Alan,
I'm prone to jumping in on newbie questions and don't be put off if
you hear differing views. :-)
> I think we=92d want these sounds to have as much separation from
> the background sounds as possible.
Separtion is the biggest problem with field recording, possibly the
only problem as long as you don't overload the recording. Keep the
record level low as with digital you can always increase it later.
> Because our main goal will be to capture recordings
> (birds, orthopterans, and frogs) in the field that we can later try
> to identify, I think we=92d want these sounds to have as much
> separation from the background sounds as possible.
You can do a lot to a recording later with filtering such as a bass
cut and you can sometimes enhance the species frequenies you are
interested in, but there is really no substitute for getting close
with a good mic. The problem is that the wildlife is likely to depart.
> 3) I think portability and =93on the go=94 would be valuable attributes
> in a field biology class.
Ideally the field kit should go into a small rainproof rucksac.
Use any old headphones or earpiece while recording to make sure a plug
hasn't come out. If the wildlife is moving a level indicator it is
recording it but there may be other problems so listen in.
> I suspect noise would be best minimized, but stereo image and
> spatiality probably less important
Stereo is nice, and useful in group recordings, but a clean mono is
nicer. For good noise figures, go for a mono gunmic in a large
windshield. Wind can be a major problem. Use a maximum bass cut on the
recorder as well to avoid overloading and, as with low level, you can
reverse this afterwards.
> 4) Total budget almost too embarrassing to mention; probably less
> than $300, at least initially.
> ...
> I doubt I currently own any relevant gear (does a Sony digital
> voice recorder count?).
If the recorder will record "music quality" and has a suitable mic
input socket, it is a starting point.
Think about spending out on a "basket" type windshield (second hand?)
or you will be limited to low wind or calm conditions. It will also
protect your mic from weather, mud, etc. You can make a "fluffy cover"
yourself.
The microphone is less important. (!?) The reason I say this is that
when you get hooked on recording, you will never be satisfied with
your mic or mics. My Sennheisers list at $600 upwards (old type used)
each on eBay and they are not perfect, but just about as good as you
can get. Go for mono to halve your initial costs. Look at used
equipment lists for self powered gunmics - nothing else is suitable -
and the longer the better.
BTW last week I bought three old Semnheiser MKH-815 T mics - the long
gunmic which is the ideal mono wildlife mic type, for around =A3160
total on eBay. I already have a good mount and basket windgag, but
that cost more. I'm making a stereo windgag mount/windgag out of
gardening hanging baskets and plastic mesh.
Recording "quality" and frequency response is less important and not
worth initially paying big money for. Mic noise is irritating but may
not interfere with species recognition. It can be reduced with sound
editing software (I use free Audacity)
> There apparently once was a shotgun
> mike somewhere in the department
This may be a good one but it also may need a separate power unit and
plug adaptors.
David
David Brinicombe
North Devon, UK
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
|