Aaron Ximm's response my my reply:
Aaron Ximm wrote:
Heya,
>thanks for a balanced, well-thought and informative email. Although you
>may think the Phonography and Nature Recordists lists are tired of your
>opinion, I would beg to differ, and also ask you either to post your reply
>to me in public yourself, and let me forward your reply to both lists.
Feel free if you insist. :)
>Aaron Ximm wrote:
>>Re: 722 (I love mine!) and HiMD, I trust you've seen Rob Danielson et al'=
s
>>analysis of the preamps. The HiMD is in the same class in terms of noise
>>and gain as the 722 -- I won't say "quality" but noise will not come from
>>there. :)
>My reading of his reviews was that a Rolls phantom power supply supply
>plus a HiMID would be close to a 722. But if I wanted to carry around two
>or three different boxes to do my recording, I would have gitten the
>Edirol R4 to go with my HDSP QuadMic and an extrenal battery, and then
>record 4 channels in high quality!
There's something I'm missing here, really, which is that most of the mics
you've inquired about work *direct* with HiMD (or suppose an Edirol R09
etc), but require extra boxes *because* you're using the 722. The mics I
was thinking about -- Soundman OKM, Core Sound HEBs, Sonic Studioes,
WL183s, etc., all either work direct off plug-in power as supplied by a
HiMD.
The HEBs are the odd ones out as they require a 9V battery supply that Len
Moskowitz makes for them. I've not seen a version of the DPAs that can
power off 48V phantom though I'm pretty sure there is one, but Len does
match the capsules which I value a good deal.
But anyway, the Rolls therefore is a red herring?
>My general tendency is to go for a Core Sound High End Binaural set right
>now. But I would have to say that the communication form them is much
>slower than with the DSM people... I wonder how much benefit would come
>from the Core Sound mods than if I just bought two DPAs and wired them up
>myself. I heard from Rob Danielson that you had some good things to say
>about the Shures. I also tried out his pair and they did seem like a vast
>improvement from the Panasonic capsules I use now.
Fwiw even Leonard's DSMs using the Panasonics sound way better than every
other Panasonic-based design I've heard. Just not as quiet as the other
options.
Leonard is a great guy and very responsive in all the years I've known
him. I had a mediocre experience with Len at Core myself, I ordered their
1/8" stereo miniplug to XLR adatper plus a bunch of other stuff -- couple
hundred bucks' worth -- and paid for expedited shipping, but after a week
when nothing'd arrived I called and found out the XLR breakout was
backordered -- the stuff finally arrived, laughably via expedited
shipping, weeks later. If I hadn't inquired I'd never have known. Not very
inspiring.
That said the mics are really nice. :)
However I REALLY REALLY recommend getting a WHB from Leonard at Sonic
Studios if you don't have one for any of these small mics that would fit
in it. It's optimized for his mics but would also work with the other
small ones (not 100% sure about the WL183s) but it's really what makes his
gear so great and instantly transparently useable. Wonderful.
>>If money is *truly* no object I'd also consider the Schoeps CMC mics with
>> the active cables and detatched capsules.
>Did think about this, and I was tracking a seemingly cheap set on EBay for
>a while. MBHO also makes a very similar but much less expensive active
You know one thing that's prevented me from going the CCM route myself is
the thought that the gain in sensitivity vs. noise would be only partially
useful if I continued to use them as I have my DSMs -- ie, stealthy
mounting on my head.
No point in having exquisitely quiet $4000 mics on my head if I can now
hear myself breathing and gurgling in every recording where the different
would theoretically come out, right?
>>None of the options you mention will work directly off phantom; all will
>>require powering boxes (except maybe the raw DPAs, don't know about that)=
.
>>That's an extra $75 or so. Fwiw I got a cable from Core that adapts 1/8"
>>stereo mini to dual XLR to get into my 722. I'd recommend going that rout=
e
>>anyway, so you can always plug direct into your backup [Hi]MD -- which I
>>*know* you will carry for when the battery on the 722 dies or the drive
>>fills up -- right? ;)
>Think I'd rather carry extra batteries and a spare 1 Gig CF than an extra
>HiMID (plus batteries, media, etc). But I haven't had the 722 die yet.
>They always say, there's two kinds of people--those that don't back up,
>and those that have never had a hard drive fail. Interpolate this
>accordingly for recorders! ;-)
To be blunt, I think you would be making a HUGE mistake to not always
carry a backup MD/HiMD with media whenever you are out recording for more
than a day trip. HUGE.
A couple gigs of CF are going to get you what, an hour or two of
recording? A battery is going to get you a couple hours? Neither worth
anything if something schitzes the firwmare in the 722?
Don't get me wrong. I love my 722. But if you're going to be carrying
binaural mics that can work directly into a very quiet very high gain HiMD
I'd call you worse than foolhardy to not have one in the bottom of your
bag! And you can take that as a threat. >;)
If I sound vehement it's because I really feel strongly about this and
have praised god for my backup deck on multiple occasions in situations
where there simply was no other way to keep recording.
Beyond simply having a backup, I also strongly suspect you will find you
use the 722 in known quiet situations and with the MKHs, but use a HiMD
with binaurals when wandering the streets randomly or just grabbing your
gear to have with you "just in case." It's so small and painless to carry
esp with small binaural mics -- even with DSMs in their headband -- that
it offests the downsides. I think.
>>My experience has been that 95% of the time for my generalist interests
>>the noise is not an issue. I invested a *lot* of money last year to chase
>>that final 5% and still will end up with the wrong (ie, easy to use and
>>carry) gear when I need it... so...
>Conversely, I've discovered that I COULD HAVE made a very good recording
>if only my gear had functioned better. And that the good recordings I've
>made only become useable with lots of post processing to equalize out the
>noise that largely comes from my DAT, MD, Panasonic caps or AT822. So it's
>more than 5% for me.
I have to say that if you're using cheap panasonic mics and an 822 in most
of the situations you've been dissatisfied in, the noise is almost all in
the mics and the quality loss is all in the mics.
The 822 is just not an impressive mic. I bought one early on as an
alternative to my DSMs and have *never* been satisfied with it, and always
am *very* surprised when I heard something I like that was recorded with
it or the 825.
Same thing for cheap binaurals, I bought some as a scratch/loaner pair and
they're just not worth using when I have nicer things.
Frankly I'm not very impressed with the OKMs either though I love the work
of people who use them like Francisco Lopez. Go figure.
But I'd be curious what situations you've been in where better-quality
mics into MD/HiMD/micro-DAT would fail. The only type I can think of are
very quiet ambiances and attempts to record natural/environmental quiet (
e.g. inside churches) etc which are challenges to almost all kit... :/
These are all things I've spent a lot of time agonizing over myself in the
past year or so, since i've invested in my own "ultimate 2-channel kit" to
compliment my binaural stuff. I'm VERY curious to see what happens on my
next real trip -- how the convenience vs quality vs stealth etc. dynamics
play out for my kind of recording...
best as ever,
aaron
--
www.quietamerican.org
83% happy
9% disgusted
6% fearful
2% angry
|