> 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.
Um,
Just to voice some devil's advocacy here, it's worth remembering that
devices like the LS-10 are in no way a 'waste of money.' If your goal
is to start doing regular nature recording, developing your field
craft, knowledge of local biophonies, species, and seasonal
variations, and collect some favorite moments, these devices are a
*fantastic* investment. They are much easier to lug around than any of
the larger and more expensive 'pro' level boxes, and frankly, the
quality you can get out of them is so good for the ease of use that
you could use them happily for many years.
This is alluded to in Rob's picking up on the idea of "critical" --
there's critical, as in, I want my relatives and birder friends to
hear how lovely that lark sounded down by the pond; and critical as
in, this is a species behavior survey tracking the change in local
dialect in response to the new power plant down the road. The latter
is critical in a technical sense. The former is critical in a way that
the LS-10 or its ilk are NOT going to let you down on!
E.g. my own case. Despite having invested in a much higher quality kit
with unimpeachable gear, I *still* regularly reach for two kits 90% of
the time: my (by nature recording standards) quite noisy Sonic Studios
DSM mics into minidisc -- half the time, not even HiMD, since I forget
to charge the internal battery; so I still record with c. 1998 era
minidisc! -- and more recently, the Zoom H2.
Yes, the results I get are much noisier than with my Sound
Devices/Sennheiser MKH kit.
But embarassing? Never! Most of the recordings I make with my
micro-kit are spur of the moment and would not have been made if I'd
only had my backpack's worth of 'best in class' gear as an option.
Sometimes that is no option... e.g. family hikes, esp. now that we've
got a very young daughter occupying kit space with her various
accoutrements!
It's true that I enjoy recording a wider array of source material than
a dedicated nature recordist in quiet environments -- but I suspect
that's going to be the case, subject wise, for many beginners; and
also, it takes some real effort to get to environments that demand
that quietest gear. For those who are sure (for whatever reason) they
must have the best possible gear, by all means, invest...
...but for those starting out, please do NOT shy away from easy to
find, easy to use, convenient kit like the LS-10 (or perhaps a bit
quieter, the very similar Sony PCM-D50?). You *can* upgrade if you
feel the need, but why not give it a few months in the field learning
what you like, happy that you have something that fits in your parka
pocket in the meantime...?
Anyway. YMMV. But I just wanted to interject a counter-voice lest new
members get the idea that the cheaper prosumer entry level gear serves
no purpose!
It's worth repeating: most of the most moving and evocative recordings
I've enjoyed were made with less than perfect gear, field practice,
etc...
...none of which is to say, we should not strive for or celebrate excellenc=
e.
Just that moving and inspiring results do not require the best of
anything, other than spirit, patience, work, and luck! :D
aaron
--
quietamerican.org
oneminutevacation.org
83% happy
9% disgusted
6% fearful
2% angry
|