Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Internal mics question  (Read 10283 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline to_taper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Internal mics question
« on: July 07, 2017, 11:49:05 AM »
I have only used my internal mics once in the past 5 years, and that was out of desperation.

I have another situation where I want to record a local act but have to travel really lightly (the show occurs right between me taking my wife to a theatre matinee and then a dinner for our 35th wedding anniversary).

I have an Edirol R-09HR and a Sony PCM-M10. I plan to stand up by the speakers with the deck in my shirt pocket. Which of the two decks has the better mics?

Any help here on the deck or recording location would be appreciated.

Thanks

Offline heesu

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 235
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #1 on: July 07, 2017, 12:01:00 PM »
I don't have either of those decks, but I've used internals a few times (zoom h2n / d50). You can pull decent recordings with internals, but they are more susceptible to crowd noise, and clipping. The quiet, acoustic shows have sounded good during the music - but were an absolute mess every time the crowd reacted. When I taped Bob Weir @ Austin City limits from the balcony, my levels were much better and the sound more balanced between music/applause - so it came out alright.

As long as you make sure you're not overloading, it should be ok.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #2 on: July 07, 2017, 05:57:11 PM »
I have only used my internal mics once in the past 5 years, and that was out of desperation.

I have another situation where I want to record a local act but have to travel really lightly (the show occurs right between me taking my wife to a theatre matinee and then a dinner for our 35th wedding anniversary).

I have an Edirol R-09HR and a Sony PCM-M10. I plan to stand up by the speakers with the deck in my shirt pocket. Which of the two decks has the better mics?

Any help here on the deck or recording location would be appreciated.

Thanks

I'm 100% sold on the internals on my DR-2D. (I own 4, and am about to buy 2 more)

they have 'lo', 'med', and 'high' gain settings, then 100 levels for each of those 3 settings.

around 88 to 92 on lo-gain, and 66 to 74 on med-gain is the best for "rock" music (and I tape a *lot* of it)

I'd imagine "high" gain would be for if you were at a Henry Rollins spoken word show, away from talkers and clappers.

I've had artists let me set them on the stage by their feet on 'low' gain, and come away with some pretty amazing stuff.   mini-tripods aid greatly in that.

the other sweet part about the DR-2D is the "dual" record mode, in that it will record a 2nd stereo track simultaneously anywhere from -6 to -12db (you can preset what level it's at in the menu before recording), so it's virtually impossible to get "too close overload", unless you set your levels way too hot.

I like to have my bounce anywhere  from -3 to -6dB for a well mixed show, to -8 to -12dB for a show that's poorly mixed that may need post-show equalization (more headroom).

I did *hate* the internals in my R-09 (1st generation, WAY too tinny and harsh), but the DR-2D internals, when set correctly, are very hard to discern from my Sonic Studios stealth mics, and on occasion they exceed the Sonics in quality.

so I'd stay away from the Edirol (unless that 2nd gen HR machine had improvements made) based on my experience with the internals on the *different* machine and go with the Sony, unless you can find a DR-2D
« Last Edit: July 07, 2017, 06:03:00 PM by furburger »
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #3 on: July 07, 2017, 06:09:45 PM »
if your event is a few weeks from now, I could mail you one of my DR-2D's as a 'backup' for your event.

it's a"2 button push to record" deck (well 3, if you count "power on")
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #4 on: July 07, 2017, 06:33:47 PM »
Use the Sony.  Set input sensitivity to low and use manual levels appropriately low. 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #5 on: July 07, 2017, 06:54:18 PM »
I own both of those decks.  The Edirol R-09HR has better internal mics.  They are rated better and in my personal experience, they are better.  The Sony PCM-M10 are good, but given the choice, there is no choice. Set your levels low enough to accommodate peaking out and put your limiter on anyway just to be safe.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline morst

  • Archivist: Camper Van Beethoven & Cracker
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
  • Get in touch if you wanna record Cracker or CVB!
    • Soundscape Preservation Society
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2017, 08:59:15 PM »
I plan to stand up by the speakers with the deck in my shirt pocket. Which of the two decks has the better mics?
Remember to use hearing protection!!

