John - Most helpful. Thanks very much for a great story and the
recommendations. This is exactly what I was looking for.
FJM
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 8:50 AM, John Crockett <> wrote:
> **
>
>
> Hi Frank,
>
> There are many very knowledgeable and generous folks on this list from
> whom you will learn a great deal. Welcome to it!
>
> David and Dan's questions are very important: what do you want to record
> and how much can you spend? In the end you'll want several microphone
> setups for different purposes. But where are you beginning?
>
> I wonder if you might find it helpful to hear how I progressed and where =
I
> am now. I knew next to nothing when I began about 10 years ago, and now
> although I have added to my knowledge, perhaps I know a little bit less
> than nothing because the field of possibilities has expanded so!
>
> Do ask questions and become familiar with the particular demands of natur=
e
> recoding before you buy a recorder or microphones. For instance, I think
> you'll find that the Zoom recorders are not ideal for most nature recordi=
ng
> as they have fairly noisy preamps for external microphones. There are
> better choices.
>
> My first microphone was homemade from two very cheap, low-sensitivity,
> high noise Radio Shack electret condenser capsules (cat # 270-090) and a
> small triangle of mahogany. I had no idea what I was doing. Horribly hiss=
y.
> I could not stand listening to those recordings for more than a few
> minutes. Regrettable because the soundscapes I was recording then were
> irreproducible. I've simply never heard the like again in 10 years.
>
> I was interested in recording soundscapes in stereo, so my next microphon=
e
> was the Rode NT4, bought on eBay for a very reasonable price. I was sorel=
y
> disappointed in the noise level of this microphone, until I discovered on
> this list that the cable contained a -12dB pad that was killing the signa=
l
> output. I removed the pad from the cable, and now I use this microphone
> often. It works well for me for capturing a stereo soundscape in which
> there is also a focal point to the recording, something in the center of
> the image that I want emphasized.
>
> Then it seemed to me that I wanted something more sensitive to "get in
> closer" to certain animal vocalizations, so I bought a used Sennheiser ME=
66
> shotgun microphone. This is a solid performer, but at this point I do not
> use it very often. Two of these together make a nice lower-noise
> alternative to the NT4, but for me the convenience of the NT4 package mea=
ns
> I am more likely to use it. This matters. The best mic in the world is no
> good if it sits at home. How willing you are to haul gear around is a
> factor to consider.
>
> Then I really wanted close-up, finely detailed recordings of birds,
> especially the woodcocks who are among the first arrivals to our fields i=
n
> the spring, so I built a very inexpensive (<$100) parabolic microphone fr=
om
> a plastic dish (eBay again!) and EM172 microphone capsules from
> Frogloggers.com. For my purposes this works very well, although it is
> cumbersome to carry around. It doesn't roll up the way the superior Telin=
ga
> dish does. But it sounds pretty good. One lesson I learned is that
> parabolas do not work very well with low frequencies. Fantastic for birds=
.
> Nearly useless for grey seals, one of my main subjects, who vocalize at
> around 500 Hz.
>
> Then I decided that I was interested in recording a variety of whole
> soundscapes, not just those with focal animals, and the Rode stereo
> microphone was too focused, lacking the spaciousness that I have heard in
> so many excellent nature recordings. So I built a very, very inexpensive
> soundscape microphone, again using EM172 capsules, and based on the
> boundary array designs of Rob Danielson (his PBB2N in particular). I love
> this microphone array. It is rugged, It is fairly small, It is cheap and
> easy to make, and it works with a wide variety of relatively inexpensive
> portable recorders. The EM172s have a pretty decent signal/noise ratio,
> especially when used in a boundary array, and so far have worked very wel=
l
> for me.
>
> Caught by the allure of ever-quieter microphones, I bought a pair of
> Audio-Techinca AT3032 microphones, which are very low noise, but I have y=
et
> to use them effectively because I do not have the budget for one of the
> high-end recorders/preamps that they require. That was wasted money, so
> far. Used Sound Devices MixPre preamps, or the popular Fostex FR2-LE
> recorder, are often available used for around half the cost of a new one,
> but still beyond my reach at the moment.
