At 3:25 PM -0400 7/18/09, Matt Blaze wrote:
>
>Thanks. all, for the kind words.
>
>I'll try to do more of these comparisons under different conditions,
>but it depends on my ability to wrangle both the recorders and the
>time to use them simultaneously (my students are using some of them in
>my day job, too).
>
>Thanks Rob for your analysis -- very helpful. I find the performance
>of all these devices to be remarkable Although the self-noise is
>audible in the worst of the recordings, it's still not *bad*. And
>although the Sonys are the (clear) winners in terms of noise
>performance, they are also the largest and heaviest of their class,
>just a bit too big to live unobtrusively in a jacket pocket or
>backpack. Essentially, these tests convince me that that my practice
>of always carrying around the LS-10 or the ARES (the two smallest and
>lightest of the bunch) -- just in case an interesting sound comes up
>-- is likely not to make me regret my failure to have with me
>something bigger and better.
Hi Matt--
I took a Zoom H2 out with me to 4th of July weekend happenings to
test the built-in mics on robust sound sources-- a parade, street and
bandstand musicians, a baseball game crowd and a dunk tank and
fireworks. All of the subjects came out better than I thought they
would considering how easy it was to use the H2.
From my perspective, the drawback with simple, "pocket recording" is
I can't stop to make a good stereo recording if I want to. The stereo
imaging of the built-in mics is quite flat and unexciting. I tried a
bunch of micing positions with subjects that had potential. When the
subject to micing distance got under 3 feet, the image started to
come alive.
I'm not suggesting that one needs to carry heavy, ultra low-noise mic
rigs around, there are plenty of ways to generate exciting stereo
imagery using small, easy to mount and DIY stereo mic arrays.
"Stereo" done well seems to be a fairly important quality factor when
I'm enjoying field recordings. DIY stereo arrays based on space omnis
are a very economical way to improve the results of these "pocket
recorders" and many recordists and students also enjoy increasing
their participation in the recording process.
>The best recorder, like the best camera,
>is the one you have with you, after all.
>
>The dog bark is definitely revealing, and a very different image from
>the rest the recordings. When I started setting up, the dog in the
>yard two houses to the right was having a heated exchange with the dog
>in the yard of the house to the left, but by the time I was rolling it
>was just ending, apparently with the left dog getting the last word in
>and then shutting up. Oh well.
The dog is portrayed on the left with the M-S array and slightly to
the left with the H4n's and your mystery rig. He's in the center on
the others. Rob D.
>
>Best
>
>-matt
>
>On Jul 18, 2009, at 12:35, Rob Danielson wrote:
>
>> At 7:28 AM -0700 7/18/09, Dan Dugan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I finally got around to making simultaneous recordings (of a very
>>>> boring suburban soundscape) with a sampling of current generation
>>>> handheld recorders:
>>>>
>>>> * Nagra ARES-MII
>>>> * Sony PCM-D1
>>>> * Sony PCM-D50
>>>> * Olympus LS-10
>>>> * Zoom H4n
>>>> * Sennheiser MKH-800 Mid-Side pair on a Nagra VI (OK, not exactly
>>>> pocket size, but a useful baseline)
>>>> * A mystery mic that I'll describe later
>>>
>>>> For whatever it's worth, the audio can be found at:
>>>>
>>>><<http://www.crypto.com/audio/shootout/>http://www.crypto.com/audio/shootout/><http://www.crypto.com/audio/shootout/>http://www.crypto.com/audio/shootout/
>>>
>>> That's worth a lot, thank you very much, Matt.
>>>
>>> -Dan Dugan
>>
>> Hi Matt-
>> Same here!
>>
>> Matching background presence between the files (there were very small
>> differences in levels from your peak matches), I found HF noise
>> performance using the built-in mics performance decreased in this
>> order:
>>
>> Sennheiser MKH-800 (reference)
> > Sony PCM-D1 (tie with) Sony PCM-D50
>> Zoom H4n
>> Olympus LS-10
>> Nagra ARES-MII
>> Mystery mic (The HF response of this mic seems considerably
>> compromised)
>>
>> The dog bark provided me the most useful medium range stereo imaging
>> and overall tonal comparisons. The background ambience was most
>> useful for detecting the self-noise of the mics and wide stereo
>> imaging.
>>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/m6vvcj>http://tinyurl.com/m6vvcj (9mb QT movie)
>>
>> <http://tinyurl.com/m7m6ma>http://tinyurl.com/m7m6ma (mp3 with
>>bark and pres samples in this
>> order
>> Sennheiser MKH-800 (reference)
>> Sony PCM-D1
>> Sony PCM-D50
>> Zoom H4n
>> Olympus LS-10
>> Nagra ARES-MII
>> Mystery mic
>>
>>
>> A few things I noticed:
>>
>> (1) The LS-10's and ARES-MII's built-in mics are significantly
>> brighter.
>> (2) The built in mics have much less lateral stereo imaging than the
>> M-S reference but among these, the Zoom H4n and the Mystery X-Y mic
>> seem to be slightly wider.
>> (3) The built-in mics on the H4n seem to be a little quieter than
>> those in the LS-10. The LS-10's built-in mics are noisy enough to
>> lose the advantage this recorder should have over the H4n based on
>> input noise measurements of the mic preamps of these two recorders.
>> (4) The D50 has better frequency response under 130Hz than the D1.
>> The H4n also has pretty good response in the lowest frequencies
>>
>>
>> I guess its predictable (though unfortunate) that one would be able
>> to hear the self-noise of the built-in mics in surburban environment,
>> but it is interesting to hear how much less audible HF self-noise
>> there is in the built-in mics of the Sony units-- consistent with
>> Raimund's comment of a few days ago.
>>
>> The stereo imaging of all of the built-in mics does seem to be
>> minimal for distant subjects.
>>
>> I'm guessing the "mystery" mics are off the shelf DIY electrets
>> perhaps from radio shack plugged into a H2.
>>
>> Thanks again,
> > Rob D.
>>
--
|