--- In Rob Danielson <>
wrote:
> Maybe we should try to include a qualifying phrase like, "for point
> and shoot recording" when we talk about these recorders?
Agreed. It borrows from the instamatic camera world, and
automatically 'places' the device in the market. I have used this
term along with "happy snap" to describe products like the Zooms and
similar. I don't see that as a negative thing, by the way. In both
the photography and audio worlds, technology has advanced 'point and
shoot' and 'happy snap' devices to the point where they do a very
acceptable job (depending on your applications and expectations).
What would be really cool would be a Zoom or similar with a built-in
MS array and an IR focusing system (as used in instamatic cameras)
that would automatically adjust the polar response of the M capsule
and then the MS ratio based on the distance to the sound source and
the desired width. Part of the 'focusing' process might also include
sampling the SPL and choosing an appropriate recording level. As with
the cameras, you'd have a few presets to select (e.g. wide/narrow
stereo image, headphone/speaker playback, etc., equivalent to
landscape/portrait and all that stuff) and the recorder would then
take care of the rest. And, of course, the user would have the option
of over-riding any of the automatic settings if desired.
For people who need 'point and shoot' simplicity in a recorder, that
might be useful...
> I've noticed
> that people are starting to talk about LS-10 as the new miracle
> recorder and its a noticeable drop in noise performance from Hi-MD.
People on tight budgets are always quick to hail the new 'saviour'
product; the device that costs next-to-nothing yet promises to knock
the existing and more expensive technologies off their perch. Hence,
a lot of raving about a new product as if it's The One. No offence
meant to anyone here, but I personally find this phenomenon rather
pathetic. Gimme the red pill every time, thanks!
Saviour products arrive regularly in the computer industry and others
that rely on silicon technology - things are always getting faster,
better and cheaper, and there is a tendency to inadvertantly
extrapolate that thinking across to other industries as well. But the
problem with sound recording is that a very large part of the process
is bound to the laws of physics and acoustics, not silicon and
software, and those things can't be changed so easily. We can't make
a new improved version of the lyrebird, for example, with higher SPL,
better directivity, extended endurance and a more outgoing nature in
order to make it easier to record! So, we're back to the physics of
capsule design, the informed choice of recording equipment, and the
application of fieldcraft.
[Here's a silly idea for someone with a good collection of nature
sounds: create a nature recordists' theme park in a large
acoustically isolated and treated space where there are no planes,
motors or other annoying sounds. People can walk through fake forests
and jungles, 'spot' wax dummy birds and animals (reproducing
previously made recordings through built-in loudspeakers), sneak up
and record them onto handheld point-and-shoot recorders. Then, in the
souvenir shop that they have to pass through on the way out, they
present the recordings they 'captured' and are given copies of the
originals for a small fee.]
> I'm
> interested in helping people who want to be able to make high
quality
> recordings or people who want to start off with a system they can
> grow into, not out of.
Me too. Buying something cheap now and replacing it with something
better later is usually false economy, unless the purpose of buying
cheap is simply to test the water before taking the big splash. I
wrote a magazine column on this topic some time ago, called 'Adding
Down, Buying Up'. It refers to music recording, but the principles of
adding down and buying up are transferrable to all aspects of sound
recording. It's based on the fact that no matter what we think our
budget might be at the moment, if we're not happy with the result
we're probably going to keep spending money until we are. If we
acknowledge that fact, then it makes sense to spend a bit more from
the beginning to avoid wastage.
- Greg Simmons
|