money you spend. And add to your
recording opportunities.
Another part of the problem, regardless of how someone comes into this
is expectations. It's the modern trend to think that you can become a
instant expert, and your first recording will sound just like the
excellent ones you bought. All you have to do is buy the "right"
equipment and it will automatically happen. Well, it's not that way at
all, it takes time to learn this craft. Your first recordings will not
be likely to meet the highest standards. I'm sure there are quite a few
who try nature recording, and when the first few recordings don't meet
their expectations they give up. We have become a society that expects
instant results. I know this is a concern for me in advising beginners.
I probably recommend higher equipment than needed for beginning just in
the hope that they will not be discouraged by these high expectations.
The equipment available now is far better than what I started with long,
long ago.
I did not start with the equipment I have now. I started cheap, got out
and did lots of recording, and added gear as my needs and abilities
grew. I would spend months or even years looking at specs and so on
while still recording, before buying. After which, I'd just record with
the new equipment and not worry about the specs, learning what it really
did. A beginner, handed what I have, would not get the recordings I can
get. I've learned these pieces of equipment, am still learning, by
recording. I know a great deal about outdoor recording from having spent
lots of time doing it. My gear is ready to go year round, and I'll drop
everything and go anytime something interesting turns up. Or just go out
and troll for sound.
Nature recording grew mostly out of scientific documentation. This is
the source of the tradition of unmodified recordings. It is only within
fairly recent times it's been moving out of pure science into
entertainment. Some of what's happening makes those of us who came from
the scientific tradition uncomfortable. But it's a natural growth and
generally good for the craft.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|