Hi Mike
Thanks for your comments - thought provoking as usual.
I don't think I have the DIY skills to even think about tackling modificati=
ons to my NT4. However the the Roland in-ear mics set me googling. I see =
it is possible to monitor through them while recording. It seems a possibi=
lity. Is there much of a feedback problem?
Another item I read suggested they were hissy. Given the price of them (ni=
ce to see UK price has not been inflated too much cf USA) maybe they use Pa=
nasonic WM61As.
Thinking about this I remembered a pair of spectacle mounted WM61As I made =
4/5 years ago. I unearthed them and recorded while listening through headp=
hones. No feedback noticeable. A photo is shown here
https://picasaweb.google.com/G0SBW.PM/MicForNightingaleWalk
Given the nature of the walk with 20 people listening for the birds (I've b=
een told there could be up to 40 males looking for mates; each with its own=
territory) I think there will be a lot of walking. A head worn, binaural m=
ic + earphones seems a good way to go.
I've started making a stereo pair of EM172s which can be spectacle worn or =
used in a boundary rig. Not sure about the headband wind preventer shown i=
n the photo - maybe a woollen beanie will be better. Eight days to the wal=
k so I should have made an informed choice of gear by them
Cheers TomR
--- In "Mike Rooke" <> wrote:
>
> 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 a=
nd the whole lot slides into a blimp -end result pseudo binaural rig with i=
mproved 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 / roc=
k pools etc.
>
> I guess the bottom line is to use something you know works or is proven f=
rom prior field recording trips. Wind noise protection and adequate sensiti=
vity with low enough noise for the area.
>
> -Mike.
>
|