naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: From Philippe Henry

Subject: Re: From Philippe Henry
From: "oryoki2000" <>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 19:33:50 -0000
I wrote:
 
> Sony is introducing its new Hi-MD 
> minidisc recorders in April. The Hi-
> MD recorder connects to the Mac via 
> USB, and transfers files in their 
> digital form.  

Re-reading Sony's information and posts by enthusiasts on minidisc
newsgroups leads me to post this update.  Two points:

First, Sony never specifically mentions the Mac in the info about
Hi-MD.  The Hi-MD disc is formatted using Microsoft FAT, and it
attaches using standard USB conventions without additional drivers. 
So a Hi-MD device *should* be plug-and-play with Mac System X,
appearing on the computer desktop as an external hard disc.  But we
won't know until somebody buys a production Hi-MD and plugs it into a Mac.

Second, Sony says audio transfers from Hi-MD to computer work
exclusively with its SonicStage software.  This permits enforcement of
digital-rights management (i.e., no file sharing). If there is no way
to access recordings via the FAT file system of the Hi-MD, then Macs
won't be able to upload a digital copy of Hi-MD recordings.  

There's a workaround solution. Hi-MD machines will play back their
recordings through the headphones/line out port. So it's possible to
transfer Hi-MD recordings to any Mac or PC in the same way you have
always uploaded files from the original minidisc machines.  But it
will be frustrating for Mac owners to do without USB services.

Mac users will get the details on this issue when the Hi-MD recorders
go on sale in a few weeks.  Even if Mac users have to use the old
"analog, in real time" data transfer method, I think the opportunity
to record in uncompressed WAV format, and to record for an extended
time period, make Hi-MD recorders the right choice when you're
spending less than $500 for a field-worthy recorder.  

--oryoki 




 





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

>From   Tue Mar  8 18:27:06 2005
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:51:50 -0500
From: Walter Knapp <>
Subject: Re: parabolic alternatives

From: "thorley_tom" <>

> I bought mine new for less than 1/2 rrp. (I think they have had trouble 
> shifting 
> units after the obvious applications - football games etc. - and maybe they 
> are also doing deals in the U.S.). The Cedar system is certainly not 
> something I could justify spending money on, it definately takes a friend in 
> the 
> mastering house (or the police force!)

At half price it's still way too high for what it is in terms of sound 
quality. At least for nature recording.

> I fully agree. I spoke to the people in developement at AT and they 
> aknowledged it's poor self noise, unfortunately they did not have any plans 
> to 
> develop the AT895 further for at least  a year and a half (that was 1 year 
> ago 
> approx.). So here's hoping that someone else will take up the mantle? 
> However I think it is unlikely because the AT895 has cornered most of the 
> market and is suitable noise wise for most of it's intended uses. 

Except for we poor nature recordists, who could really use a high 
quality design like this. But I'm sure sports is a far greater market 
than us.

>>The other way is to baffle a parabolic. Pretty bulky, but might work if 
>>done well enough.
> 
> 
> Please explain further unless you have alredy developed the idea in other 
> posts.

I'm still developing the idea period. A few quick thoughts:

My old homemade parabola used a plastic kitchen funnel to keep a lot of 
local ambiance away from the tie tac mic and limit it's "view" to just 
the reflector. This probably also helped it's low frequency response as 
it cut down direct sound.  A picture of it at the bottom of my homemade 
parabolic page:
http://frogrecordist.home.mindspring.com/docs/quickparabolic.html
Parabolic theory does not include baffles like this.

The Telinga with it's thin dish does let quite a bit of sound through 
the dish. It might help to put some soundproofing foam on that so that 
it forms a better sound shadow. Maybe use spray foam between a sandwich 
of two Telinga reflectors.

I've also considered fitting a plastic collar on the outside of the foam 
of the DAT Stereo element to cut down on direct sound when needed. Would 
have to be positioned precisely. Much in the same way as the funnel in 
my old dish. This would, of course, change the stereo field so would 
have to be fine tuned. Don't know until I try it what it would be like.

A deeper dish is in itself a baffle. Greatest amplification for size in 
a parabolic occurs at about a focal length to dish depth of 4:1 
according to Sten's paper. This is not the most practical shape, but 
might be worth it.

There is room for a lot of experimentation on parabolics. Most of which 
won't help, but we won't know until we try.

Walt






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

>From   Tue Mar  8 18:27:06 2005
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:14:25 -0500
From: Walter Knapp <>
Subject: Re:  non-professional setup

From: 

>>For that size you could carry a Sony ECM-MS957 and not be much
>>
>>>different. That matches the minidisc, no oddball plug matching. Or go
>>>even smaller at some noise hit with the ECM-MS907.
>>
> 
> Hi Walt and Grant and all those who have been giving me advice on this 
> projest..thanks so much. Will the ECM-MS907 have enough gain to get OK 
> recordings? 
> Or will it need an amplifier?

These Sony mics are designed to work well with their MD's. I've not 
tried a ECM-MS907, but have used a ECM-MS957 quite a bit. It is a very 
good local stereo mic. I've used it to pick up frogs for a little ways, 
maybe 100', but if you tried for longer distance the self noise would 
get you. No separate amplifier needed, it powers from a single AA battery.

 From what I've read the ECM-MS957 is considerable improvement in sound 
quality over the ECM-MS907 and a little less self noise. As a result 
I've always recommended the ECM-MS957 over the ECM-MS907. It is a little 
larger, but still pretty much a "normal" mic size. And it gives you two 
switchable field widths. And the ECM-MS957 has a removable cable (5 pin 
XLR at the mic), the ECM-MS907 is a fixed cable. Standard has a gold 
ministereo plug at the other end.

Either mic can be had at some savings off Ebay. Large numbers sold 
there. Try to get the "new" package, which will come with a tabletop 
stand and foam windscreen. A large Rycote mini windjammer will work with 
the ECM-MS957. Much better than the foam windscreen and less bulky. 
Those are sometimes on ebay too.

I think ECM-MS957 would be a good choice for what you are talking about. 
I still have mine along for knockabout uses. I've made a 5 pin to 5 pin 
cable for working with my Portadisc system.

Walt




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU