naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

3. Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison.

Subject: 3. Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal mics comparison.
From: "Peter Shute" pshute2
Date: Wed Jul 18, 2012 6:18 pm ((PDT))
The original problem was that John Crockett wants a recorder like the M10 b=
ut with a stereo image like an LS-7 or LS-5. If the M10 is to be made suita=
ble by adding external mics then they need to be in a really tiny package.=
=0D
=0D
Peter Shute=0D
=0D
>-----Original Message-----=0D
>From: =0D
> On Behalf Of Gregory=0D
>O'Drobinak=0D
>Sent: Thursday, 19 July 2012 10:32 AM=0D
>To: =0D
>Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10=0D
>internal mics comparison.=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>Well, there is a cheap & quick solution for a simple array that gives=0D
>better=0D
>sound, but is not really binaural. It is similar in concept to strapping=
=0D
>a pair=0D
>of omnis to either side of a small tree, like Bernie has mentioned=0D
>before.=0D
>=0D
>Go down to ToysRUs or Walmart or something and get a round foam Nerf=0D
>ball. These=0D
>are about 7" in diameter and cost about $5.00.=0D
>Attach the EM172s to either side of that foam ball with a strip of Lycra=
=0D
>tied=0D
>around it, facing forward. Punch a hole in the bottom of the ball so=0D
>that you an=0D
>mount it on a gooseneck shaft attached to an inexpensive, lightweight=0D
>tripod.=0D
>You really can put that foam ball on most anything since it weighs very=0D
>little.=0D
>The pull some fake monkey fur over it and you're done! The whole mc rig=0D
>should=0D
>cost less than $40.00 for everything (the fur may cost as much as the=0D
>mics!).=0D
>Oh, and just solder the EM172 onto a proper stereo shielded cable,=0D
>terminated in=0D
>a 1/8" Stereo mini-plug befoe attaching them to the ball (I found a good=
=0D
>small-conductor stereo cable from an old pair of headphones, but make=0D
>*sure*=0D
>that it it shielded). Then you just plug it into your M10 and use the=0D
>PIP menu=0D
>option to power the mics.=0D
>=0D
>I've also had good luck using the Shure MX391LP/O microflex boundary=0D
>mics that I=0D
>found on ebay for ~$26.00. I made a very simple adapter using two TA4M=0D
>connectors wired appropriately to a stereo 1/8" mini-jack. Then you just=
=0D
>plug=0D
>everything together and use a cable terminated into a 1/8" mini-plug at=0D
>both=0D
>ends, plug it into the M10, use PIP and again you are off & running.=0D
>Lightweight=0D
>& low-cost. What yo do with the 391s is up to you; there are an infinity=
=0D
>of=0D
>choices such as the foam ball, various versions of the 'SASS' array,=0D
>trapazoidal=0D
>foam blocks, etc. All of these are very lightweight, compact, cost-=0D
>effective and=0D
>quick to make. Just do it!=0D
>=0D
>This will definitely be better for stereo separation than the built-in=0D
>M10 mics=0D
>and the mics I mentioned are essentially equivalent in term of self-=0D
>noise to=0D
>that of the M10.=0D
>=0D
>Enjoy!=0D
>=0D
>- Greg=0D
>=0D
>________________________________=0D
>From: rock_scallop <=0D
><john_hartog%40rockscallop.org> >=0D
>To: =0D
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>=0D
>Sent: Wed, July 18, 2012 6:38:38 PM=0D
>Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10 internal=0D
>mics=0D
>comparison.=0D
>=0D
>Hi Vicky,=0D
>That processing procedure was quick and gross, and later think I=0D
>improved it=0D
>with a bit more playing around.=0D
>=0D
>The problem I have with most arrays is the LF stuff gets piled in the=0D
>center,=0D
>attenuating that a bit might make sound more natural, however this time=0D
>I think=0D
>I just I over did it.=0D
>=0D
>But you are right, an external array is the best solution for improving=0D
>the=0D
>stereo image. I don't like head worn arrays because I can't look around=0D
>while=0D
>recording, and the sound of my own breath is so often noticeable.=0D
>=0D
>John Hartog=0D
>rockscallop.org=0D
>=0D
>--- In =0D
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , vickipowys=0D
><> wrote:=0D
>>=0D
>> John,=0D
>>=0D
>> I have to agree with Greg, your MS processing did not work for me=0D
>> either, when listening through headphones.=0D
