Hi Frank,
I'm glad you found it helpful. One clarification: when I said
"Anything above about EIN -116 will work for the ME66 and the EM172s."
I meant above that on Raimund's list. In terms of dBu, that would be a value
lower than -116.
Also, the Rode NT4 is a bit less sensitive and therefore requires a quieter
preamp to go well with it, less than about -121 dBu(A). On Raimund's list that
means the Roland R-05, the Olympus LS-5/10/11, or the Sony PCM-M10 for small
portable, relatively inexpensive recorders. Or anything above those on the list
for larger portable recorders.
best wishes,
John
--- In Frank MacDonell wrote:
>
> 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 nature
> > 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 recording
> > 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 hissy.
> > 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 microphone
> > was the Rode NT4, bought on eBay for a very reasonable price. I was sorely
> > 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 signal
> > 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 ME66
> > 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 means
> > 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 in
> > the spring, so I built a very inexpensive (<$100) parabolic microphone from
> > 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 Telinga
> > 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 well
> > 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 yet
> > 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 an
> > excess of mechanical noise as the disk spins up and down every few minutes.
> > 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 that
> > 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 (refurbished,
> > for under $200, again on eBay. Without eBay I'd probably still be recording
> > 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 changed
> > 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 own
> > 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-ins.
> > 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. The
> > 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 over
> > 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 NT4
> > is almost useless outside. Even though the NT4 is not the quietest nor the
> > 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 reason,
> > 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 like
> > > Zoom HN2 would be a good way to start. Your comments are most welcome.
> > > Thanks in advance for your time.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Frank KD8FIP
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Frank KD8FIP
>
>
>
|