Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences  (Read 35537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Hi,

I've been searching these forums for a couple of days but I'm still struggling to make up my mind. I've asked people at Gearslutz and was advised by Ozpeter to ask the TapersSection community for more information. Basically, I want to get into field recording and I'm looking for a field recorder with internal mics good enough to capture nature sounds. From what I've read, the Sony PCM M10 has a very low noise floor and is generally held in high regard around here. However, the placement of its omni mics results in a somewhat lackluster stereo image. I do not exclude the possibility od using external microphones somewhere down the road, which might also be a problem because the M10 doesn't have any XLR inputs (I don't want to buy external preamps). Ozpeter suggested that I should get the M10 and add a pair of Roland CS-10 binaurals which are PiP-powered. I think it's a good solution but are there any other recorders which would rival the quality of the M10's internal mics but with XLR inputs and decent preamps? Seemingly, the only options worth considering are the Roland R-26, the Olympus LS-100 and the Zoom H6... I can strech and buy one of these if they'll provide decent results on their own (at least until I can afford good external mics). All of them have some annoying quirks but what matters the most is the quality od the internals. Is the H6 a step-up from the rest of the Zooms or is it still noisy? I'm sorry for bothering you, I'm sure you're all fed up with such threads but all the available options make my head spin... I genuinely don't know which recorder and which mic to buy. Thanks in advance.

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2014, 02:24:17 PM »
Hi,

I've been searching these forums for a couple of days but I'm still struggling to make up my mind. I've asked people at Gearslutz and was advised by Ozpeter to ask the TapersSection community for more information. Basically, I want to get into field recording and I'm looking for a field recorder with internal mics good enough to capture nature sounds. From what I've read, the Sony PCM M10 has a very low noise floor and is generally held in high regard around here. However, the placement of its omni mics results in a somewhat lackluster stereo image. I do not exclude the possibility od using external microphones somewhere down the road, which might also be a problem because the M10 doesn't have any XLR inputs (I don't want to buy external preamps). Ozpeter suggested that I should get the M10 and add a pair of Roland CS-10 binaurals which are PiP-powered. I think it's a good solution but are there any other recorders which would rival the quality of the M10's internal mics but with XLR inputs and decent preamps? Seemingly, the only options worth considering are the Roland R-26, the Olympus LS-100 and the Zoom H6... I can strech and buy one of these if they'll provide decent results on their own (at least until I can afford good external mics). All of them have some annoying quirks but what matters the most is the quality od the internals. Is the H6 a step-up from the rest of the Zooms or is it still noisy? I'm sorry for bothering you, I'm sure you're all fed up with such threads but all the available options make my head spin... I genuinely don't know which recorder and which mic to buy. Thanks in advance.

Not sure what your budget is, but you should check out the new (yet-to-be-released in the West) SONY PCM-D100 which, based on recordings found on the web, seems to have superb internal microphones. It also records at high quality PCM 24/192 and DSD 2.8 formats.

It does not have XLR inputs, so if you want those, I would guess people on the forum will point you to the Sound Devices or Marantz recorders.

You can make extremely good recordings with PIP mics into the M10. You can also purchase very small preamps from people who make them here on the forum that will enable you to use better mics. Once you're out in the field with bigger hand-held or mounted microphones, it's not really such a problem to add a small preamp in your pocket or bag.
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2014, 06:42:21 PM »
Thanks! I'd love to get a D100 but I'm sure it'll bear a bonkers price tag when it launches in Poland. Might be around 4000 zl, which is a lot. My budget allows me either to get the M10 with binaurals or to buy one of the mentioned recorders and expand their capabilities with external mics later. I'd really love to buy an M10 + Usbpre2 + ext mics and all the fancy gear but I simply cannot afford it. It's a shame that Sony discontinued the D50.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2014, 06:45:04 PM by Amatsubu »

Offline flipp

  • resident curmudgeon
  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2014, 07:11:21 PM »
While it has been out for a few years, check out the Fostex FR-2LE. Very low noise floor and pretty good pres, decent internal omni mics, XLR -1/4TRS combo inputs, on-board P48 for external mics; can be had used for $250 and up if you wait and watch. One currently on ebay for $250 that has been relisted twice, each time with a lower opening bid. Seller lists Poland as a country he will ship to.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/141169191063

Offline earmonger

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
  • 20-20000 Hz
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2014, 10:43:41 PM »
There's a whole email forum called Nature Recordists that can probably give you very specific tips.

http://www.naturesongs.com/naturerecordists.html

For what it's worth, I recorded an interview outdoors with the PCM-M10 internals, sitting on a hillside, and the birds came through quite nicely. But the levels were set for the conversation, so I wasn't cranking it up to get the birds alone, which might reveal more self-noise.

Ozpeter is a real expert and I have great respect for him, but I disagree with him about his strong dislike of the PCM-M10's stereo image. Omni or not, there is definitely a stereo image through the internals. You could, if you wish, put a little baffle between them when you record to increase the sense of separation.  There are also stereo widening effects you can use in post-processing, even with a freebie like Audacity.

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=71707

And if you want a Sony D-50 you can still find them for around $400 on eBay--don't know what the circumstances are with eBay in Poland, but its US version recently made international shipping a whole lot easier.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR3.TRC2.A0.Xsony+d-50&_nkw=sony+d-50&_sacat=0&_from=R40
« Last Edit: January 18, 2014, 10:55:43 PM by earmonger »

Chimney Top

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2014, 11:55:56 PM »
While it has been out for a few years, check out the Fostex FR-2LE. Very low noise floor and pretty good pres, decent internal omni mics, XLR -1/4TRS combo inputs, on-board P48 for external mics; can be had used for $250 and up if you wait and watch. One currently on ebay for $250 that has been relisted twice, each time with a lower opening bid. Seller lists Poland as a country he will ship to.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/141169191063


FR-2LE is a good recorder, but the internal mic's are awful.  The Roland R26 mic's are very good.  I haven't used the LS-100, but it may be a good choice to use internal mic's and it has XLR inputs for potentially using external mic's.

Chimney Top

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2014, 12:01:21 AM »
Here is a list for reference (from a thread I started about a year ago).


2 Channels:

(Handheld/Pocket Size)

Tascam DR-100 (XLR/3.5mm)
Tascam DR-100 mkII (XLR/3.5mm/digital)
Marantz PMD 660/661 (XLR)
Marantz PMD 620 (3.5mm)
Edirol R-05 (handheld, 2 channel (3.5mm)
Edirol R09/R09H (handheld, 2 ch, 3.5mm) - discontinued
Sony M10 (handheld, 2 channel (3.5mm)
Sony PCM-100
Pyle Pro PPR80 (3.5mm)
Ikey Audio M3 (3.5mm)
Olympus LS-10/LS-10S/LS-11/LS-20m (audio and video)/LS-12/LS-14 (3.5mm)
Olympus LS-100 (XLR/TRS/3.5mm - 2 ch simultaneous recording, multitrack editing)
Tascam DR-40 (XLR/TRS, no 1/8" input)
Tascam DRV1-HD (audio - 3.5mm, and video)/DR-05/DR-03 (3.5mm)
Nagra SD (XLR adapter), Ares, Lino, Pico (3.5mm)
Sony PCM-50 (3.5mm/digital)
Korg MR-1, Korg MR-2 (SD 1-bit, 3.5mm)


(Larger Size)

Marantz PMD 670/671 (XLR, 3.5mm/digital)
Fostex FR-2
Fostex FR-2LE (XLR/TRS)
Tascam HDP2
Korg MR-1000
Sound Devices 702/702t/722
Nagra VI/LB




More than 2 channels:

(Handheld/Pocket Size)

Zoom h4/h4n (XLR/3.5mm - 4 ch)
Roland R-26 (4 external ch: XLR/TRS combo input and 3.5mm, 6 total ch)
Tascam DR-2d (handheld, 4 channels (both inputs 3.5mm)
Zoom H6


(Larger Size)

Tascam HSP82 (8 ch)
Sound Devices 744 (4 ch)
Sound Devices 788 (8 ch)
Sound Devices 633 (6 ch)
Edirol R4 (4 ch)
Edirol R44 (4 ch)
Tascam DR-680 (6 ch)
Cymatec LR-16 (TRS, 16 ch)
Aeta 4MinX (4 ch)
Fostex DCR302 (3 ch)
Sound Devices 664 (6 ch)
Roland R-88 (8 ch)


IOS Recording Devices:
Tascam IXJ2
Apogee One/Duet/Quartet IOS (XLR/TRS)
Fostex AR4i
« Last Edit: January 19, 2014, 12:04:27 AM by Chimney Top »

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2014, 01:42:47 PM »
Thanks for your help:)

There's a whole email forum called Nature Recordists that can probably give you very specific tips.

http://www.naturesongs.com/naturerecordists.html

For what it's worth, I recorded an interview outdoors with the PCM-M10 internals, sitting on a hillside, and the birds came through quite nicely. But the levels were set for the conversation, so I wasn't cranking it up to get the birds alone, which might reveal more self-noise.

Ozpeter is a real expert and I have great respect for him, but I disagree with him about his strong dislike of the PCM-M10's stereo image. Omni or not, there is definitely a stereo image through the internals. You could, if you wish, put a little baffle between them when you record to increase the sense of separation.  There are also stereo widening effects you can use in post-processing, even with a freebie like Audacity.