>>=0D
>> In the first clip the environmental noise is evenly spaced around me=0D
>> and I can travel outwards, but in the processed clip I feel like I am=0D
>> in a pressure cooker and can't escape.=0D
>>=0D
>> Not a very technical explanation I know :-)=0D
>>=0D
>> To save on all this post-production, the best quick solution for good=0D
>> stereo from a pocket recorder is to use external head-worn electrets=0D
>> (e.g. EM172s), quick to put on if they are mounted on a lightweight=0D
>> headband from an old set of headphones.=0D
>>=0D
>>=0D
>> Vicki=0D
>>=0D
>>=0D
>>=0D
>> On 18/07/2012, at 2:30 PM, Gregory O'Drobinak wrote:=0D
>>=0D
>> > John:=0D
>> >=0D
>> > Interesting. But when listening to this with cans on, the second=0D
>> > part sounded=0D
>> > like it was pulling down hard on my ears!=0D
>> > It was a very strange sensation, with a very curious spectral=0D
>> > shift. Not at all=0D
>> > pleasant.=0D
>> >=0D
>> > I've been thinking about some ways to 'spread out' a narrower=0D
>> > stereo image, but=0D
>> > it may be very tricky with M-S processing. Perhaps having a wider=0D
>> > sound stage=0D
>> > like the SASS-type rigs is not at all possible with closely-spaced=0D
>> > capsules, no=0D
>> > matter what the method. Seems like you can't put in the proper=0D
>> > inter-aural=0D
>> > delays that one would have with a natural spacing of the mic=0D
>> > elements ex post=0D
>> > facto, but I could be wrong. I'd like to see if anyone can really=0D
>> > pull this off=0D
>> > effectively.=0D
>> >=0D
>> > What exactly was your process?=0D
>> >=0D
>> > Thanks!=0D
>> >=0D
>> > - Greg=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> > ________________________________=0D
>> > From: rock_scallop <>=0D
>> > To: =0D
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com>=0D
>> > Sent: Tue, July 17, 2012 10:39:01 PM=0D
>> > Subject: [Nature Recordists] Re: Olympus LS5, LS7 and Sony M10=0D
>> > internal mics=0D
>> > comparison.=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> > For the sake of understanding values or risks of Mid-Side=0D
>processing.=0D
>> > Here is a URL to a bit of my urban backyard test with the pcm-m10.=0D
>> > The first part has no added EQ, the second part has Mid-Side=0D
>> > processing to=0D
>> > correct the stereo image.=0D
>> >=0D
>> >=0D
>> > http://soundcloud.com/john-hartog/jh-test20127017-pcmm10-ms/s-TnZrf=0D
>> >=0D
>> > Any comments are welcome.=0D
>> >=0D
>> > John Hartog=0D
>> > rockscallop.org=0D
>> >=0D
>> > --- In =0D
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , "rock_scallop"=0D
>> > <john_hartog@> wrote:=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >> Hi Robin,=0D
>> >> It is always nice when post-processing is not needed, but show me=0D
>> >> an external=0D
>> >> array for nature recording that will not benefit from some post EQ=0D
>> >> most of the=0D
>> >> time.=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >> Of course one must be careful not to over do it.=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >> What do you mean by "skew your phase and introduce other=0D
>> >> distortions." If it=0D
>> >> sounds good, is it not good?=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >> John Hartog=0D
>> >> rockscallop.org=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >>=0D
>> >> --- In =0D
><naturerecordists%40yahoogroups.com> , "robin_parmar_sound"=0D
>> >> <robin@> wrote:=0D
>> >>>=0D
>> >>> John wrote:=0D
>> >>>=0D
>> >>>> On the other hand, the advantage of the lower noise mics in the=0D
>> >>>> M10 is the=0D
>> >> potential for an extended acoustic horizon in quieter settings,=0D
>> >> and for those=0D
>> >> capable of making MS adjustments in post that might make a=0D
>> >> difference.=0D
>> >>>=0D
>> >>> Of course the best thing to do is use external mics when low=0D
>> >>> noise is of=0D
>> >> paramount importance. Then you can control the recording topology=0D
>> >> exactly,=0D
>> >> without resorting to post-processing that will skew your phase and=0D
>> >> introduce=0D
>> >> other distortions.=0D
>> >>>=0D
>> >>> -- Robin Parmar=0D
>> >>>=0D
>> >>=0D
>>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D
>=0D





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU