Hi Peter,
whack your headphones on (computer speakers won't handle the sounds) &
take a listen to tracks 2, 4 & 6 on this:
http://engravedglass.bandcamp.com/album/jez-riley-french-instamatic-snow\
donia?permalink
<http://engravedglass.bandcamp.com/album/jez-riley-french-instamatic-sno\
wdonia?permalink>
i've been recording fence & other found wires for years - always
interesting. The recordings on this release are, as ever, unprocessed.
ta.
--- In Peter Shute <>
wrote:
>
> Jez, what do you mean by "recording fence wires"?
>
> Peter Shute
>
>
> --------------------------
> Sent using BlackBerry
>
> ________________________________
> From:
> To:
> Sent: Sun Jun 24 03:15:31 2012
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] R-44 issue
>
>
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> the FR2LE really isn't neat the Sound Devices - its a long way off in
terms of not only specs (specs on paper only say so much as we all know)
& in terms of in the field. The pre-amps on the Fostex don't have as
much headroom & are considerably noisier. More importantly they don't
sound as good, but they are good for the price.
>
> As for the specs on tests this is a big subject that's been discussed
on here a few times - the thing is that these tests only tell half the
story. There are a few sites that, for example, specs the self noise of
the DR-680 at lower than the R-44 but others that find the opposite. The
R-44 pre-amps burn-in slower than the DR & I guess that might be
something to do with it.
>
> Much of my recording is concerned with very, very quiet sounds, most
of which a recorder such as the Fostex is incapable of capturing simply
because the self noise is louder than the sound being recorded. Thats
the reason I bought a Sound Devices recorder.
>
> Also, the pre-amps & paths on the FR2LE don't handle non-conventional
mics well - I don't know the science of why, just the effect - but for
example when recording fence wires with the FR2LE there's a ton of
frequencies that just aren't there. I once had a long discussion about
this & was told that Fostex route power to their inputs differently for
one thing & also that their pre-amp design is limited because of the way
they route power. One effect of this is that, for example, some FR2LE's
need phantom power on with contact mics & some don't - its had us
scratching our heads on more than one workshop.
>
> forgetting spec-talk for now, put simply the difference in available
gain between the FR & the SD is that the FR is about 60% of what the SD
has & in terms of self noise the FR is about 40% more than the SD has.
>
> The FR2LE is a good recorder, the PMD661 is a good recorder, the R-44
is a good recorder - all for their cost. The Sound Devices is, without
any doubt whatsoever a very different thing (& I speak as someone who
still sometimes uses a minidisc too & has no beef with lower cost units
per say).
>
> --- In
<naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.c\
om>, "robin_parmar_sound" robin@ wrote:
> >
> > Jez wrote:
> >
> > > thanks Robin, I knew of this test (which by the way has different
results from quite a few others). I've used all the other recorders &
actually the R-44 has a lower self noise than the FR2LE & the PMD661 for
example - but there is a knack to getting the gain & sensitivity knob in
the right positions for optimum performance.
> >
> > I would like to know more about this, since I have not read much
disagreement with the tests I referenced. Would love to be better
informed!
> >
> > I confess to being surprised that the noise would be lower than the
FR-2LE, which is already at Sound Devices quality. Some of my recordings
are already right at the limits of what is audible / possible, IMO.
> >
> > -- Robin Parmar
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
|