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=71707

And if you want a Sony D-50 you can still find them for around $400 on eBay--don't know what the circumstances are with eBay in Poland, but its US version recently made international shipping a whole lot easier.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trksid=p2050601.m570.l1313.TR3.TRC2.A0.Xsony+d-50&_nkw=sony+d-50&_sacat=0&_from=R40


I've checked eBay a couple of days ago but the prices are a bit high for a used product without a valid warranty. There's no problem with shipment to Poland but there are problems with additional taxes. By buying anything for over $100 from the US you risk having to pay a substantial customs fee. It might happen or it might not happen but the risk's still there. I'm a bit afraid to pull the trigger, especially that a used D50 is already a tad more expensive than a new H6, even without factoring in the customs fee.

About the M10's stereo image, Ozpeter gave me a link to a VST which can widen it a bit and unclutter the low-end. There definitely is a certain degree of stereo imaging (it has to be;p), I guess it's just not pronounced enough to be satisfactory for him. The M10 might be a solid choice, with the dedicated windscreen (expensive;/) it should cost me about the same as the Zoom H4n. With binaurals, the price should be somewhere around the H6 or the LS-100. Maybe someone will share their opinions about the other recorders?



Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2014, 06:49:35 PM »
Here is a link to a recording I made last summer with my M10 using internal mics (level set at 4.0, 24/96). The M10 was sitting on the railing of my front porch. This may give you an idea of the stereo spread (or lack of it).

There is a very loud moment at 02:17 when a small plane flies overhead. Again, at 04:46, when some birds take off, it gets a little loud.

https://app.box.com/s/21pwlgbeei5vlb6qcn04
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2014, 08:23:47 PM »
Here is another part of the same recording. None of the parameters have changed.

A train goes by, and the M10 does a good job of capturing the low rumble from these trains, vibrating through the bedrock (Canadian Shield) under this area.

https://app.box.com/s/cojxc2jcf0e5yrij5yn8
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2014, 09:32:10 PM »
Thanks for your help:)



 The M10 might be a solid choice, with the dedicated windscreen (expensive;/)

Check the Retail Section below for Dead Muppets priced affordably. 

Offline John Willett

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1550
  • Gender: Male
  • Bio:
    • Sound-Link ProAudio
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #11 on: January 20, 2014, 06:40:30 AM »
While it has been out for a few years, check out the Fostex FR-2LE. Very low noise floor and pretty good pres, decent internal omni mics, XLR -1/4TRS combo inputs, on-board P48 for external mics; can be had used for $250 and up if you wait and watch. One currently on ebay for $250 that has been relisted twice, each time with a lower opening bid. Seller lists Poland as a country he will ship to.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/141169191063


FR-2LE is a good recorder, but the internal mic's are awful.  The Roland R26 mic's are very good.  I haven't used the LS-100, but it may be a good choice to use internal mic's and it has XLR inputs for potentially using external mic's.

The FR-2LE's internal mivcs were not designed to be used for recording, rather as emergency note-takers.  It was designed to be used with external mics, which it does superbly.

It's batter than virtually all of the pocket machines.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #12 on: January 20, 2014, 09:43:34 AM »
Omni or not, there is definitely a stereo image through the internals. You could, if you wish, put a little baffle between them when you record to increase the sense of separation.

Rigging up some sort of baffle between the mics is likely to be the most most significant improvement you can make when recording nature and ambiences with the internal omni mics built into any small recorder.  Here's a link to a tread with some photos I posted years ago about doing that with the original R-09 was released (which did not have very good built-in omnis, yet the mic/line inputs were good).  I suspect the omnis built into the M-10 are significantly better than those in the R-09 and would work nicely this way. 









Assuming the omnis mics themselves are of decent quality and the noise floor of the mics and recorder is low enough, omnis are in general an excellent choice for this sort of application, and baffle seperated omnis a prefered setup.  The primary problem with built-in opmnis is that they are too close together to work well as an unbaffled A-B spaced pair given the small dimentions of the recorder.  Introducing a baffle between them corrects for that design problem.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #13 on: January 20, 2014, 01:33:38 PM »
Thank you all!

Here is another part of the same recording. None of the parameters have changed.

A train goes by, and the M10 does a good job of capturing the low rumble from these trains, vibrating through the bedrock (Canadian Shield) under this area.

https://app.box.com/s/cojxc2jcf0e5yrij5yn8

Thanks for the effort! It seems that the self-noise of the M10 is low enough. The stereo imaging is not brilliant but it's there;p


Omni or not, there is definitely a stereo image through the internals. You could, if you wish, put a little baffle between them when you record to increase the sense of separation.

Rigging up some sort of baffle between the mics is likely to be the most most significant improvement you can make when recording nature and ambiences with the internal omni mics built into any small recorder.  Here's a link to a tread with some photos I posted years ago about doing that with the original R-09 was released (which did not have very good built-in omnis, yet the mic/line inputs were good).  I suspect the omnis built into the M-10 are significantly better than those in the R-09 and would work nicely this way. 









Assuming the omnis mics themselves are of decent quality and the noise floor of the mics and recorder is low enough, omnis are in general an excellent choice for this sort of application, and baffle seperated omnis a prefered setup.  The primary problem with built-in opmnis is that they are too close together to work well as an unbaffled A-B spaced pair given the small dimentions of the recorder.  Introducing a baffle between them corrects for that design problem.

Thanks for the tip! Do you think that placing binaural mics in reasonable distance from each other (e.g. by attaching them to some sort of DIY poles) would also yield decent results? I know this is not exactly the "proper" way of doing binaural recordings but it might be interesting.

Offline Amir

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #14 on: January 20, 2014, 01:58:02 PM »
Based on your budget, I suggest that you take a closer look at Zoom H6. Its internal XY mic is really good (definitely superior to that of the LS-100 or the Roland model you mentioned), and its preamps are also good for XLR mics -- again better than those of the LS-100. People say that the internals of the Zoom H6 are similar to those of the D50. Also, unlike the D50, The H6 offers 4 XLR inputs. As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes. Also, the M10's audio quality is a bit dark and muffled -- I prefer the D50/H6 mics.
All that said, the D100 is a definite step-up from all of those recorders when it comes to internal mics and the quality of the recorder itself.

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2014, 04:03:04 PM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2014, 04:19:33 PM »
Thanks for the tip! Do you think that placing binaural mics in reasonable distance from each other (e.g. by attaching them to some sort of DIY poles) would also yield decent results? I know this is not exactly the "proper" way of doing binaural recordings but it might be interesting.

Sure.  That can work well, I often use telescopic TV antennas to A-B space small omnis, or attach them to rigid wire-stalks. I've posted alot about ways of doing that in the Oddball Mic Techniques thread. Sometimes that's better, sometimes a baffle is better, sometimes a directional microphone technique is better.

It really depends somewhat on what you are recording and what type of stereo information is most appropriate.  Big immersive ambiences that envelop the listener benefit from different techniques than do sharp imaging recordings where the listener can clearly follow the path of a sound moving from one-side to the other.  The two aren’t mutually exclusive, but some techniques benefit one aspect or the other.

In general-
An angled pair of coincident (x/y) cardioid mics will produce sharper left/right imaging, and less of an enveloping sense of space. 

‘Sufficiently’ spaced omnis (often called A-B spaced omnis) produce recordings that are often described as sounding “big, open and ambient,” without as much of the sharp “pin-point” imaging produced by a pair of x/y cardioids.

Baffled omnis and near-spaced cardioids are in some ways part-way between those things.  These descriptions are subjective simplifications, but hopefully give you an idea of what to expect.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2014, 04:20:37 PM »
Ignoring for a moment the quality of specific gear and issues of stereo imaging and envelopment, let’s back up to the basics here and talk about microphone pattern types first-

Omni microphones are often preferred for this type of recording for a few reasons-

1) They generally sound more natural than directional mics (especially a certain price point).  That is partly due to their frequency balance being pretty much the same as for sound arriving form off-axis as well as on-axis.  A theoretically ideal cardioid would also have the same frequency response off-axis as it does on-axis, and only show differences in signal level for different angles of arrival. But that is almost never the case in reality.  The response to the rear is usually quite different than on-axis.

2) Flatter low-frequency response. Cardioids usually have a reduced low frequency response for sounds arriving from farther than about a meter or so away.

3) Less susceptible to wind and handling-noise.

However, people can and do make good ambience and nature recordings with directional mics. If you are focusing on a particular subject rather than the overall ambience of a space, then directional mics such as cardioids may be more appropriate.  That’s one reason why they are often the preferred pattern around here for music recording- most music tapers more interested in focusing on the clarity of the direct sound coming from the band, rather than the whole ambient ‘sound of the room’.  Quite often tapers want to minimize the ambient sound of the room, rather than emphasize it.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2014, 04:27:41 PM »
Microphone setup and configurations-

Omnis-
In a basic sense, the ‘stereo-ness’ of true omnis depends only on differences in arrival time between microphones which creates phase/timing difference between channels. (Directional mics can do that too or not, depending on the mic setup).  To do that, the microphones need enough space between them to produce significant timing differences, and that significant distance varies by frequency.  When the mics are close together, the differences are minimal and the recording will essentially be mono for most of the frequency range, exhibiting some ‘stereo-ness’ only at rather high frequencies.  The closer the microphones are together, the higher that mostly-mono frequency.  As a rough guide, something like 12” or 15” is what I’d consider a minimal amount of spacing for an unbaffled omni pair.  I usually want 3 or 4 feet between mics, sometimes more, like when I’m using other mics as well.

