Even as a staunch 722-er, I'm with you, Klas. It's a lovely
device...particularly when one achieves a certain age.
Bernie
On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:58 AM, Klas Strandberg wrote:
>
>
> I agree that the LS-10 input amp doesn't seem to be the most silent.
>
> But:
> Having used handheld recorders that switches them self off or, on
> occasions, don't work at all for no understandable reason... crash
> when USB connected or make the PC crash, dirty phantom power,
> radiates HF and in one case had a 300 Hz sine wave at -45 db.... have
> had to switch glasses to read the display, got lost in menus and
> almost erased recordings, fumbled in the dark with strange lids over
> the batteries... flash card get stuck, lids falling off, poor
> headphone amps, tripod threads at the most strange places...
>
> The LS-10 has made me like recording again. All you need to do is use
> a mike with a high enough output to run over the few extra db noise
> that the input amp causes.
>
> Not having done measurements, it sounds to me that the ME-series does
> that, for example.
>
> Klas.
>
> At 12:23 2009-07-02, you wrote:
> >Hi Rob,
> > I have recorded with a binaural set based on 2 x
> > EM158's in my anechoic chamber - this would be more related to
> > Pauls original setup, fairly low noise binaural mics (compared to
> > Panasonic WM6x's) I think the point with the recorders is similar
> > to photography, you either take the point and shooter and live with
> > the noise - or take the SLR and a backpack to match. I know the
> > backpack wont fit in my pocket and is far less discrete in use :)
> > Its contents are also far more expensive than the recorder in my
> > pocket but alas we know the path eventually leads to the NT1A. :)
> >
> >Regarding the noise, I mailed you on 30th June / EM158 Noise Tests
> >with a zip containing an annotated .amad file. I can resend if it
> >didnt make it.
> >
> >http://urlme.net/audio/RecNoise-E158.flac
> >
> >The test setup in the Semi finished :/ Semi-Anechoic Chamber:
> >
> >Pair of binaural EM158 headphones placed pointing up on acoustic
> >foam, approx. 0.5M in front of them a very quiet clock.
> >
> >Recorded Sequence is:
> >
> >Recorder: Edirol R09HR
> >Mic: 2 x Em158N
> >Obs: Plug in Power ON - Gain Hi, Max Level (80) =3D Maximum for this =
> recorder.
> >
> >0.5 Sec Gap
> >
> >Recorder: Edirol R09HR
> >Mic: 2 x Em158N
> >Obs: Battery box (2 x 6.8 K, 9V battery, 2.2uF decoupling caps ->
> Out)
> >
> >1 Sec Gap
> >
> >Recorder: FR2-LE
> >Mic: 2 x Em158N
> >Obs: Battery box out -> FR2-LE - Preamp Max Gain, Rec Level Max Gain
> >
> >Recorder: FR2-LE
> >Mic: 2 x Em158N
> >Obs: Battery box out -> FR2-LE - Preamp 3-Oclock, Rec Level Max Gain
> >
> >I then tested a converted Edirol CS-15 Mic:
> >
> >Recorder: FR2-LE
> >Mic: Converted CS-15, Left Channel =3D 3 x Em158N - Right Channel =3D
> >UEC14 Figure 8.
> >Obs: Battery box out -> FR2-LE - Preamp Max Gain, Rec Level Max Gain
> >
> >Recorder: Edirol R09HR
> >Mic: Converted CS-15, Left Channel =3D 3 x Em158N - Right Channel =3D
> >UEC14 Figure 8.
> >Obs: PIP Power, Max Level, Gain Hi.
> >
> >No leveling / matching has been made - the flac contains the
> >original cropped audio
> >placed into the sequence as described above.
> >
> >BR,
> >Mike.
> >
> >
> >--- In Rob Danielson <>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > At 7:47 PM +0000 7/1/09, picnet2 wrote:
> > > >Hi,
> > > >I'll chime in here with my "Holiday Mic test" - not intended to
> be a
> > > >scientific test and wasnt intended for release but I think others
> > > >may find it interesting. - Im just debating which (air) mics to
> take
> > > >on holiday.
> > >
> > > Hi Mike--
> > >
> > > re:
> > >
> > > >Avoid the H2 if you can its mic-pre's are hiss factories. (i own
> > > >one) - line in is reasonable, LS-10 is a much better choice.
> > >
> > > If one is going to use low-noise mics? Your test seems to
> provide an
> > > example of the importance of this distinction (see below).
> > >
> > > >
> > > >Heres a quick test where all mics are normalized to roughly the
> same
> > > >level. - This may give some indication of a lower noise mic
> (NT4 at
> > > >around 16 dBA) vs multiple Electrets in a DIY mic costing < 80
> > > >dollars. Its noise figure is perhaps around 18-19dBA. The
> sphere has
> > > >~13 dB more output than the NT4 under the same conditions.