>
> For the past 6 or 7 years I have been using a Sony MZRH1 Hi-MD recorder
> for all my recordings (before that I had a used Sony MZ-R70 minidisc
> recorder). This little unit has served me very well. It has very quiet
> preamps. Its only flaws, in my opinion are a cumbersome menu system and a=
n
> excess of mechanical noise as the disk spins up and down every few minute=
s.
> These are long discontinued.
>
> I just graduated to an Olympus LS-11, which is a very nice flash memory
> recorder, sadly no longer in production in the U.S. The other recorder th=
at
> is often spoken of highly is the Sony PCM-M10. For me it was a tossup
> between the PCM-M10 and the LS-11, and the LS-11 won on price (refurbishe=
d,
> for under $200, again on eBay. Without eBay I'd probably still be recordi=
ng
> with that crummy little Radio Shack homemade mic, the only thing that was
> available to me locally in 2003!. Amazing to think how things have change=
d
> in these 10 years.).
>
> You'll want to acquaint yourself with Raimund's list of recorder preamp
> noise levels:
>
> http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm
>
> The quieter recorders are at the top of the list. But as David pointed
> out, a sensitive mic, like the ME66, does not need a super quiet recorder
> preamp. Anything above about EIN -116 will work for the ME66 and the
> EM172s. You'll see that the Zoom recorders are not so good, however. I ow=
n
> the Zoom H2, but never use it for nature recording with an external mic,
> although the built-in mics are about as good as any of the other built-in=
s.
> I use it to record our concerts and for capturing musical ideas.
>
> One thing to note is that the built-in microphones on any recorder, no
> matter how expensive, are not that good compared to a decent external
> microphone. Good for catching a spontaneous recording where the signal is
> strong, but not so good for recording really quiet soundscapes.
>
> This summer I was recording grey seals in the Bay of Fundy, and I had the
> parabola, and the ME66, and the Rode NT4 stereo mic. I did not have the
> soundscape array with me because I have not fully worked out the wind
> protection on it and it was very windy. I have purchased (you know where)=
a
> Rode Blimp for the NT4. Works great.
>
> As it turned out, the NT4 was my best microphone in that situation, where
> I thought either the parabola or the ME66 would carry the day. It seems
> most of the signal was not coming directly from the source (seals over a
> mile from shore), but reflected off the water and the rocks around me. Th=
e
> more directional microphones missed most of the signal; it is lost in the
> sound of wind and waves. The NT4 captured much more and those are the
> recordings I am using.
>
> I would say that in all I have spent a little more than $1200, spread ove=
r
> about 10 years.
>
> If I were starting now with a limited budget I would probably get a
> PCM-M10 and the Rode NT4 with blimp. Without full wind protection, the NT=
4
> is almost useless outside. Even though the NT4 is not the quietest nor th=
e
> most sensitive, nor does it have the most exciting stereo image, it is a
> handy package, and I grab it more often than anything else for that reaso=
n,
> and I am happy with the results.
>
> This is of course just one person's experience, driven by limited budget
> and particular needs. There is better pro gear than I have mentioned here=
,
> if you have the budget for it.
>
> It's worth noting that most of my recordings are played through two
> loudspeakers in a PA system, and the NT4's paired cardioid mic capsules
> work well for that purpose. For private listening with headphones, I'd
> rather listen to the boundary array. Check out Rob Danielson's and Curt
> Olson's and Vicki Powys's web sites. Many ideas for inexpensive DIY
> soundscape microphone arrays. Also the DIY boundary mic blog at
>
> http://diystereoboundarymics.blogspot.com/
>
> best wishes,
>
> John
>
> John Crockett
> Westminster, Vermont
>
> www.naturalcontemplative.com
>
> Let us live in harmony with Earth
> And all creatures
> That our lives may be a blessing.
>
>
> --- In Frank MacDonell wrote:
> >
> > Looking for some advice regarding equipment to get started. My research
> > indicates a shotgun mic with a balloon cover and a digital recorder lik=
e
> > Zoom HN2 would be a good way to start. Your comments are most welcome.
> > Thanks in advance for your time.
> >
> > --
> > Frank KD8FIP
> >
>
>
>
--
Frank KD8FIP
|