Thanks for the follow-up Gene, Mark, Rob and Adam.
I'm finally getting out in the field to test the Rolls PB224 this weekend.
-John Hartog
--- In "Gene Dorcas"
<> wrote:
> I ran a crude test here using common mic and noise source. I
couldn't see
> any difference.
> Gene
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> On Behalf Of Rob Danielson
> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:12 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] NH900 vs. RH10 gain False Alarm
>
> As he prepared to do the test, Alan discovered that the RH-10's mic
> sensitivity was set to "Low." The record gain is very close for the
> two units. I recently had several normal NH900 settings change at
> once which I suspect was from leaving the unit without a battery for
> several days. Rob D.
>
> At 9:59 AM -0500 9/22/05, Rob Danielson wrote:
> >Allan Haighton will be doing a test over the next week too. I don't
> >have a RH-10. Rob D.
> >
> >At 7:47 AM -0700 9/22/05, Eugene E Dorcas wrote:
> >>I will give it a try soon. It might be a few days before I get a
little
> time.
> >>
> >>John Hartog <> wrote:Hi Eugene,
> >>Since you own both recorders, any chance you could do a more formal
> >>comparison between the two? I think some of us would benefit from any
> >>further investigation into this matter. I had been considering a
> >>RH10, mostly based on descriptions of its nicely lit display, but if
> >>it means compromising gain, it's probably not worth it.
> >>- John Hartog
> >>
> >>
> >>> Eugene E Dorcas wrote:
> >>> I haven't done any purposeful comparisons but sometimes I feel
that
> >>my nh900 outperforms the newer rh10. I like the rh10 because of the
> >>easily viewable display at night while recording frogs. However, I use
> >>the mh900 before the rh10 when practical.
> >>>
> >>> Rob Danielson wrote:
> >>> At 8:16 AM -0700 9/21/05, Eugene E Dorcas wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> >I use a NH900 and a RH10 for my recorders.
> >>>
> >>> Have you, by chance, detected a difference in the amount of record
> >>> gain between these units? Another recordist reported to me
that his
> >>> RH-10 seems to have less gain. Preliminary. Rob D.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> "Microphones are not ears,
> >>> Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >>> A listening room is not nature."
> >>> Klas Strandberg
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>"Microphones are not ears,
> >>Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >>A listening room is not nature."
> >>Klas Strandberg
> >>Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>"Microphones are not ears,
> >>Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >>A listening room is not nature."
> >>Klas Strandberg
> >>Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >Rob Danielson
> >Film Department
> >University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
> >
> >
> >
> >"Microphones are not ears,
> >Loudspeakers are not birds,
> >A listening room is not nature."
> >Klas Strandberg
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Rob Danielson
> Film Department
> University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
>
>
>
> "Microphones are not ears,
> Loudspeakers are not birds,
> A listening room is not nature."
> Klas Strandberg
> Yahoo! Groups Links
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|