To get around that spacing requirement, we can place a baffle between the omnis, which produces level differences as the frequency rises, essentially making them increasingly directional at high frequencies.  The recording will still be mostly mono at low frequencies due to the close proximity of the mics to each other, but the level differences as the frequency goes up creates sharper imaging than spaced omnis without a baffle.  So one reason baffled omnis is a preferred way of recording ambiences is that it leverages the good attributes of omni mics while also getting some improved directional imaging that is more like angled cardioids. 

With a baffle, the spacing between the omni mics can then be less (say just a couple inches up to 16” or so, I like more spacing if possible but that requires a bigger baffle to work), but you still get the benefits of omni mics, and a 360 degree pickup pattern that does a good job of recording the ambience of the entire space.


Cardioids-
Can be A-B spaced, but are usually near-spaced or coincident (meaning they are stacked to be as close as possible, pointed left/right, which is also called X,Y).  Coincident x/y patterns have no timing information between channels, and the ‘stereo-ness’ of the recordings are entirely level difference based.  That can make them easier to mix with other sources, more mono-compatible, and sharp imaging, but less “big, open and enveloping” sounding.  The mono compatibility and level-difference-only stereo can benefit recording a close single source like someone talking, singing or playing guitar.  And that’s primarily what X/Y mics on small recorders are designed for doing rather than recording ambiences.

Near-spaced microphone techniques depend on a small amount of spacing between the mics as well as the angle between mics and that introduces some timing differences above the frequency determined by distance of the spacing.  Those techniques are often preferred around here as sounding more natural than coincident x/y setups, but still retain much of the imaging and focus-on-a-subject aspects of cardioid mics.  Plus the setups are smaller than A-B spaced omnis or omnis with a baffle, so they are easier to use when recording music.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline rastasean

  • in paradise
  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3699
  • Gender: Male
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2014, 04:34:04 PM »
My advice:
Get the m10 and a good pair of headphones and you will be able to hear what the mics are actually recording. You can do a lot of good recordings with the m10 and plug in mics, but there may come a need when you need a pre-amp. Until then, I think the m10 will allow you to record many hours of nature sounds.

While this is not nature related, I recorded this as an off-the-cuff test while at a job several years ago and many people like it: http://www.freesound.org/people/rastataper/sounds/62225/

I used a minidisc recorder and a pair of binaural microphones and I don't think there was any post processing work.

Go to freesound and listen to the recordings and see what equipment was used. You don't have to copy the recording chain exactly to come out with a great recording.
Advice is a form of nostalgia, dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it’s worth.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2014, 04:35:34 PM »
Oh yeah, Binaural-
Binaural uses omnis placed in your ears.  It uses the baffle of your head AND the directionality of your outer ears to produce the stereo effect and is best with headphone playback.  It is simply a special case of baffled omnis.

Many around here do something similar except they don't place the mics inside their ears.  That makes the recordings somewhat less personalized to your ear shape and they tend to work better on speakers while still working well on headphones.  It is a baffled omni technique sometimes refered to HTRF around here (which is a fancy acronym for Head Related Transfer Function).

'Binaural' mics are simply small omnis which can be used for any omni setup- A-B spaced, baffled, or headworn.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2014, 04:48:10 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline rastasean

  • in paradise
  • Trade Count: (23)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3699
  • Gender: Male
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2014, 04:41:30 PM »
Oh yeah, Binarual-

Yeah, absolutely true. I just tend to use the term 'binaural microphones' when meaning baffled by the head.
Advice is a form of nostalgia, dispensing it is a way of fishing the past from the disposal, wiping it off, painting over the ugly parts and recycling it for more than it’s worth.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2014, 04:45:33 PM »
Some practical take-aways-

For what you're doing you'll want a recorder with a low noise-floor and sufficient 'clean' gain. (The M10 may be that, but I don't own or use one so I can't say)

A baffle will definitely improve the imaging of recordings made with the internal mics of the M10. (or any other handheld with relatively closely spaced internal omnis)

Assuming similar mic quality, directional built-in mics can work for what you want to do, but may not be the best choice for ambient recording if they are limited to an X/Y configuration only. If they can do a near-spaced configuration like ORTF (spaced 17cm and angled 100 degrees apart) then that's more appropriate to your use.

EQ goes a long way in correcting problems which are not imaging related, like overly 'bright' or 'dull', 'thin' or 'boomy' sounding recordings.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2014, 04:49:16 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #23 on: January 20, 2014, 06:50:09 PM »
Hmmm.  Looks like I should go out and run an M10-internals test vs Roland in-ears vs some other stereo mic to illustrate the imaging problems of the M10.

However, meanwhile, I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread that the problem with (unbaffled) close spaced mono mics is not just how narrow the stereo image is, but also that the width varies with frequency.  Most omni mics are very omni at low frequencies, but more directional at higher frequencies.  So the stereo image at higher frequencies is wider than the stereo image at lower frequencies.  The ear actually works a bit similarly - which is why sub bass loudspeakers can be placed almost anywhere in a room as the ear doesn't localise them. 

So, in the case of a typical rock band, even if the bass player is off to the side and the drummer's cymbals are in the centre, you'll hear the bass in the middle but you'll get stereo spread of the cymbals.  (I'm illustrating my point rather than being exact).   In the case of birdsong with city rumble, the birds may sound reasonably spread out but the rumble will tend to sound centred.  And the ear's characteristics make matters worse. 

I suspect that the "darkish" sound some report from the M10's internals is down to this effect - I'm not enough of a theorist to speculate on whether the centred bass works kind of additively from the two mikes, but quite definitely you do get frequency dependent imaging skewing from closely spaced omnis.   The VST I've posted before tries to widen the bass more than the top to counteract this.

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2014, 08:02:48 AM »
Based on your budget, I suggest that you take a closer look at Zoom H6. Its internal XY mic is really good (definitely superior to that of the LS-100 or the Roland model you mentioned), and its preamps are also good for XLR mics -- again better than those of the LS-100. People say that the internals of the Zoom H6 are similar to those of the D50. Also, unlike the D50, The H6 offers 4 XLR inputs. As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes. Also, the M10's audio quality is a bit dark and muffled -- I prefer the D50/H6 mics.
All that said, the D100 is a definite step-up from all of those recorders when it comes to internal mics and the quality of the recorder itself.

Surprisingly, I've also heard that the XY mics and internal preamps of the H6 are quite close to those of the D50's (which I don't entirely believe). It would be nice if somebody could confirm that as I had a hard time finding examples of H6 nature recordings.

Microphone setup and configurations-

Omnis-
In a basic sense, the ‘stereo-ness’ of true omnis depends only on differences in arrival time between microphones which creates phase/timing difference between channels. (Directional mics can do that too or not, depending on the mic setup).  To do that, the microphones need enough space between them to produce significant timing differences, and that significant distance varies by frequency.  When the mics are close together, the differences are minimal and the recording will essentially be mono for most of the frequency range, exhibiting some ‘stereo-ness’ only at rather high frequencies.  The closer the microphones are together, the higher that mostly-mono frequency.  As a rough guide, something like 12” or 15” is what I’d consider a minimal amount of spacing for an unbaffled omni pair.  I usually want 3 or 4 feet between mics, sometimes more, like when I’m using other mics as well.

To get around that spacing requirement, we can place a baffle between the omnis, which produces level differences as the frequency rises, essentially making them increasingly directional at high frequencies.  The recording will still be mostly mono at low frequencies due to the close proximity of the mics to each other, but the level differences as the frequency goes up creates sharper imaging than spaced omnis without a baffle.  So one reason baffled omnis is a preferred way of recording ambiences is that it leverages the good attributes of omni mics while also getting some improved directional imaging that is more like angled cardioids. 

With a baffle, the spacing between the omni mics can then be less (say just a couple inches up to 16” or so, I like more spacing if possible but that requires a bigger baffle to work), but you still get the benefits of omni mics, and a 360 degree pickup pattern that does a good job of recording the ambience of the entire space.


Cardioids-
Can be A-B spaced, but are usually near-spaced or coincident (meaning they are stacked to be as close as possible, pointed left/right, which is also called X,Y).  Coincident x/y patterns have no timing information between channels, and the ‘stereo-ness’ of the recordings are entirely level difference based.  That can make them easier to mix with other sources, more mono-compatible, and sharp imaging, but less “big, open and enveloping” sounding.  The mono compatibility and level-difference-only stereo can benefit recording a close single source like someone talking, singing or playing guitar.  And that’s primarily what X/Y mics on small recorders are designed for doing rather than recording ambiences.

Near-spaced microphone techniques depend on a small amount of spacing between the mics as well as the angle between mics and that introduces some timing differences above the frequency determined by distance of the spacing.  Those techniques are often preferred around here as sounding more natural than coincident x/y setups, but still retain much of the imaging and focus-on-a-subject aspects of cardioid mics.  Plus the setups are smaller than A-B spaced omnis or omnis with a baffle, so they are easier to use when recording music.


