bbystrek wrote:
> I have been using an AT822 for a little short of two years now as my
> first and only mic. I have mostly recorded natural soundscapes in
> Connecticut - amphibians, insects, birds, water, etc. Successfully
> recorded to both minidisc and DAT. While I don't have much
> experience with many other mics, self noise with the AT822 is always
> an issue when recording in quiet environments. For this reason, I am
> currently in the process of upgrading my mic. With that out of the
> way, I'm very satisfied with most of my final CDs produced for
> personal listening. The mic works well for me with reasonably loud
> soundscapes and soundscapes containing content which blends with or
> masks the mic self noise (i.e. water, wind, background of frogs or
> insects, etc.).
This is a important point, our expectations somewhat dictate what mics
we should choose. Good recordings can be had with very low end gear if
our expectations of "good" are appropriate to the equipment.
> Search the Naturerecordists archive for "AT822", we have had a number
> of conversations on this mic. My personal impressions from the group
> is that this is a noisy mic when compared to Sennheiser's MKH and K6
> modular series mics and the Telinga products. But it's probably
> better than most of the binaural setups and definitely better than
> the Radio Shack sort of thirty dollar mics. Some of the group's
> members have given excellent advice to new recordists in the past -
> for most people, it's probably better to try and borrow equipment or
> purchase an inexpensive setup to start to see how much they enjoy it
> before spending large $$$ on gear. The "hiss" from the mic is one
> variable that can be reduced to a degree for a price. It's important
> to consider your subject matter, quality needs and budget when
> sorting out the gear dilemma. Be cautious before drawing conclusions
> on mic recommendations. There is no such thing as a "best mic" for
> nature recording. "Best" is a matter of application and many people
> on this list have multiple "best" mics in their arsenal depending on
> the recording situation. Also be aware that most of the general mic
> experience out there is based on music recording where the sound
> sources are loud, close and indoors - nature recording introduce a
> whole different set of challenges and equipment demands.
One thing to think of here, the AT822 may be lower quality than the top
end mics. But the top end mics of the day were worse than the AT822 not
all that long ago. And you did not worry so much about the mic noise,
because you would likely not hear it for the tape hiss. Modern equipment
has created higher expectations. But many classic recordings of high
quality were done with that older equipment. The oldest frog recordings
I have were done in the 50's "Sounds of North American Frogs" by Charles
M. Bogert. It's my understanding that the recorder he used was a spring
wound tape recorder. I'm not sure what the mics were, but they were
nothing like what we are blessed with. But his recordings are excellent.
We have it easy.
Definitely nature recording is it's own world as far as equipment usage.
We have to deal with specs and descriptions of mics from the indoor
recording world. Much of it simply won't apply, or won't be important,
or will apply differently. Part of gaining experience is learning to
interpret mic descriptions and specs as they apply to nature recording.
I definitely recommend that beginners keep to a budget until they are
certain that they are in it for the long haul. Quality mics are a long
term investment. You can generally sell them, but at less than new
price. It's worth taking time to look for used ones, some of those are
"used" only in the sense they have gathered dust on a shelf somewhere.
And you can probably recover nearly all the money you put into a used
high end mic.
Probably the biggest problem is that some beginners tend to
underestimate how much learning is involved in getting high end
recordings. Buying expensive equipment is only part of the problem. It's
very hard to just jump into this stuff and immediately be producing the
quality of commercial CD's. You can gain experience with any level of
gear. In some ways the challenges of using lower end gear for good
recording will teach you more than the high end gear will.
> If your not already familiar, check the web for stereo recording
> techniques. There is a lot of information out there describing some
> eight or ten different methods of mic placement and coverage. As you
> noted that your coming from mono, pay particular attention to the
> difference between stereo based on "difference in amplitude"
> and "difference in time of arrival". The AT822 being an XY mic is
> completely compatible for later conversion to mono as it only
> generates difference in amplitude signals between the two channels.
Though it's a expensive book, a good book to get is "The New Stereo
Soundbook" by Ron Streicher & F. Alton Everest. This covers the types of
stereo and the issues while staying relatively non-technical.
http://www.stereosoundbook.com/
> The AT822's credits are it's relatively low cost of around $230, and
> it's ease use as it's quick and easy to setup being a Stereo XY mic.
> It yields very natural sounding results. It's limitation in the
> context of my subject matter, is solely it's performance in terms of
> self noise and sensitivity. Be conscious of the fact that some of
> the mics favored amongst this group require phantom power (typically
> 48VDC) which requires an external power supply when used with the
> typical consumer portable minidisc recorders. Many people in this
> group use pro-minidisc recorders with both phantom power and digital
> audio outputs - neither of which are ever found on the $100 recorders.
In the context of the cost of MKH mics, a phantom power supply is a
relatively minor cost. The ME mics can be battery operated. It is a
extra lump to carry around, but if you plan eventually to go to some
variant of a pro recorder then phantom power should not deter you.
As I've noted the Sony ECM-MS957 is of a similar cost and specs. I like
it's sound a bit better. It's a M/S stereo, which can yield a more
variable stereo field. And, of course like the AT822 is mono compatible.
> Finally, how I'm satisfied with my final results... Post recording
> processing in the computer is always required. From what I
> understand, a better mic translates to less need for noise
> reduction. I must confess, I'm a obsessive perfectionist. I'm
> trying to produce a listening experience void of "the hand of man"
> including the mic itself. While I don't artificially "create" an
> environment by mixing (at least not yet), I readily cut or filter to
> remove segments of things like aircraft and barking dogs. Hence, my
> final result is not a "perfect" scientific representation of the
> environment. It's sometimes noted, that as soon as you select and
> position your mic, you have already "edited" what the listener will
> later hear. It takes some time to learn the basics of computer sound
> editing, but I have found it can make a huge difference in the final
> result.
In fact the positioning of the mic may have much greater effect than
it's specs. The environment we record in is so acoustically variable
that even a few feet can make a difference. Always audition what's
coming from the mic before recording. Fish around for the sweet spot to
have the mic.
In nature recording we generally try to minimize processing the
recording, trying to get what we want when we record. That is not always
possible, and even science processes recordings. While it's a worthwhile
goal to try and get a recording that's exactly like what we heard, in
practical terms we will always fall short. Even if the mic is not
contributing self noise, it's still coloring the sound. Each model mic
colors the sound differently. When you get really picky you have to
audition each mic you are considering, preferably with the subjects you
record. Always try to listen before buying if you can. And then there is
the recorder, the listener's speakers/headphones, etc.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|