> Beware of specs. "Self noise" is often quoted but is often
> meaningless because it is not defined.
OK, this is good to know.
> The reason I suggested high output mics - that is output in mV/Pa SPL
> (millivolts per Pascal sound pressure level) not the maximum
> possible - is that the input amp hiss on any affordable recorder is
> going to be audible unless swamped by a high gain mic. For instance
> the Sennheiser ME66 gives a beefy 50 mV/Pa. The Nady SGM12 is about 5
> mV/Pa or 20dB lower.
Looking at Rob Danielson's mic comparison chart is confusing me - because a=
lot of the mics *appear* to have relatively low sensitivity (to the ME66, =
for example), and when all's said and done high self noise too. The Rode Vi=
deomic Oryoki suggests is only 15 mV/Pa... and has a self noise figure of 2=
0 dB(A). It might be my best bet for getting started though.
> Also forgot my usual advice to use a bass cut. You can put the bass
> back in again if needed with a sound editor like Audacity but it often
> prevents wind or handling noise spoiling the recording.
This is new to me - is this done via the recorder?
> > I'm still not clear on the advantages/uses of stereo vs mono.
>
> Suffice it to say that once you've recorded in stereo you won't want
> to go back to mono. :-)
OK, I think mono will be OK for most of my initial requirements anyway, tho=
ugh not sure about the migrating birds, I had thought that for later analys=
is mono would be more suitable.
thanks,
Arwen=20=09=09=20=09=20=20=20=09=09
|