Thanks for the effort, Gutbucket! I know some of this but it's always good to get insight from someone more experienced than myself. Omnidirectional mics are indeed good for capturing ambience in its entirety. Pseudo-binaural recording should also yield nice results. I wonder how XY mics would work... I know they're geared towards musicians but I'm quite curious. The XY's on the Zoom H6 can be set either to a 90-degree or to a 120-degree pattern. If it's quiet enough it might be a good choice but honestly, I don't think it is.

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2014, 09:35:08 AM »
I hate this thread.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2014, 09:52:50 AM »
Ha, what?

I wonder how XY mics would work... I know they're geared towards musicians but I'm quite curious. The XY's on the Zoom H6 can be set either to a 90-degree or to a 120-degree pattern. If it's quiet enough it might be a good choice but honestly, I don't think it is.

Good quality mics and preamps can superceed subtleties of configuration. I haven't heard the H6, but I've been impressed by a couple recordings made with the H4N of bands in a small room, even though I probably would have prefered a different configuration rather than x/y for that.

One of the reasons x/y with cardioids doesn't sound as "ambient and spacious" as other configurations is that most of the reverberation and ambience that arrives at the microphone pair from outside of the forward facing "window" will be correlated and effectively mono.  A wider angle between mics helps compensate for that a little bit, and although not an option with built-ins, x/y with mic patterns that have a reverse polarity lobe such as supercardioid or figure-8 do a better job of avoiding that.

It really depends on what you want to convey.  Field full of crickets, immersive subway echos, babling brook, the red-tailed hawk screech in the canyon, stuff like that I'd lean towards spaced omnis, and x/y for a ping-pong match, train passing, footsteps, lecture, and stuff like that.  Well, maybe baffled omnis for the train going by, since the low-frequency infrasonic rumble that the omnis will catch is a major portion of the magic in that, with the baffle providing clear directional imaging as it passes.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Amir

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2014, 10:35:56 AM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2014, 10:41:26 AM »
I think this is an informative discussion.  I took my DR2d out in the woods last Spring using the internal mics.  It was interesting how well it picked up the birds chirping in the trees, but what surprised me was the sound from the nearby creek was too prominent compared to the way my ears heard it.   

I haven't tried this with the M10.  Maybe when it warms up...


Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2014, 11:10:56 AM »
Well, maybe baffled omnis for the train going by, since the low-frequency infrasonic rumble that the omnis will catch is a major portion of the magic in that, with the baffle providing clear directional imaging as it passes.

Dug up an old example of this and just posted it to Soundcloud.  I was on my way home late one night after recording a band and stopped at a crossing to catch a late night freight train passing through town.  It's miniature omnis spaced about 20" and baffled with my body.  I used to play this for friends who dropped by to listen to music at my home, a effective way of getting their attention and warming them up for some serious music listening.  [edit- except for the minute or so lead-in and lead-out with night-birds chirping, obviously this is not a quiet ambience of nature sounds. Crank it up to realistic levels!  Turn playback volume up until the birds and traffic at the begining are audible as being at normal listening levels, the train passes at the second audible ringing of crossing bells (as I recall, could be the third). Appologies for a bit of fabric rubbing noise here and there in the quiet parts.]

https://soundcloud.com/leakybucket/late-night-freight-car-2007-04

Gear chain= DPA 4060 > DPA MMA6000 > Edirol R-09
« Last Edit: January 22, 2014, 03:43:43 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2014, 11:17:05 AM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Well, we all hear differently. :)

I think stereo recording via built-in mics is always a compromise no matter what the configuration. Cardiods in x-y on a recorder are usually not far enough apart and give only slightly better stereo spread if you're recording a band. And they are poor for nature recording because they reject so much of the ambient sound. I've had the same problem even using an external stereo microphone like the BP4025 for ambience.

The M10's internal mics may be its Achilles heel for some, but all-in-all, for the OP, I'd say it is the best choice of recorder for nature sounds because it has such inherent low noise and the omni mics capture so much of the environment. The M10 is a great sound-catcher, or sound-collector. You can keep it in a bag like a point-and-shoot camera. Long battery life, hardy, and teams up well with preamps.

And there was one in the yard sale -- last time I looked -- for only $150!
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2014, 11:27:08 AM »
I hate this thread.
^^
The motivation to post that train clip.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Amir

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2014, 11:51:28 AM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Well, we all hear differently. :)

I think stereo recording via built-in mics is always a compromise no matter what the configuration. Cardiods in x-y on a recorder are usually not far enough apart and give only slightly better stereo spread if you're recording a band. And they are poor for nature recording because they reject so much of the ambient sound. I've had the same problem even using an external stereo microphone like the BP4025 for ambience.

The M10's internal mics may be its Achilles heel for some, but all-in-all, for the OP, I'd say it is the best choice of recorder for nature sounds because it has such inherent low noise and the omni mics capture so much of the environment. The M10 is a great sound-catcher, or sound-collector. You can keep it in a bag like a point-and-shoot camera. Long battery life, hardy, and teams up well with preamps.

And there was one in the yard sale -- last time I looked -- for only $150!

Agreed -- when price and recorder size/weight come into play, nothing can beat the M10. It's a little gem, but if I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I'd use the D50 or the H6. The D100 presumably does a great job (I don't have it yet), but it's out of the question for many as getting it is like purchasing 3 or 4 M10s simultaneously! :)

Offline Jonmac

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 111
  • Gender: Male
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2014, 12:09:33 PM »
The XY's on the Zoom H6 can be set either to a 90-degree or to a 120-degree pattern. If it's quiet enough it might be a good choice but honestly, I don't think it is.

Is you opinion based on experience with the H6, or just a gut feeling ?

I have an H6 and am very happy with the preamps.



Zoom H1, Zoom H2, Zoom H6, Tascam DR-40, Tascam Dr-05, Homebrew mic's, C2 Cardioids

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #34 on: January 21, 2014, 12:33:54 PM »
I hate this thread.
^^
The motivation to post that train clip.

I hate the fixation on inherently compromised internal mics, when the clear solution is externals. Even cheap extrernals.

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #35 on: January 21, 2014, 12:37:34 PM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Well, we all hear differently. :)

I think stereo recording via built-in mics is always a compromise no matter what the configuration. Cardiods in x-y on a recorder are usually not far enough apart and give only slightly better stereo spread if you're recording a band. And they are poor for nature recording because they reject so much of the ambient sound. I've had the same problem even using an external stereo microphone like the BP4025 for ambience.

The M10's internal mics may be its Achilles heel for some, but all-in-all, for the OP, I'd say it is the best choice of recorder for nature sounds because it has such inherent low noise and the omni mics capture so much of the environment. The M10 is a great sound-catcher, or sound-collector. You can keep it in a bag like a point-and-shoot camera. Long battery life, hardy, and teams up well with preamps.

And there was one in the yard sale -- last time I looked -- for only $150!

Agreed -- when price and recorder size/weight come into play, nothing can beat the M10. It's a little gem, but if I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I'd use the D50 or the H6. The D100 presumably does a great job (I don't have it yet), but it's out of the question for many as getting it is like purchasing 3 or 4 M10s simultaneously! :)

If I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I wouldn't use internal mics.
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Amir

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #36 on: January 21, 2014, 01:24:44 PM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Well, we all hear differently. :)

I think stereo recording via built-in mics is always a compromise no matter what the configuration. Cardiods in x-y on a recorder are usually not far enough apart and give only slightly better stereo spread if you're recording a band. And they are poor for nature recording because they reject so much of the ambient sound. I've had the same problem even using an external stereo microphone like the BP4025 for ambience.

The M10's internal mics may be its Achilles heel for some, but all-in-all, for the OP, I'd say it is the best choice of recorder for nature sounds because it has such inherent low noise and the omni mics capture so much of the environment. The M10 is a great sound-catcher, or sound-collector. You can keep it in a bag like a point-and-shoot camera. Long battery life, hardy, and teams up well with preamps.

And there was one in the yard sale -- last time I looked -- for only $150!

Agreed -- when price and recorder size/weight come into play, nothing can beat the M10. It's a little gem, but if I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I'd use the D50 or the H6. The D100 presumably does a great job (I don't have it yet), but it's out of the question for many as getting it is like purchasing 3 or 4 M10s simultaneously! :)

If I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I wouldn't use internal mics.

If my recordings were that critical, I'd pair the D50 (or the D100) with my SD USBPre2, a USB battery and 2 high-quality external mics. That would give me excellent stereo representation. The M10 doesn't have a digital input and can't sit in this chain.

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #37 on: January 21, 2014, 02:34:41 PM »
As someone who owns the M10, I don't like its stereo separation either -- it's good as long as your sound source is near the recorder. The more that moves away, the more mono-like your recording becomes.

I actually had the opposite experience. Listening closely to an M10 ambient recording I have posted in this thread, I felt that the stereo spread seemed wider when there were no sounds nearby.

Really interesting -- my own time spent with the M10 proves the opposite. The more distant the sound source, the more mono-like M10's recordings become. This is not necessarily bad or unfavorable -- I sometimes prefer that feature of the M10, but it's never been my number-one choice when it comes to stereo recording via built-in mics.

