naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Olympus LS-10 reviews

Subject: Re: Olympus LS-10 reviews
From: "Max Catterwell" oatcruncher
Date: Tue Jul 1, 2008 4:07 pm ((PDT))
I would be interested, as a novice, to know at what price point a
'decent' not 'cheap' recorder starts. Is it say, with the likes of the
Fostex FR2 and the Tascam HD-P2; both around =A3700.00? Or is it with
something like the Sound Devices 772 at about =A31800.00? What do you have=

to pay?
Having concluded that the likes of the LS-10 don't really cut the
mustard, and are apparently a waste of money, I'm sure that a lot of
beginners like myself, and more importantly potential beginners, who
have clearly been ill advised by people like the Wildlife Sound
Recording Society, would welcome any hints that would save depression
and abject embarrassment later.
Max


Greg Simmons wrote:
> --- 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie Krause
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>



<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