> From: Marty Michener <>
>
> Hello All:
>
> I last week I received by email these questions, and pass them along for
> any and all responses; I have been too busy to write anything yet:
I've jotted down a few quick thoughts below.
> Dear Mr. Michener:
> Here are my questions:
>
> 1. What kind of equipment should a birder use to get quality recordings?
The simple reply is a recorder and a microphone. Truly the first
question back on this is how much money can you spend? That's one way to
narrow the choices. It does little good to say that a $1500 recorder
coupled with a pair of $1000 mics will give quality recordings if the
person cannot possibly afford that. Or, even if they have the money have
the desire to spend that much. It's not something that's free to get
into, but can be done for a lot less than that. My usual response for a
beginner is a consumer MD and put as much as they can afford into a mic.
For those wanting to record birdcalls a parabolic can be more bang for
the buck, especially if it's a homemade.
One also has to define what they mean by quality recordings. This means
something different to each person. One problem is recordings you have
made and worked on you will know far better than others, you will know
their flaws. This tends to mean others will be more impressed with the
quality of the recording than you are. Even defining quality recordings
as being like commercial CD's does not say much as they can be so variable.
A additional issue is what they intend to record. Isolated birdcalls are
recorded by different methods than birdcalls in their natural sound
environment. And who's to say they should limit themselves to birds? And
this has a lot to do with equipment, especially microphones. Microphones
are the key to good recording. The mic needs to match what you are
trying to do.
I note that the level meters on most current recorders are LCD and could
be a problem. Don't have a good solution, for the highly visually
impaired something like the metering on the Sound Devices MP2 would be
good with it's bright multicolor LED's. But going that route is
expensive. My portadisc has a lighted meter of good contrast, but again,
it's expensive. Metering is key to this stuff, so a solution would have
to be found.
> 2. What are the benefits of recording bird sounds?
As far as I'm concerned we don't need to do a cost/benefit analysis on
this. The primary benefits are being able to listen to the birds a
different time, and to share a bit of what you heard with others.
Many seem to record feeling that there is some benefit to science. And
it is possible for your recordings to benefit science. But, it's a weak
justification, science mostly does very specific experiments with very
specific equipment. The primary area where we can help is in simple
documentation of the ranges and locations of species. The sort of thing
that simply requires lots of folks out there keeping good records.
> 3. What are some steps a birder can take toward being a professional nature
> recordist?
I consider a professional to be someone who's expert at nature
recording. They are highly experienced and make good recordings with
greater ease than the rest of us. But, some take professional to mean
making money at it. Which is quite a different thing.
Record, record, record. Nothing builds your ability to make good
recordings like doing. Record every chance you get. Keep your equipment
always ready. And Listen, listen, listen. Not only to your recording
subjects, but critically listen to your recordings. And those of others.
The second part is to get your name known. Don't expect to jump in as a
unknown and make a killing. Find ways to become known. This is kind of a
two way street, because if your name is known people tend to assume you
are a expert. Even if you are not.
> Thanks so much for helping me with this piece; I may send follow-up
> questions later.
>
> The audience will mainly be novice birders who are visually impaired. Would
> you consider just a brief answer to each question for this specific group?
> I just want them to see that doing what you do is possible for them, too.
> Maybe you could mention that there are visually impaired nature
> recordists--if you know of any. A few sentences would work, geared to this
> audience, but if you think that type of answer is somewhere in the
> archives, I'll look.
> Thanks,
>
> Chrissy Laws
>
>
>
> I am a bit stumped, other than my suggestion that the questioner prowl
> through naturerecordists archives . . .
>
> Have a terrific Christmas, everyone,
>
> Marty Michener
Just a few thoughts above, don't know if they help. I would think that
some visually impaired folks would make excellent recordists. They are
already using their ears in a more discriminating manner than the
average person.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|