Well, we all hear differently. :)

I think stereo recording via built-in mics is always a compromise no matter what the configuration. Cardiods in x-y on a recorder are usually not far enough apart and give only slightly better stereo spread if you're recording a band. And they are poor for nature recording because they reject so much of the ambient sound. I've had the same problem even using an external stereo microphone like the BP4025 for ambience.

The M10's internal mics may be its Achilles heel for some, but all-in-all, for the OP, I'd say it is the best choice of recorder for nature sounds because it has such inherent low noise and the omni mics capture so much of the environment. The M10 is a great sound-catcher, or sound-collector. You can keep it in a bag like a point-and-shoot camera. Long battery life, hardy, and teams up well with preamps.

And there was one in the yard sale -- last time I looked -- for only $150!

Agreed -- when price and recorder size/weight come into play, nothing can beat the M10. It's a little gem, but if I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I'd use the D50 or the H6. The D100 presumably does a great job (I don't have it yet), but it's out of the question for many as getting it is like purchasing 3 or 4 M10s simultaneously! :)

If I were recording stuff out in the wild and better stereo representation were my aim, I wouldn't use internal mics.

If my recordings were that critical, I'd pair the D50 (or the D100) with my SD USBPre2, a USB battery and 2 high-quality external mics. That would give me excellent stereo representation. The M10 doesn't have a digital input and can't sit in this chain.

That's true. The M10 doesn't have a digital input.

But the M10 has an excellent line-in and does a great job with a good preamp like the USBPre2. I did a comp somewhere in this forum between the D50 and the M10 using Beyer MC930's > Audient Mico > line-in of those recorders, and there wasn't much difference.


"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2014, 12:55:15 PM »
I hate this thread.
^^
The motivation to post that train clip.

I hate the fixation on inherently compromised internal mics, when the clear solution is externals. Even cheap extrernals.

Where did I write that I plan on using internals for the rest of my life? Besides, a pair of binaural mics can hardly be considered "internal"... I'm merely looking for something to start with and I want to buy the best I can afford. I don't think that cheap externals with noise floor possibly higher than that of the M10's itself could be considered a "clear solution".


The XY's on the Zoom H6 can be set either to a 90-degree or to a 120-degree pattern. If it's quiet enough it might be a good choice but honestly, I don't think it is.

Is you opinion based on experience with the H6, or just a gut feeling ?

I have an H6 and am very happy with the preamps.






No, it's just a gut feeling. I'm sure that the H6 is a good machine but it seems to be geared towards musicians. If its self-noise would be as low as the M10's I'd buy it in an instant, the XLR inputs would really come in handy somewhere down the road. Maybe you could make a short nature recording with its internal mics? I'd really appreciate that:)

Ha, what?

I wonder how XY mics would work... I know they're geared towards musicians but I'm quite curious. The XY's on the Zoom H6 can be set either to a 90-degree or to a 120-degree pattern. If it's quiet enough it might be a good choice but honestly, I don't think it is.

Good quality mics and preamps can superceed subtleties of configuration. I haven't heard the H6, but I've been impressed by a couple recordings made with the H4N of bands in a small room, even though I probably would have prefered a different configuration rather than x/y for that.

One of the reasons x/y with cardioids doesn't sound as "ambient and spacious" as other configurations is that most of the reverberation and ambience that arrives at the microphone pair from outside of the forward facing "window" will be correlated and effectively mono.  A wider angle between mics helps compensate for that a little bit, and although not an option with built-ins, x/y with mic patterns that have a reverse polarity lobe such as supercardioid or figure-8 do a better job of avoiding that.

It really depends on what you want to convey.  Field full of crickets, immersive subway echos, babling brook, the red-tailed hawk screech in the canyon, stuff like that I'd lean towards spaced omnis, and x/y for a ping-pong match, train passing, footsteps, lecture, and stuff like that.  Well, maybe baffled omnis for the train going by, since the low-frequency infrasonic rumble that the omnis will catch is a major portion of the magic in that, with the baffle providing clear directional imaging as it passes.

I know it all depends on what I want to record but I'll probably record every interesting thing I happen to come across. I'd prefer the H6 due to its XLR inputs and maybe slightly better stereo field but I'm not sure about its noise floor. With the M10, I won't be able to splash out on a Usbpre2 with external mics.


Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2014, 01:24:32 PM »
With the M10, I won't be able to splash out on a Usbpre2 with external mics.

Why not?  You can use the unbalanced outputs from the UsbPre2 into the M10 instead of the XLR outputs, which is how everyone around here runs external preamps into the M10.  It's not a balanced connection between the two, but you'll probably have the preamp in close proximity to the recorder, so that unbalanced cable run won't be long (which makes it less suseptible to interference) and is a line-level connection that is less prone to interference pickup than an unbalanced microphone cable to a pair of low powered mics.  Most people don't experience many interference problems with decently built unbalanced low-powerd mics either, although it happens occassionally and seemed to happen more frequenty when in close proximity to cell phone interference.

Not saying the M10 is the better choice for you. Only pointing out that it is no problem using a Usbpre2 and external mics with it.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline dallman

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (33)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • *
  • Posts: 1813
  • Gender: Male
    • Clifford Morse
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2014, 02:45:24 PM »
It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0
Support Live Music: Tape A Show Today!
Deck>possibly something here> Mics

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #41 on: January 22, 2014, 02:54:14 PM »
With the M10, I won't be able to splash out on a Usbpre2 with external mics.

Why not?  You can use the unbalanced outputs from the UsbPre2 into the M10 instead of the XLR outputs, which is how everyone around here runs external preamps into the M10.  It's not a balanced connection between the two, but you'll probably have the preamp in close proximity to the recorder, so that unbalanced cable run won't be long (which makes it less suseptible to interference) and is a line-level connection that is less prone to interference pickup than an unbalanced microphone cable to a pair of low powered mics.  Most people don't experience many interference problems with decently built unbalanced low-powerd mics either, although it happens occassionally and seemed to happen more frequenty when in close proximity to cell phone interference.



Not saying the M10 is the better choice for you. Only pointing out that it is no problem using a Usbpre2 and external mics with it.

I know all that but it's simply too expensive and that's the only reason;p I don't know whether the M10 is the right choice but I don't think I have that many options to choose from. It's either the M10 or the H6.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #42 on: January 22, 2014, 03:28:58 PM »
Ok, appologies for overly wording up here.  Those things are often not obvious for those just getting started with this stuff, yet you seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0

That one crossed my mind when XLR input was mentioned early on.  I didn't realize it had both omnis and cardioids built-in, which may be an advantage here if they sound decent (and the cardboard baffle-improvement thing still applies to these built-in omnis).  Not sure of the noise specs or cost but worth taking a look at this one as well.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Chimney Top

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2014, 09:49:17 PM »
Here is a recording with the Roland R26 internal cardioid mic's.

https://soundcloud.com/user203526/david-byrne-and-st-vincent

Offline AB52

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 156
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #44 on: January 23, 2014, 12:07:09 AM »
Exactly what I do.  Two Schoeps mics to USBpre2 with external battery to Sony D50.  Sound is great.  Only problem is I am tried of the cables between the battery and USBpre2 and the D50.  I use velcro so the three units - battery unit, usbpre2 and D50 stay together - but still I would rather have one portable unit with the external mics - like a SD 702 or better.
[/quote]

If my recordings were that critical, I'd pair the D50 (or the D100) with my SD USBPre2, a USB battery and 2 high-quality external mics. That would give me excellent stereo representation. The M10 doesn't have a digital input and can't sit in this chain.
[/quote]

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #45 on: January 23, 2014, 07:42:40 AM »
Ok, appologies for overly wording up here.  Those things are often not obvious for those just getting started with this stuff, yet you seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0

That one crossed my mind when XLR input was mentioned early on.  I didn't realize it had both omnis and cardioids built-in, which may be an advantage here if they sound decent (and the cardboard baffle-improvement thing still applies to these built-in omnis).  Not sure of the noise specs or cost but worth taking a look at this one as well.

No, there's no need to apologise:) I really appreciate your help and I certainly don't know everything I should. I've just done a bit of research beforehand just to have at least a rudimentary understanding of how these things work in terms of available connections etc.;p  Knowing that the M10 doesn't have XLR inputs, I wanted to find some sort of a workaround;p

I've been eyeballing the Tascam for quite some time but heard mixed opinions about the quality of its internals. Some people said that the performance of the built-in mics is rather underwhelming. They also had some reservations concerning the preams of the unit. I'll try to read about it a bit more. It seems like a nice machine. Metal chassis, XLR inputs, a neat set of bundled accessories and not overly expensive. If its noise floor and preamps are better than some people claim they are, then it's a no-brainer. Thanks for the suggestion, dallman.

Here is a recording with the Roland R26 internal cardioid mic's.

https://soundcloud.com/user203526/david-byrne-and-st-vincent

Thanks! Unfortunately, with this kind of a recording it's quite hard to properly assess the self-noise of the R-26. Sounds nice but it might not work so well for ambiences. Thanks for the effort nonetheless;)

« Last Edit: January 23, 2014, 07:55:46 AM by Amatsubu »

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #46 on: January 23, 2014, 08:15:22 AM »
If found a sample of a nature recording on Tascam's site. They claim it's been recorded by Robert Rich;p http://tascam.com/product/dr-100/downloads/

Doesn't sound half bad but the source is loud enough to mask the self-noise of the Tascam. I wonder what it would sound like when recording smaller streams, crickets or shimmering leaves. I'm also interested in recording louder sources and for these I think even a Zoom H1 would do.

