MX391 in a blimp or the NT4. I modified my NT4 fitting NT45-O capsules to it
and removing the fixed capsule angle. A pair of ears fit the capsules and the
whole lot slides into a blimp -end result pseudo binaural rig with improved SNR
due to the ears, keeping the battery option or phantom power. :)
Tree binuaral with the Shure mics would also sound good.
I recently traveled to Whitesands bay / Wales with rather too much gear, ended
up using Roland in-ear binaural mics + Neumann WSB100 wind screen for many of
the recordings and the MX391O blimp rig for the rest / waves / rock pools etc.
I guess the bottom line is to use something you know works or is proven from
prior field recording trips. Wind noise protection and adequate sensitivity
with low enough noise for the area.
-Mike.
--- In peter lenaerts <> wrote:
>
> Hi Tom
>
> I love the rig you built. Amazing.
> I am wondering though: don't you think the MX391 is really noisy? Or are you
> not bothered by that?
> My choice would be the Rode NT4, regardless of its weight.
>
> Good luck
>
> Peter
>
> On 18 Apr 2012, at 00:25, tk7859 wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > I will be joining some guided nature walks during the next couple of weeks
> > and have been thinking about which recorder/microphone to take along.
> >
> > The purpose of the 90 minute, late evening walks is to hear the courtship
> > vocalisations of Nightingales, which have started to arrive in this part of
> > England.
> >
> > Choice of rig is easy; it should be the LS-10 as it is so suitable for this
> > sort of activity. Microphone choice is more difficult. I have available a
> > Sennheiser MKE 300D, the zoomable parabolic rig, a Rode NT4 cardioid and
> > several head spaced boundary arrangements.
> >
> > Ideally, a shotgun type mic or a parabolic reflector would seem to be most
> > suitable. Unfortunately I am not too keen on the MKE 300D as it is mono and
> > mine seems to lack sensitivity. The zoomable parabolic is too heavy - it
> > needs a sturdy tripod for best results. So the NT4 (maybe using the Marantz
> > 661with its phantom power, rather than the battery power option) could be
> > the best match for the situation, although a bit heavy for using on the
> > hoof?
> >
> > I then had the idea of putting a handle on the lightweight MX391 boundary
> > rig. I rummaged through my junk and found an old handle/bracket for
> > fastening an external flash unit to a camera. This was equipped with a 1/4
> > inch thread arrangement allowing it to be fitted direct to the boundary.
> > The last two photos in this album show the arrangement
> >
> > https://picasaweb.google.com/G0SBW.PM/MX391MicRig?authuser=0&feat=directlink
> >
> > This morning there was quite a wind. So, I went out and recorded the sound
> > of it blowing through a large Willow at the bottom of the garden. I used
> > the hand held MX391 rig with wind protection as per the photo. The
> > recording was made at 9:15 am. At that time the wind speed recorded at this
> > weather station (1.5 miles away) was 35 mph with gusts up to 45 mph
> >
> > http://www.sailbrightlingsea.com/home_live-weather/
> >
> > While recording I sheltered at the side if a 6 foot, woven panel, garden
> > fence (it can be heard rattling in the recordings) and some shrubbery. I
> > started recording with the LS-10 set to "high 6" but there was some
> > overloading. A snippet at this setting is here
> >
> > http://soundcloud.com/g0sbw/mx391-wind-6
> >
> > I reduced the gain to "high 4" which stopped most of the overloading
> >
> > http://soundcloud.com/g0sbw/mx391-wind-4
> >
> > These are best listened to using headphones.
> >
> > The hand held boundary rig is certainly a practical proposition. However,
> > it is omni directional and I wonder if the cardioid NT4 would be a better
> > choice as I will be in a group of about 20 others.
> >
> > Cheers, TomR
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> http://www.surfacenoise.be/peter
> http://recordings.surfacenoise.be
> http://www.aisikl.net
> |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>
>
>
>
|