I have the M10 and don't love the internal mics, but they work. I used to have a Zoom H2 and I thought it actually had pretty good mics (but it was not for me, because it could not handle proper line level input without an attenuator.)

One nice thing about the M10 is that the internal mics are omni's, so they don't have the proximity effect of a directional mic (extra bass pickup from close sources), and hence don't pick up as much handling noise as the units with cardioid internals.
Teams: Neumann, Bay Area Tapers, Multitrack, Pioneertown Tapers, Mac Geeks, Cassette Masters, Poster Collectors, Alumni of teams St Louis, Upper Midwest & Milwaukee / Southern Wisco

Offline edtyre

  • Trade Count: (51)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1785
  • Gender: Male
  • Team Philly " No Excuses, Just Tapes"
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #7 on: July 08, 2017, 12:13:20 PM »
mini-tripods aid greatly in that.

Isn't that a mic stand recording? :-)
music>mics>pre>recorder

Offline ilduclo

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3777
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #8 on: July 08, 2017, 01:27:58 PM »
a friend of mine uses the m10 and gets pretty good results.  :cheers:

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #9 on: July 08, 2017, 01:30:16 PM »
mini-tripods aid greatly in that.

Isn't that a mic stand recording? :-)

selfie stick   :bigsmile:

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #10 on: July 08, 2017, 10:24:54 PM »
mini-tripods aid greatly in that.

Isn't that a mic stand recording? :-)


no, I don't hang Deady bears from a 6 inch tripod, looking for attention.

it dampens the vibration from the stage floor.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #11 on: July 11, 2017, 01:32:59 AM »
I haven't heard a tape made with internal microphones worth a damn in probably three years.  Perhaps in a super small club with the band close in and moderate volume it might work, but basically internal mikes are crap. 

Any cheap microphone and a battery box will be a 100% improvement.  I started with Church Mikes and his preamps and they are way better than any internal mikes I've ever used or listened to. 

And if you think about it, Tascam, Zoom, and Sony probably spend no more than $10 on their mikes to sell their units at $200, and Church mikes and a battery box cost in excess of $200.  You get what you pay for.
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline ilduclo

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3777
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #12 on: July 11, 2017, 09:22:38 AM »
:lol:

Offline morst

  • Archivist: Camper Van Beethoven & Cracker
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
  • Get in touch if you wanna record Cracker or CVB!
    • Soundscape Preservation Society
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2017, 02:37:31 PM »
And if you think about it, Tascam, Zoom, and Sony probably spend no more than $10 on their mikes to sell their units at $200, and Church mikes and a battery box cost in excess of $200.  You get what you pay for.

M10 retailed for $349 list...

And what do you reckon is the cost of the mic elements on the Church set versus the Primos that Sony uses? Just curious how your comparison of retail vs wholesale prices shoots out...

https://www.primomic.com
Teams: Neumann, Bay Area Tapers, Multitrack, Pioneertown Tapers, Mac Geeks, Cassette Masters, Poster Collectors, Alumni of teams St Louis, Upper Midwest & Milwaukee / Southern Wisco

Offline ilduclo

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3777
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #14 on: July 11, 2017, 03:22:39 PM »
and, my Sony D50 has pretty good mics, too, IMO, and then there's the Sony d100, so I think internals can be ok...... :yack:

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #15 on: July 11, 2017, 10:15:36 PM »
For me I am looking better than ok.  To each his or her own but if its a choice between using internals or not taping, not taping is my choice.  Had a broken wire in my pre-amp a few years ago.  After using the internals for a few songs I said f it, I'll never listen to this.  I figured there would be a better source.  There was.  A pair of Neumans from a non prime spot sounded so much better than the internals from the 12th row.

Offline heesu

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 235
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2017, 10:33:01 PM »
For me I am looking better than ok.  To each his or her own but if its a choice between using internals or not taping, not taping is my choice.  Had a broken wire in my pre-amp a few years ago.  After using the internals for a few songs I said f it, I'll never listen to this.  I figured there would be a better source.  There was.  A pair of Neumans from a non prime spot sounded so much better than the internals from the 12th row.