Chimney Top

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #47 on: January 23, 2014, 02:41:52 PM »
Ok, appologies for overly wording up here.  Those things are often not obvious for those just getting started with this stuff, yet you seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0

That one crossed my mind when XLR input was mentioned early on.  I didn't realize it had both omnis and cardioids built-in, which may be an advantage here if they sound decent (and the cardboard baffle-improvement thing still applies to these built-in omnis).  Not sure of the noise specs or cost but worth taking a look at this one as well.

No, there's no need to apologise:) I really appreciate your help and I certainly don't know everything I should. I've just done a bit of research beforehand just to have at least a rudimentary understanding of how these things work in terms of available connections etc.;p  Knowing that the M10 doesn't have XLR inputs, I wanted to find some sort of a workaround;p

I've been eyeballing the Tascam for quite some time but heard mixed opinions about the quality of its internals. Some people said that the performance of the built-in mics is rather underwhelming. They also had some reservations concerning the preams of the unit. I'll try to read about it a bit more. It seems like a nice machine. Metal chassis, XLR inputs, a neat set of bundled accessories and not overly expensive. If its noise floor and preamps are better than some people claim they are, then it's a no-brainer. Thanks for the suggestion, dallman.

Here is a recording with the Roland R26 internal cardioid mic's.

https://soundcloud.com/user203526/david-byrne-and-st-vincent

Thanks! Unfortunately, with this kind of a recording it's quite hard to properly assess the self-noise of the R-26. Sounds nice but it might not work so well for ambiences. Thanks for the effort nonetheless;)


I could post a sample of the track recorded with a Neumann KM184 > Roland R26.  Noise floor is higher with the internals, but still good.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 15700
  • Gender: Male
  • "Better to love music than respect it" ~Stravinsky
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #48 on: January 23, 2014, 04:12:13 PM »
Hah, I occurs to me that this thread may set a new record around here for highest ratio of 'quoted' to 'new post' text.  :laugh:
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<< (note: This is a 1st draft, now several years old and in need of revision!  Stay tuned)

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #49 on: January 24, 2014, 06:52:16 AM »
http://transom.org/?p=31508

"It sounds as clean as a Sony PCM-D-50, and offers XLR inputs (and phantom power). The DR-100′s built-in directional mics don’t sound quite as good as the Sony’s, nor are their pickup patterns adjustable, but they’re capable mics that do a decent job of recording ambience and other stereo events. There is also a pair of omnidirectional mics flush-mounted to the face of the DR-100mkII, but they sound pretty bad – though they might be effective for recording voices for transcription, the pair of unidirectional mics has a much richer sound."

A nice piece of info, I wonder if it's trustworthy. Apparently, the omnis are rubbish but the unis are nice.

"At the time of this review, the DR-100mkII is the best-sounding recorder in its price range, and rivals the quality of many recorders that cost a good deal more. The Tascam DR-40 is less expensive and offers many more recording options, but it’s quite hissy with low-output external mics. If you’re looking for an affordable audio recorder with XLR inputs that can sound good with a wide variety of microphones, including dynamic omnis, the DR-100mkII might just be the one."   

Well, I find that hard to believe;p People commenting on the review claim that the M10 is a better choice and that the Tascam's mics sound terrible;p

« Last Edit: January 24, 2014, 06:57:11 AM by Amatsubu »

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2014, 10:46:42 AM »
Please also consider the intended use.  The DR100 is physically larger and doesn't have the battery life of the M10.  The size and battery life of the M10 solves a lot of problems for taping. 

Your decision needs to factor in your intended overall package of recorder, microphones, and power (battery box/preamp)needed to drive it all. 

There are pretty extensive threads on the DR100 MKII and the M10 on TS.   
 

Offline fguidry

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 154
  • Gender: Male
    • Kaleponi - Slack Key in California
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2014, 12:23:33 AM »
... If its self-noise would be as low as the M10's I'd buy it in an instant, the XLR inputs would really come in handy somewhere down the road. Maybe you could make a short nature recording with its internal mics? I'd really appreciate that:)
...

How could my "nature" recording tell you anything at all? If I take my recorder out and crank it up I hear motorcycles on the freeway 2 miles away long before I hear preamp or mic noise. But I can still hear the local insects at work over the freeway. How loud are your bugs compared to mine?

Since this is a music oriented comparison it's probably of no interest, but it includes clips comparing a D50 and H6 on the same source. Poorly level matched, I'm afraid. http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2013/08/15/zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout/

*** Edit *** A couple of additional thoughts.

The most important factor in any outdoor recordings I've done has been wind protection. A Tascam DR-05 with a good wind sock will pull better recordings than an SD702 and Sennheiser rig without one, 90% of the time.

Experience counts a lot in getting a good capture. It's a constant problem solving process. Get started on the learning curve with a sub-$100 dollar device and figure out what you'll record, where, why, and what issues actually arise. You've set out to solve the problem of preamp and mic self-noise without any evidence that these will be the main problem preventing successful recordings.

I can give such advice with authority, having spent thousands on gear only to learn that experience is the real key to good recordings.

Fran
« Last Edit: January 25, 2014, 02:29:09 AM by fguidry »

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2014, 05:11:10 PM »
Kind of following from what Fran posted - heh, look, no quotes! - here's a sample which I've probably posted before - I hope this link works -

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByTVNpxnwA3DdHI0UGpkUEVCZW8/edit?usp=sharing

This is an urban recording, but after the urban bit there follows some "silence" recorded in a room with a quietly ticking clock, recorded at exactly the same level settings as the urban bit.  In the room at the time of recording, it was just possible to hear the clock ticking.  This recording gives you an idea of the dynamic range recordable with the system used, and some feel for real-world noise performance.

The system used was a humble Sony ICD-SX750 and the mics were the Roland in-ears. 

In my view noise is not a problem with this system unless you are recording something very quiet and want to crank up the gain so that, on replay, the sound heard is louder than you would have heard it if you were just using your ears.  With an M10 as the recorder I would expect noise to be lower though to be honest, I haven't verified that.

With this example I think you would find that if you first played the quiet bit, and set playback so you can just hear the clock (like in real life) you will then find the urban stuff will play back very loud.  It's remarkable how large a dynamic range you can record these days without paying a fortune.

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #53 on: January 25, 2014, 06:19:32 PM »
... If its self-noise would be as low as the M10's I'd buy it in an instant, the XLR inputs would really come in handy somewhere down the road. Maybe you could make a short nature recording with its internal mics? I'd really appreciate that:)
...

How could my "nature" recording tell you anything at all? If I take my recorder out and crank it up I hear motorcycles on the freeway 2 miles away long before I hear preamp or mic noise. But I can still hear the local insects at work over the freeway. How loud are your bugs compared to mine?

Since this is a music oriented comparison it's probably of no interest, but it includes clips comparing a D50 and H6 on the same source. Poorly level matched, I'm afraid. http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2013/08/15/zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout/

***zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout thoughts.

The most important factor in any outdoor recordings I've done has been wind protection. A Tascam DR-05 with a good wind sock will pull better recordings than an SD702 and Sennheiser rig without one, 90% of the time.

Experience counts a lot in getting a good capture. It's a constant problem solving process. Get started on the learning curve with a sub-$100 dollar device and figure out what you'll record, where, why, and what issues actually arise. You've set out to solve the problem of preamp and mic self-noise without any evidence that these will be the main problem preventing successful recordings.

I can give such advice with authority, having spent thousands on gear only to learn that experience is the real key to good recordings.

Fran

Well, unless the SNR of a given recorder miraculously changes itself from recording to recording, I can't see why a short sample of a relatively quiet source wouldn't give me even a vague idea of the H6's self-noise. You're the expert here and maybe I'm jest stupid but I don't think it matters all that much whether my "bugs" are louder or quieter than yours. I know that experience, mic placement, proper "environmental awareness" (if I may call it that) and the environment itself are the key to making good recordings. I didn't bring up the importance of using a windsock because it's obvious. However, no matter how great of an expert you are (and I believe you are an expert in this field, no irony here), self-noise is self-noise and it won't miraculously go away (unless you're quite adept at post-processing). You can be the best driver in the world but if your car's suspension is all shot to hell you'll still go through the pearly gates in a big ball of fire;p Recording and playing back sounds as we hear them is not a problem. It becomes a problem when you want to get them a bit louder. That's why I'm asking about such things. I'm not talking SD/Schoeps noise floor but something decent or good or whatever you want to call it. I've been pondering upon the problem of recording in environments I'll most probably record in myself and inferred that if a significant issue arises, it'll most likely be the noise floor. Maybe I should've factored in the possibility of being attacked by a polar bear but somehow the noise-floor of my equipment had sprung to mind first;p Just taking the Mickey, sorry;p In all seriousness, I agree with you on the experience part, after all I'm here to learn. Sorry for being a nuisance.

