naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PCM portable recorder

Subject: Re: PCM portable recorder
From: "Rob Danielson" danielson_audio
Date: Fri Mar 7, 2008 4:53 am ((PST))
Hi Nigel--
I'm not comfortable recommending any of these recorders for recording
atmosphere or ambience in quiet locations (which is usually more
demanding than recording individual calls) because their noise and
gain performance has yet to be carefully compared to known recorders.
It would require a "surprise" result if past trends are a useful
guide.

I heard a test Bruno Hack made with a Rode NT-4 comparing an H4 and a
Fostex FR2-LE. The  Rode NT-4's self noise is rated ay 16dB(A) but
the noise generated by the H4 is quite audible (not so with the
Fostex, of course). That would make the H4 substantially noisier than
a Hi-MD recorder which I would regard as having the maximum amount of
pre noise I'd like to see in a recorder purchased for this purpose. I
hope Eric shows the H2 to be a big surprise but I'm no longer very
hopeful it could be a good match for low noise mics. For reference,
the noise performance of the HiMD recorders is on par with or better
than that of the your PMD 670. The gain performance of the HiMD
recorders is excellent, 5dB more than SD 722's and 744Ts.

If you run each of the model numbers of the small recorders through
the list archive and include the term, "noise" you might get an idea
of how the reports on the small recorders are trending.

These recorders, using their built-in mics, are probably a safe
choice for urban ambience and loud effects/music recording (and a X-Y
stereo image works okay for your needs).  Be sure to go over the
power options and file size specs carefully; there have been some
"gotchas" reported.

I can ship my Art Phantom III, 2- NT1-A mics & clocks ;-) to anyone
for a few days who can assemble some these recorders together with a
known, reference recorder, to run comparison tests.  The
"non-recording" time I have at this point is invested in reading and
testing mics/rigs, but there there are many recordists asking
reasonable questions your like yours, Nigel. Rob D.

  =3D =3D =3D =3D =3D


At 2:48 AM -0600 3/7/08, Gianni Pavan wrote:
>Hi, I would also consider the Zoom H2.
>Gianni
>
>2008/3/7, rackseng <<nigelvideng%40aol.com>>:
>>
>>  Hi all.
>>
>>  As always I looking for some advice.
>>
>>  I've been out and about with my new PMD 670 & ME66/K6P, in a rycote
>>  etc..
>>
>>  Great for specific sound projects, but now I'm working on a few
>>  simple atmosphere items, so I need something much more lightweight
>>  with, dare I say, built in mic etc.
>>
>>  Need to record general atmos to accompany digi stills of events. With
>>  an option to plug in a ME66 (running on own batt phantom), or a
>>  simple radio mic.
>>
>>  Any comments on Zoom H4, Edirol R-09, Tascam DR1 would be greatly
>>  appreciated.
>>
>>  I'm fairly new to wildlife sound recording, and everyone in this
>>  group has helped me so much, many thanks to all.
>>
>>  Nigel.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>


--







<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