To each their own. I've listened to several recordings from zoom internals that were solid, from shows with no other sources. Glad they exist.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #17 on: July 12, 2017, 10:06:22 AM »
Well a Beatles reunion tape made with Zoom internals vs nothing.  Got it.  I'll take the Zoom thank you very much.

But the question is whether internals are better than the cheapest external option, e.g., Church mikes with a battery box and the answer is no, the cheapest external mikes will always outperform internal mikes, the components are higher quality and you have the benefit of a preamp/battery box.  I'm actually surprised there is a debate on this subject. 

Now there are options to make the internals sound better--like I said small club, close in, soft music.  They will work.  But still take that same location and swap out some cheap externals, and 100% of the time you'll have a better tape. 
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #18 on: July 12, 2017, 11:02:34 AM »
For me I am looking better than ok.  To each his or her own but if its a choice between using internals or not taping, not taping is my choice.  Had a broken wire in my pre-amp a few years ago.  After using the internals for a few songs I said f it, I'll never listen to this.  I figured there would be a better source.  There was.  A pair of Neumans from a non prime spot sounded so much better than the internals from the 12th row.

To each their own. I've listened to several recordings from zoom internals that were solid, from shows with no other sources. Glad they exist.

Yes, exactly.  Personally, I might listen to a song if its something epic and I really want to hear it (see Scooter123's comment).  In reality I have more music I could ever listen to and I'd rather listen to something I like that sounds really good. 

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #19 on: July 12, 2017, 01:34:26 PM »
Well a Beatles reunion tape made with Zoom internals vs nothing.  Got it.  I'll take the Zoom thank you very much.

You so funny...I'd love to see a reunion with 2 out of 4 dead people!   :yack:

All kidding aside, I love the sarcasm on this thread, so much so, that I thought I'd add to it a bit.  Simply put, zoom is worthless (IMO). Yes, you get what you pay for. To take it a step further, internal mics are a semi-adequate back-up in the event that you are the only person there to record an event and that is your only option.  Church CA-14's are a solid sounding mic.  I mention this because Church mics have been brought up as a comparison to internals.  There is no comparing a real microphone to any internal mics.  I have used internals on both my Sony M10 and Edirol R-09HR in a pinch.  Given the recording atmosphere (eg. small bar with controlled volume compared to an arena), they may give you something to have as a reference to the music.  Will you want to listen to the recording for enjoyment?  Probably not.  They are thin recordings with little re-listenability.  So yeah, if you want something to make a good recoding, buy microphones.  But don't just buy them, research them first!  Go on etree, archive, dime, or whatever site you like and compare different mic/deck/pre combinations, being sure to know where they were recorded.  Mics don't have to cost you an arm and a leg, but you often do get what you pay for, so listen and decide where to draw the line for yourself.

As for using internal mics, as a choice, do the same research.  Just because Edirol/Roland internals may be reviewed as better sounding mics, doesn't mean you'll be any happier with them.  In the instances I have had to record with internals (again, using the M10 or the R-09HR), I have been happier with the R-09HR.  That isn't to say the M10 was bad.  they were also very different situations.  The R-09HR was at Jones Beach Theater, having no time to set up for a Dave Matthews show, I turned on the R-09HR while setting up real mics.  I recorded on the R-09HR for about 1minute and 20 seconds before switching to externals.  It was a similar situation with the M10, but it was in a small bar, and I didn't want to set up in front of their face, so I placed the M10 in front of them, and used that.  Will I listen to that recording.  LOL, no.  I did check it out, of course, to know how it came out, and I was surprisingly pleased with the results.  That doesn't mean it meets my standards to sit down and enjoy. The moral of the story, buy some damn mics and do the job right! If you need to keep it simple, audition the Church Audio CA-14 (cardiod) with a CA9200 pre.