On a side note: as you can probably tell, I'm not a native user of English so if I write some utter cobblers in terms od grammar, semantics and whatnot, please bear with me. Also, I wrote this post on my phone which acts up quite a bit and often throws in random words as I'm typing, even when I turn off next-word suggestions;p

Thanks for the sample, ozpeter! I hope I'm not pissing you off that much with my pointless amateur twaddle;p
« Last Edit: January 25, 2014, 06:28:57 PM by Amatsubu »

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #54 on: January 25, 2014, 07:41:57 PM »
Quote
Thanks for the sample, ozpeter! I hope I'm not pissing you off that much with my pointless amateur twaddle;p
I just wish I had your ability to think about and evaluate purchases, rather than just rushing out and buying the first thing that comes to hand! 

But I think Fran is right in pointing out that without some basis of comparison it's tricky to really evaluate self noise from a single subjective sample.  And at the same time I agree with you that such a sample might still provide enough audible clues to give some impression of what is natural - the ambience - vs what is not (a continuous self noise hiss which would seem out of place against the ambience), though provision of a parallel recording made using a more state of the art system would help.  But that's surprising time consuming to set up correctly.

How's that for seeing both sides?!

Offline stancourtney

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #55 on: January 25, 2014, 08:57:21 PM »
I'm currently using 8 Sony M-10's for nature recording.  Great quality, long battery life, sturdy build.  Great recorder.

Stan Courtney

www.stancourtney.com

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #56 on: January 26, 2014, 09:24:51 AM »
Yeah, Fran definitely has a point. There are just too many variables to be taken into account. However, a basic evaluation of self-noise level should be possible.

All the recorders within such price bracket seem to have their own share of annoying quirks but the M10 appears to be the most solid choice among the lot, all things considered. I only wish external preamps were a bit cheaper. I like the Tascam and the H6 but I still have to read about them some more. Surprisingly, a recent review of the D100 claims that the Tascam is close in terms of recording quality;p

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #57 on: January 26, 2014, 02:12:13 PM »
That presupposes one has the recorders on hand to comparatively test. 

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #58 on: February 08, 2014, 01:33:20 PM »
I've stumbled upon a comparison between D50's internal microphones and the Roland CS-10 binaurals which Ozpeter suggested. The jump in quality was simply gobsmacking, not only in terms of stereo field but also the overall level of detail. Judging by the looks of things, the M10 + a pair of binaurals might be the only equipment I'll ever need for my purposes, considering that I probably won't be able to shell out for an external preamp. I'm only worried about microphonics and wind noise, as I've heard that CS-10's are really sensitive. Are there any decent DIY windscreen solutions for such mics?  There's also a nice package from Chris Church http://www.church-audio.com/viewitem.php?productid=21 but I'm not entirely sure about this one.

Offline earmonger

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
  • 20-20000 Hz
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #59 on: February 08, 2014, 02:36:54 PM »
Church Audio mics are designed for the needs of what most of us do here--recording live music. To protect the recording from overload in loud situations, they deliberately have a lower sensitivity than many other mics. For nature recording you would want higher sensitivity.

Since Chris builds his mics by hand, you should contact him, tell him your recording needs and see if he can make you a high-sensitivity version. He'll probably have other sensible advice, too. Also look at his CA-10, for non-amplified sounds.   

Note that the Rolands go in your ears, which places them in position for HRTF: Head Related Transfer Function, which is a fancy way of saying that because your head is between the mics,  you get that spatial separation you heard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function

That's true binaural recording, which the audio purists will tell you is different from simply setting up two omni mics.

Have you looked into that Nature Recordists group at Yahoo? 
« Last Edit: February 08, 2014, 02:46:30 PM by earmonger »

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #60 on: February 09, 2014, 12:14:49 AM »
I've stumbled upon a comparison between D50's internal microphones and the Roland CS-10 binaurals which Ozpeter suggested. The jump in quality was simply gobsmacking, not only in terms of stereo field but also the overall level of detail. Judging by the looks of things, the M10 + a pair of binaurals might be the only equipment I'll ever need for my purposes, considering that I probably won't be able to shell out for an external preamp. I'm only worried about microphonics and wind noise, as I've heard that CS-10's are really sensitive. Are there any decent DIY windscreen solutions for such mics? 

Both Sony PCM-M10 & D50 models have very, very low noise mic preamps when set in LOW mic input sensitivity and inputs are virtually overload proof, so no external preamp is required. 
Most all windscreens detract from the natural sound reception of the microphone by introducing artifacts due to the synthetic materials used. 
Exception is the custom windscreen for my custom DSM mics made by me for over 2 decades using natural fiber material.  See http://www.sonicstudios.com/access.htm#whb

An owner of a suitable rig meant for these discussed purposes recently sent a system on consignment to offer interested recordists.

Scores of raw mp3 encoded recordings made with the DSM-1S model found at: www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm
Anyone interested in this rig please contact me at guysonic@aol.com

« Last Edit: February 09, 2014, 12:18:54 AM by guysonic »
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

DSM HRTF STEREO-SURROUND RECORDING SYSTEMS WEBSITE: http://www.sonicstudios.com

Offline dream

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 96
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #61 on: February 09, 2014, 08:01:45 AM »
I've stumbled upon a comparison between D50's internal microphones and the Roland CS-10 binaurals which Ozpeter suggested. The jump in quality was simply gobsmacking, not only in terms of stereo field but also the overall level of detail.


I also use this combination with great success (ambience recording): D-50 + CS-10EM. It's no KU-100 but sounds very good - very useable results. Roland has a winner with the CS-10EM.

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #62 on: February 12, 2014, 04:02:11 PM »
Church Audio mics are designed for the needs of what most of us do here--recording live music. To protect the recording from overload in loud situations, they deliberately have a lower sensitivity than many other mics. For nature recording you would want higher sensitivity.

Since Chris builds his mics by hand, you should contact him, tell him your recording needs and see if he can make you a high-sensitivity version. He'll probably have other sensible advice, too. Also look at his CA-10, for non-amplified sounds.   

Note that the Rolands go in your ears, which places them in position for HRTF: Head Related Transfer Function, which is a fancy way of saying that because your head is between the mics,  you get that spatial separation you heard.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function

That's true binaural recording, which the audio purists will tell you is different from simply setting up two omni mics.

Have you looked into that Nature Recordists group at Yahoo?

Yeah, I know Church Audio mics are geared towards people recording live music. That's why I wasn't sure about using them for ambience recording.
I know Rolands work in HRTF position with your own head assuming the role of a natural baffle, hence the realistic stereo field. I also know it's different from simply setting up omnis in AB position (which some people call "pseudo-binaural recording"), as the sound isn't affected by the pinnae of your ears.



I also use this combination with great success (ambience recording): D-50 + CS-10EM. It's no KU-100 but sounds very good - very useable results. Roland has a winner with the CS-10EM.

Thanks! M10 + CS-1EM seems like the best cost-effective setup within my limited budget. I think it should yield results similar in quality to your combo. I still have a couple of months to make my decision and I've heard that Zoom H5 is coming out soon. Depending on its price, it might be worth looking into.




Offline Xonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #63 on: February 15, 2014, 07:13:22 PM »
Amatsubu, I'm in the same position as you and asked the same question more or less, a few weeks ago. here's a few observations I've made over the past couple of years:

 there are, IMHO, no decent stereo mics on the market for anything under about £800. Yes there are some mics about and I'm sure a few people could name some on here, but all of them have in my opinion, some really annoying quirqks. When I say stereo mics, I mean handheld. Added to that, you then need a sepperate device for recording. Again, a lot of these have quirks.

Binaural recording is great, but only really if you listen back through headphones. I have a set of binaurals, the bmc3s and honestly whilst the head image is lovely, it never ever translates  as well to speakers. Additionally, it's very hard to protect against wind noise, cable movement and russling. The last 2 can be done but it's a bit of a gamble. Example, I wear a croakie to affix the binaurals to my glasses. No one else has issue with this that I've heard of, but for me, my hair crackles against it every time I turn my head. Binaural is good, I'd just advise considering something else as well if you want to play back on speakres and get the same effect.

For my money right now, portable recorder with internal mics, I'd go for the zoom h6 because: It has a reasonably low noise flaw on the internals. Certainly you're unlikely to notice it in most situations unless the area around you is almost totally silent. The  noise it does exhibit is, oddly enough, like a very low wind through trees, which might work well in your case. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying you can hear it all the time in fact the majority of the time I have to look for it on my recordings and never come across it. I hate repeate  hate noise flaw with a passion so I'd not use it if it were there. It has 2 types of mics that come with it, an ms wwhich is... interesting, and xy which are nice. It also has different modules including a shotgun you can plug on to it which might be exactly what you need. It also has some surprisingly really good preamps, 4 of them in fact, which you could use for plugging in additional mics later. My point here is that you'll have a lot of options to play with and can find what works best for you. You will likely need a rycote and suspension to get the most out of this for £100, but it's not entirely necessary, I just recommend it.
Finally, it has a line input, which you could use for plugging in binaural microphones. The batteries on internals are truly insane. I've been recording with it everywhere since the end of November and only changed the 4 AAs once. I like that it has 4 AAs as well, wop them out and then stick some new ones in in under 30 seconds if you're good, and you can always get AAs wherever you are. The bootup time is amazing, it's all up and running in about 4 seconds for me and that is absolutely crucial when you're recording.
The whole thing comes in a little case which for you might be really handy.

