At 2:24 PM +0000 7/22/08, clay wrote:
>--- In
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>=
m,
>Rob Danielson <> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Clay--
>> As you are familiar with the MicroTrack and Zoom H2 and, if I recall
>> correctly, you own a Hi-MD and do not find the former two up to your
>> standards in terms of their mic input pre noise, you may be in for a
>> wait.
>
>Rob,
>
>thanks as always for your thoughtful reply.
>
>bummer about the wait. yes, I do have Hi-MD,
>and had thought it was time to make the move
>to SD cards exclusively.
>
>OTOH, I guess 16 db self noise is not a horrible
>limit for a pocketable solution.
>
>I guess I'm surprised that no one are using
>preamps of the quality of the minidisk in
>a similar size package.
They're "on-Par" with the noise performance achieved by consumer
grade recorders in years past-- including MD. We've discussed the
"whys" of this several times and I guess its up to enlightened
recordists** (e.g. crazy nature/artist types :-) ) to let the
manufacturers knows its important to us. Very low noise pre
performance does not seem to be high a priority based on the typical
"reviews" these pocket recorders are getting. We know the
manufacturers can build that quality in for little or no extra cost
if they make it a priority. Rob D.
** I note that the term, "Nature Recording" to describe, "higher
quality/more critical" recording is being more widely used. We are
making some impact on the consuming-end, perhaps we could further
raise the dB level about our needs? This could also include more
questioning of reviewers who are reinforcing status quo when they
state, without sufficient testing, claims like, "the pre in the unit
sounds clean,.. etc." Good testing must include very quiet, external
mics at high gain.
>
>>
>> As has been pointed out, recordists using mics with over ~16 dB(A)
>> self-noise should be quite happy with the LS-10 and Raimund feels a
>> high sensitivity mic like the ME-67 effectively lowers the LS-10's
>> input noise to an acceptable level. Recordists wanting to record
>> ambience in quiet locations, as quite a few do with Hi-MD, might not
>> be as happy. Here's a list of noise specs for many mics
>>
><http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/pages/MicSpecs-Cover.html=
>http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/pages/MicSpecs-Cover.html
>> . There's also a list with mics whose self-noise is under 17dB(A).
>>
>> Based on Raimund's input noise ratings
>>
>><http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm>http://www.avisoft.com/recorder=
tests.htm
>>, I was including the LS-10
>> as a possible CF "replacement" for Hi-MD, but tests that Vicki and
>> Lilly recently posted have convinced me that there are some
>> significant audio performance compromises with this recorder. The
>> noise produced is quite warm and noticeable, there are discrepancies
>> in noise and level between the two channels of the two recorders I
>> studied and the response under 125 Hz seems to be poor when using the
>> external mic jack. Using Low-Sens and 24 bit recording mode did not
>> seem to improve noise performance that much in Vicki's tests we
>> further evaluated. There's also a peculiar time drift problem.
>>
>> "Surprises" like this remind that there is really no reliable
>> substitute for side-by-side testing using very low self-noise mics if
>> one is looking for a great recorder (audio performance wise) at a
>> lower cost. Even creating a list of CF recorder "candidates" for
>> such a task is quite a task!
>>
>> Number-wise, the next, most-promising candidate for testing might be
>> the Sony PCM-D50 which some of us expect to match Hi-MD's input noise
>> performance. Oryoki and others have pointed out that its not that
>> much smaller than a FR2-LE,..
>
>yeah, agreed,
>
>>
>> One, concise way to look at the options is, the new CF recorders are
>> likely on par with MD recorders in terms of mic pre noise
>> performance, BUT, if your mics are noisy-- ALL of these recorders
> > area good match and you can freely compare them in terms of
>> non-quality affecting factors like recording media, convenience, etc.
>> Rob D.
>>
>
>thanks again, Rob
>
>cheers,
>Clay
>
>
--
|