Just as an added note.  You may not be a fanatical taper like many on this site (myself included in that mess), and sound quality may not be as important to you, as opposed to just documenting something.  Keeping that in mind, and do whatever the hell you want  :yahoo:
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2017, 08:15:38 PM »
I haven't heard a tape made with internal microphones worth a damn in probably three years.  Perhaps in a super small club with the band close in and moderate volume it might work, but basically internal mikes are crap. 

Any cheap microphone and a battery box will be a 100% improvement.  I started with Church Mikes and his preamps and they are way better than any internal mikes I've ever used or listened to. 

And if you think about it, Tascam, Zoom, and Sony probably spend no more than $10 on their mikes to sell their units at $200, and Church mikes and a battery box cost in excess of $200.  You get what you pay for.


there's plenty of mine on dime done with internals that sound just fine, if not outstanding.

if one learns how to use the 3-way gain, in conjunction with positioning, one can make an excellent recording with the internals.


as for Church, I know Leonard Lombardo makes the same kind of mics (Sonic Studios), that he sells them for $500-700, and that each set is less than $30 in parts. (slightly more if you get the low-cut)

whatever the battery box is made of (hard plastic?), some black rubber coating, wire, a couple of little diaphragms, a hard plastic mount, a bit of foam, and a 1/8 plug

that's it.

« Last Edit: July 14, 2017, 01:42:07 AM by furburger »
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2017, 08:28:38 PM »
a handful of "shitty internal microphone" recordings..... :google of rolleye smilies here:



Peter Mulvey w/ Suitcase Junket in Fairbanks: (*lots* of texture and a beautiful sound):

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=595076


Loudon Wainwright III in Nashville (taped from the back of the room, away from the 'geese'):

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=595385


36 Crazyfists (Alaskan metal band, they're big in Europe, showing that heavy music can be recorded with internals as well):

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=579574


Black Mountain (sounds fine to these ears, or 90% as good as any mic-stand recording would sound...again, from the back of the room. no way to get away from the crowd, as Larimer has low ceilings and is tiny):

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=577828


Guided By Voices (tiny dump in St. Louis, the Sonics source came out too "hot"):

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=570603


and I have many more to torrent as well.




does that mean that all my internal recordings come out as good as the ones above?


no, not at all.


but this faux-elitism because "I use a mic stand" is sad, to say the least.



a mic stand is not an entry-level setup, nor is one necessary to make excellent captures.



#truestory
« Last Edit: July 13, 2017, 08:48:16 PM by furburger »
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline jcable77

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 165
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #22 on: July 13, 2017, 09:03:17 PM »
Just want to add that Naiant (Jon) makes phenomenal mics that in my opinion sound better than church stuff for cheaper $.
Mics- akg 460's ck 61's/63's/ck8's, akg active  couplings>naiant pfa's, naiant x-r's (cards). Pre- SD-302, x-y amp, apogee mini-me X2, Decks- pmd-671, R-44, dr-40, dr-03.....

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 133
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #23 on: July 14, 2017, 01:29:00 AM »
Just want to add that Naiant (Jon) makes phenomenal mics that in my opinion sound better than church stuff for cheaper $.

This. Jon makes a good selection of equipment. For example, with the price of his omnis I don't see any reason to use internals, just put them over your ear and plug them into the the recorder. No internal mics would sound that good.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #24 on: July 14, 2017, 10:05:16 AM »
Agreed.  There is simply no reason to use internals.  For half the price of a recorder, you can add a preamp and decent mikes which will significantly improve any recording.  Adding multiple recorders, recording at different settings, different locations, and even jumping to 24-98 won't improve the recording as much as a pair of inexpensive mikes and a preamp.  I don't think anyone disagrees with this concept, correct?

Did George Martin or Tom Dowd ever use internal mikes? 
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #25 on: July 14, 2017, 10:27:38 AM »
Agreed.  There is simply no reason to use internals.  For half the price of a recorder, you can add a preamp and decent mikes which will significantly improve any recording.  Adding multiple recorders, recording at different settings, different locations, and even jumping to 24-98 won't improve the recording as much as a pair of inexpensive mikes and a preamp.  I don't think anyone disagrees with this concept, correct?