I'm not sure I agree re the sony d-100. The internals are... ok, but for the price, I'm really not sure. Also, and I realise some people may really disagree with this one, I've never had anything from sony, bar a playstation which actually lasted and it makes me very nervous about buyhing anything. You have their own brand batteries which are going to be hard to come by unless you have spares as well. The whole thing just makes me nervous. Maybe I need to play with one when it comes out and have my mind changed.

The one thing I'll say about all of this gear, is that vyou've not really considered wind protection. None of these recorders work very well with that. The ls-100 is just utterly pointless in this regard, don't even consider it if you're going anywhere windy. I've tried all sorts of things and the wind gets in there. You can even blow into the hold switch on the side and the wind comes in. Just no. If you're going to be recording somewhere very very windy like the sea, a rycote blimp is what you'll probably need and unfortunately that will set you back quite a bit, not to mention you'll need an external mic for the job.

So, some random thoughts for you there, hope it helped, drop me a line with any questions, I'll let you know if I ever find something I like without quirks :)

Offline Amatsubu

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 15
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #64 on: February 16, 2014, 01:11:53 PM »
Amatsubu, I'm in the same position as you and asked the same question more or less, a few weeks ago. here's a few observations I've made over the past couple of years:

 there are, IMHO, no decent stereo mics on the market for anything under about £800. Yes there are some mics about and I'm sure a few people could name some on here, but all of them have in my opinion, some really annoying quirqks. When I say stereo mics, I mean handheld. Added to that, you then need a sepperate device for recording. Again, a lot of these have quirks.

Binaural recording is great, but only really if you listen back through headphones. I have a set of binaurals, the bmc3s and honestly whilst the head image is lovely, it never ever translates  as well to speakers. Additionally, it's very hard to protect against wind noise, cable movement and russling. The last 2 can be done but it's a bit of a gamble. Example, I wear a croakie to affix the binaurals to my glasses. No one else has issue with this that I've heard of, but for me, my hair crackles against it every time I turn my head. Binaural is good, I'd just advise considering something else as well if you want to play back on speakres and get the same effect.

For my money right now, portable recorder with internal mics, I'd go for the zoom h6 because: It has a reasonably low noise flaw on the internals. Certainly you're unlikely to notice it in most situations unless the area around you is almost totally silent. The  noise it does exhibit is, oddly enough, like a very low wind through trees, which might work well in your case. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying you can hear it all the time in fact the majority of the time I have to look for it on my recordings and never come across it. I hate repeate  hate noise flaw with a passion so I'd not use it if it were there. It has 2 types of mics that come with it, an ms wwhich is... interesting, and xy which are nice. It also has different modules including a shotgun you can plug on to it which might be exactly what you need. It also has some surprisingly really good preamps, 4 of them in fact, which you could use for plugging in additional mics later. My point here is that you'll have a lot of options to play with and can find what works best for you. You will likely need a rycote and suspension to get the most out of this for £100, but it's not entirely necessary, I just recommend it.
Finally, it has a line input, which you could use for plugging in binaural microphones. The batteries on internals are truly insane. I've been recording with it everywhere since the end of November and only changed the 4 AAs once. I like that it has 4 AAs as well, wop them out and then stick some new ones in in under 30 seconds if you're good, and you can always get AAs wherever you are. The bootup time is amazing, it's all up and running in about 4 seconds for me and that is absolutely crucial when you're recording.
The whole thing comes in a little case which for you might be really handy.

I'm not sure I agree re the sony d-100. The internals are... ok, but for the price, I'm really not sure. Also, and I realise some people may really disagree with this one, I've never had anything from sony, bar a playstation which actually lasted and it makes me very nervous about buyhing anything. You have their own brand batteries which are going to be hard to come by unless you have spares as well. The whole thing just makes me nervous. Maybe I need to play with one when it comes out and have my mind changed.

The one thing I'll say about all of this gear, is that vyou've not really considered wind protection. None of these recorders work very well with that. The ls-100 is just utterly pointless in this regard, don't even consider it if you're going anywhere windy. I've tried all sorts of things and the wind gets in there. You can even blow into the hold switch on the side and the wind comes in. Just no. If you're going to be recording somewhere very very windy like the sea, a rycote blimp is what you'll probably need and unfortunately that will set you back quite a bit, not to mention you'll need an external mic for the job.

So, some random thoughts for you there, hope it helped, drop me a line with any questions, I'll let you know if I ever find something I like without quirks :)


Thanks for the insightful feedback! I'm well aware that compromises have to be made at this price point. I've already taken into account all the annoying quirks of binaural mics. I know they don't translate well to normal speakers but I don't really care about the lifelike stereo field. I've listened to a couple of different recordings on loudspeakers and they sounded rather good. Wind protection might be a major pain in the arse and that's what I fear the most. As for the shotgun mic, I don't think I'd find any use for it as I'm mainly after recording general ambiences, not specific sounds (well, I might try that as well somewhere down the road). I like the small form factor and the dependability of the M10. Allegedly, it's the quietest recorder out there within its price point. However, the lack of XLR inputs is a significant downside. Zoom H6 looks nice but at this point I might as well wait for the H5 as I certainly won't need 4 XLR inputs and all the additional bells and whistles. Still, the little Sony clicks with me the most.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2014, 02:12:15 PM by Amatsubu »

Offline earmonger

  • Trade Count: (5)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 598
  • 20-20000 Hz
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #65 on: February 17, 2014, 11:18:39 AM »
By the way, if you want to check out some precise  measurements by real nature recording experts/scientists/fanatics:

http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm

And now you know where to look when you need a mic to record ultrasound...

Offline old and in the way

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 194
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #66 on: February 17, 2014, 01:19:53 PM »
 Check out the oade brothers marantz 661 or 620 mk11 super mods ..

Offline dogmusic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 850
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #67 on: February 19, 2014, 06:23:50 PM »

I'm not sure I agree re the sony d-100. The internals are... ok, but for the price, I'm really not sure. Also, and I realise some people may really disagree with this one, I've never had anything from sony, bar a playstation which actually lasted and it makes me very nervous about buyhing anything. You have their own brand batteries which are going to be hard to come by unless you have spares as well. The whole thing just makes me nervous. Maybe I need to play with one when it comes out and have my mind changed.

The one thing I'll say about all of this gear, is that vyou've not really considered wind protection.

Perhaps it's just good luck, but I have Sony equipment that I bought 35 years ago (TCD5M) that still works fine.

And there's a lot of experience on this forum with Sony recorders -- MD as well as the M10 -- and all pretty positive on their longevity.

The batteries for the D100 are just standard AA -- four of them.

As for wind protection, the D100 comes with a furry windscreen, as well as a case and remote.
"The ear is much more than a mere appendage on the side of the head." - Catherine Parker Anthony, Structure and Function of the Human Body (1972)

"That's metaphysically absurd, man! How can I know what you hear?" - Firesign Theatre

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1399
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #68 on: February 22, 2014, 01:20:56 AM »
Quote
Binaural recording is great, but only really if you listen back through headphones. I have a set of binaurals, the bmc3s and honestly whilst the head image is lovely, it never ever translates  as well to speakers.

Personally, I disagree, at least as far as the Roland mics are concerned.  But - stereo perception is a highly subjective thing, so what I like and what you like could well differ substantially.

I used to work with an experienced classical music producer, who could spot a bum note before the musician had even thought of playing it, and whose judgement on matters of intonation was impeccable.   But he couldn't tell the difference between mono and stereo!

Offline John Willett

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1550
  • Gender: Male
  • Bio:
    • Sound-Link ProAudio
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #69 on: February 22, 2014, 08:14:32 AM »
I used to work with an experienced classical music producer, who could spot a bum note before the musician had even thought of playing it, and whose judgement on matters of intonation was impeccable.   But he couldn't tell the difference between mono and stereo!

This is normal - a musician is tuned for listening to the performance.

This is why i Work with a Producer when I am recording - I hear the whole, he hears the performance - together we get a great result.

Offline guysonic

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1366
  • WISDOM FOR ALL TIMES
    • Sonic Studios DSM Stereo-Surround Microphone Systems
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #70 on: April 18, 2014, 04:47:00 AM »
Recent loss of my favorite Nature recording mic prompted a real-world simultaneous  comparison using an available atypical mic model. 

This test is shown www.sonicstudios.com/dsm.htm#chart

The YouTube video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rQFain2FPA

More universal playback HRTF type Nature recordings http://www.sonicstudios.com/mp3.htm.
"mics? I no got no mics!  Besides, I no have to show you no stink'n mics!" stxxlth taper's disclaimer

DSM HRTF STEREO-SURROUND RECORDING SYSTEMS WEBSITE: http://www.sonicstudios.com

Offline kevinsinnott

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences
« Reply #71 on: October 10, 2014, 01:51:43 PM »

The FR-2LE's internal mivcs were not designed to be used for recording, rather as emergency note-takers.  It was designed to be used with external mics, which it does superbly.

It's batter than virtually all of the pocket machines.

Hello, John. I realize it's been awhile, but are you saying the FR-2LE's mic pres are high quality and low noise? I'm asking because I have an Edirol R44 and while it's pretty good, I must admit it does not rival the Sound Devices units I've heard. I suppose I'm trying to determine of the FR-2LE might be a step up for me for interviews and recording music (2 channel) or ambient without separate mic preamps.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.369 seconds with 97 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF