Hi Syd,
Since viable habitat is disappearing so rapidly from all corners of
the world, why not get recordings that are both good and informative
at the same time? I think it is really important to collect as much
good data of what the natural world sounds like as we can in any way
that we can in the time we have left. And quality recordings are
germane to that issue. If we're spending any time out there with a
mic, let's aim for the best we can possibly do.
For the comprehensive study we did for the National Park Service in
2002 and that ultimately included some bird species ID, our equipment
featured 4 identical and calibrated sets of the following: Sony M1
DAT, MS mic systems consisting of a MHK30/40 combo (shock mounted,
Rykote windscreen, and tripod), Sound Devices MicPre, Sony
headphones, and an outboard re-chargeable battery [Ecocharge]). This
system worked really well and over the period of a year we collected
over 80 hours of great data from four sites.
Although, if I did it now I would probably upgrade to the Sound
Devices 722 because it has more flexibility and will provide a bit
more data for the same amount of field effort. However, the systems
can't be compared because DATs are no longer easily available (either
recorders or tape), and the 722 costs more than 3x as much as the old
M1.
Bernie Krause
>Naturerecordists have been wonderfully helpful with advice both for those
>wishing to start nature sound recording and for those seeking to make the
>highest quality recordings possible. Can anyone help me with a somewhat
>different inquiry?
>
>This comes from a nature conservation society wishing to use sound recordi=
ng
>to assist in identifying the bird species in areas of potentially
>significant habitat. This often includes sub-tropical rainforest where it
>is sometimes difficult to get a good look at a bird that is heard. In
>general, it is a matter of confirming the presence of species expected to =
be
>present, but not all calls of all species are going to be familiar. It is
>desired to record such calls for expert identification.
>
>I have been sound recording birds since 1968 and for the region concerned
>(south-eastern Queensland, Australia) I consider that for identification o=
f
>the species, the quality of the recording does not need to be of high
>quality. For calls that are familiar to me, a quite poor recording is in
>fact usually identifiable.
>
>But I am not competent to advise as to what currently available equipment =
is
>suitable and of moderate cost. In '99, I changed from analogue to digital
>recorder, and in view of my advanced age, I'm hoping my Tascam DAT recorde=
r
>will see me out. Thus I do not have any experience of today's mini-disk a=
nd
>flash disk recorders, and the like.
>
>I have seen, (and noted the details for future investigation which I've no=
t
>got around to doing) something called (I think) a USB Flash Disk with voic=
e
>recorder - JNC SSF-72, if I've got it right. Small. Rechargeable Lithium
>Ion batteries. And I gather the cost is modest. Is it a possibility?
>
>
>Any advice would be much appreciated.
>
>TIA
>
>Syd Curtis (Brisbane, Australia)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Wild Sanctuary
P. O. Box 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
t. 707-996-6677
f. 707-996-0280
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|