> > > >
> > > ><http://urlme.net/audio/fr2le-nt4-sphere-r09hr-sphere-nt4.mp3>htt
> > p://urlme.net/audio/fr2le-nt4-sphere-r09hr-sphere-nt4.mp3
> > > >
> > > >Not a brilliant time to recording in the garden due to the
> traffic
> > > >noise - I wanted to get some impression of how the different rigs
> > > >sounded as Ive never tried this combination.
> > > >...
> > > >Recorded Sequence as follows:-
> > > >
> > > >FR2-LE with NT4 from its battery.
> > > >FR2-LE with DIY Sphere Mic (Polyethylene Marine Buoy + 3xEM158
> > > >capsules on each channel) - running via a DIY battery -> XLR box.
> > > >plus me moving around to orient the sphere towards the birds.
> > > >Edirol R09HR with NT4 from its battery -> Mic / PIP OFF / Gain
> High
> > > >& Max level.
> > > >Edirol R09HR with Sphere via the same battery box.
> > >
> > > If performing to the manufacturer's self-noise spec of 16 dB(A)
> > > (which I doubt based on this test ands other comparisons I've
> made:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/6zhyxx) the NT-4 _should_ be on the cusp of
> > > revealing some input noise difference in the pre performance of
> the
> > > recorders.
> > >
> > > I took the closest matching segments from your four gear
> combinations
> > > and approximately matched the playback levels:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/kn596f
> > >
> > > This "hiss" is fairly well matched in segments 1,2 and 3
> suggesting
> > > that these three mics/powering conditions have similar noise
> > > performance that is audible above the recorders' pre noise,...
> > > HOWEVER, what happened to the "hiss" in section #4?
> > >
> > > This discrepancy suggests to me the "hiss" in tests 1, 2 and 3 is
> > > environmental and not mic-self noise audible above the pres. (Or
> > > another, yet accounted for change in the results Test 4).
> > >
> > > You'll probably need to do such comparisons in a much quieter/more
> > > controlled location and, better yet, use/include your NT-1A's for
> > > reference. Probably best that all of the combos be recorded at max
> > > or close to max gain too. Rob D.
> > >
> > >
> > > >BR,
> > > >Mike.
> > > >
> > > >--- In
> > > ><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>
> > groups.com,
> > > >Rob Danielson <type@> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> At 5:36 PM +0000 7/1/09, Tom wrote:
> > > >> > > If one is only going to use noisy mics (as Klas points
> > out), then one
> > > >> >> can save money and buy an Zoom H2. An LS-10 provides no real
> > > >> >> advantage and still has more input noise than most
> recordists like
> > > >> >> when they discover the important role mic-self noise can
> play. :-)
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Having had personal experience of both these recorders I'd
> have to
> > > >> >say that the LS-10 does have significant advantages over the
> H2. If
> > > >> >you keep the "Mic Gain" switch in the low range the input
> noise is
> > > >> >low enough that it doesn't impinge on recordings made with a
> K6/ME66
> > > >> >with a reasonable degree of ambient sound (wind, birdsong,
> insects
> > > >> >etc.)
> > > >> >
> > > >> >The H2 on the other hand had a pretty awful mic input which
> was
> > > >> >significantly noisier than using the built in mics. The only
> way
> > > >> >you'd want to use the H2 would be with an external mic
> preamp which
> > > >> >would negate the cost saving over the LS-10!
> > > >> >
> > > >> >These are just subjective observations, and I can't directly
> compare
> > > >> >the two as I sold the H2 in order to trade up to the LS-10 -
> if
> > > >> >anyone has the means to directly compare the mic inputs on
> the two
> > > > > >units I'd be interested to see the results.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Tom W.
> > > >>
> > ><<http://www.pterodaktyl.co.uk/>http://www.pterodaktyl.co.uk/><http://=
www.pterodaktyl.co.uk/
> >http://www.pterodaktyl.co.uk/
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi Tom--
> > > >> Listening for "quality" is inherently "subjective," so such
> > > >> observations are equally, if not ultimately, more important. A
> > > >> technical note to support your observation: An ME-66 mic with
> > > >> ~10dB(A) self-noise _should_ show-up the pre differences in
> the H2
> > > >> and the LS-10. However, if one plans to use electret mics of
> the type
> > > >> that Paul asked about (with more than 22dB[A] self-noise) any
> pre
> > > >> difference would not be audible. This might be an important
> fact if
> > > >> one knows that one will only use the electret or other
> noisier mics
> > > > > with the recorder. Rob D.
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------------------------------------
> >
> >"While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> >sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> Krause
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> Telinga Microphones, Botarbo,
> S-748 96 Tobo, Sweden.
> Phone & fax int + 295 310 01
> email:
> website: www.telinga.com
>
>
>
>
>
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-996-6677
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
Google Earth zooms: http://earth.wildsanctuary.com
SKYPE: biophony
|