Did George Martin or Tom Dowd ever use internal mikes?

All but 2 seem to agree based on what I have read here. 

On the hijacked comment isn't a "mini tripod"  a little mic stand?   What does a mic stand have to do with anything anyways?   I haven't owned mic stand in 30 years nor have I owned a  "mini tripod" ever.   I don't believe Scooter123 uses one either. 

It's about the mics.  All things being equal (key word there) better quality mics make a better recording.  The mics in an internal recorder are not going to be as good as a pair of inexpensive mics let alone mid priced mics or higher end mics.   Another point,  in a stealth setting it is easier to disguise a pair of mics at a higher height than a recorder with internal mics.  The extra 12 to 18 inches between a shirt pocket and hat does make a difference.  Nothing any settings on the recorder can do to change that fact.

Offline rocksuitcase

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3827
  • Gender: Male
    • RockSuitcase: stage photography
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #26 on: July 14, 2017, 10:46:51 AM »
It seems only a few have answered the Op's question R-09 vs M10.
I only have two personal references OT.
1] My buddy who is a boom operator owns an Olympus LS100 - IMO- the best internals I've heard.    (second buddy owns an LS-10 which is similar in SQ)
2] I own a Marantz PMD661- The only times I've used the internals were far away at a festival and of course it was awful.   
music IS love

When you get confused, listen to the music play!

Mics:         AKG461/CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline heesu

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 235
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #27 on: July 14, 2017, 10:56:27 AM »
Agreed.  There is simply no reason to use internals. 

I use a zoom h2n when it's not open taping and I can just set it somewhere. I don't do  >:D anymore, it's just not fun for me. So in those instances its either that, or nothing (unless someone else is  >:D).

Does it sound as good as my CA14 setup? Definitely not. Are the recordings listenable? Yeah, I think they're alright (under the right circumstances).


Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #28 on: July 14, 2017, 12:14:38 PM »
I ran a comparison of a DPA 402x/Grace V3/Sound Devices 722  vs. Edirol R09 internals, from 2nd row center of a Mozart-based acoustic concert. This was done to satisfy the conductors curiosity regarding the all-in-one recorder (R09), for his own use in recording rehearsals, lessons, etc. I velcro taped the R09 to the mic stand at above seated height (~5').  The big rig was at 9'
I gave both copies to the conductor.  He was very impressed with the R09 internal recording. I've enjoyed it as well. One thing it did really well with was in capturing the cello continuo in a way that I like to hear it.
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #29 on: July 14, 2017, 12:53:42 PM »
There are a lot of people a bit too (pre-)opinionated in this thread.

It is certainly possible to make a good listenable recording in the right circumstances with internal mics.  There are examples.  It is possible to make a not very listenable recording with external mics (even good mics).  There are examples of those too (though the issues with those are usually in the nature of a terrible space, bad position, crappy mix or other environmental factors). 

It's a question of improving the odds as well as determination, available equipment, etc. 

I'm usually in the camp that something is better than nothing (at least for some shows).  The would I listen to it again threshold varies with the qualities inherent in the performance unless it is just a truly horrible sounding recording. 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline lsd2525

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Gender: Male
  • Eschew obfuscation
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #30 on: July 14, 2017, 02:41:48 PM »
 :alert:
Mics: ADK A51s; AT4041; Superlux S502; CK91 active w/homebrew BB; AT853; Naiant X-X; Nak 300's
Recorders: M10; DR-60D; DR-70D

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #31 on: July 14, 2017, 03:19:04 PM »
 :clapping:

Seriously old skool section there.  Where was that? 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline lsd2525

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Gender: Male
  • Eschew obfuscation
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #32 on: July 14, 2017, 04:09:26 PM »
:clapping:

Seriously old skool section there.  Where was that?

No idea:) Making the rounds on facebook. Two things about that photo: That taper looks like Henry Kissinger. And there isn't a damn soul smiling either.
Mics: ADK A51s; AT4041; Superlux S502; CK91 active w/homebrew BB; AT853; Naiant X-X; Nak 300's
Recorders: M10; DR-60D; DR-70D

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #33 on: July 14, 2017, 04:57:11 PM »
Rolling tape waiting for the jive to click and the magic to happen, we've all been there.  One guy sort of appears to be snickering.  Looks like Kissinger but he'd never be caught dead in that scene.  I say it's Neal Cassady sporting Ginsberg's glasses and a sweet hands-free stealth setup directly FOB.  Check out the two dudes head-holding identical mono boom boxes making a spaced A-B recording in the background!  That's deadication.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #34 on: July 14, 2017, 05:29:00 PM »
I don't think anyone disagrees with this concept, correct?

Did George Martin or Tom Dowd ever use internal mikes?

I disagree with your concept 100%.

I'm not a Beatles nut-fluffer, nor am I working with more than 2 tracks, but that is a classic mic-stand'r tactic, to pull in an analogy that has nothing to do at all with the original post to cover up that their argument is inherently flawed.


kinda like the stuffed animals they hang from their stands.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #35 on: July 14, 2017, 05:33:39 PM »
It seems only a few have answered the Op's question R-09 vs M10.


I stated that Edirol internals, in my experience are crap, that I have never owned an M10 (though what I've heard of M10 internals was not impressive) and that if the OP truly wanted to get an excellent internals capture, to get a DR-2D.

a seller had been dumping NIB ones on Ebay over the last month (I bought 3), and people were getting them for as cheap as $75 shipped.

in addition, I posted *five* great-sounding examples of DR-2D internals recordings across multiple genres (i.e. not 'just acoustic'), proving what I am saying.



when the DR-2D outperforms the Sonics 2-3 shows out of each 10 recorded, it's a viable alternative to the spendy route.


and it shows.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #36 on: July 14, 2017, 09:07:25 PM »
Wow, Furburger.

You really think that a Tascam DR2d with internals is better than the same recorder with external mikes and a preamp.  Amazing opinion. 

Which mike-preamp combination does your rig beat out?  The low end Church stuff, or is your Tascam internal rig better than AKG, Neumann, Naks, and Schoeps, as well?   

I'm dying to know. 
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #37 on: July 15, 2017, 09:44:49 AM »
Wow, Furburger.

You really think that a Tascam DR2d with internals is better than the same recorder with external mikes and a preamp.  Amazing opinion. 

Which mike-preamp combination does your rig beat out?  The low end Church stuff, or is your Tascam internal rig better than AKG, Neumann, Naks, and Schoeps, as well?   

I'm dying to know.


nowhere did I say "better than".

I've always been happy with my recordings sounding 90% as good as a mic-stand recording at a fraction (1/20th?) of the cost.

the Tascam internals produce a superior recording to the Sonic Studios with the 3-way lo-cut 2-3 times out of 10.

it's usually when I'm at the Loon in the balcony (like the Mulvey show I linked) and put the deck at my feet on the projector box, but I've also done it in arenas and clubs in the States.

I've also done excellent recordings putting the DR-2D right at the performers feet (Kevn Kinney in Atlanta in '13 was a great one, ran two of them on stage, Sarah Peacock was another one that came out amazing)

throw in the non-existent set-up and tear-down time, and it's a viable alternative in more ways than one.   (cost/hassle/sound quality).



-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #38 on: July 15, 2017, 11:28:48 AM »
Agreed.  There is simply no reason to use internals.  For half the price of a recorder, you can add a preamp and decent mikes which will significantly improve any recording.  Adding multiple recorders, recording at different settings, different locations, and even jumping to 24-98 won't improve the recording as much as a pair of inexpensive mikes and a preamp.  I don't think anyone disagrees with this concept, correct?

OK, so good, we've settled that.  External mikes will achieve better results than internal mikes.

And you're happy with your recordings, which is a good thing. 
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #39 on: July 15, 2017, 01:53:46 PM »
Not many tapers use these internal mics (for obvious reasons) but here are some samples (not my recordings) that I found:

Roland R-09HR:
1. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13548894/BillyBragg-170702-TapedBySoledriver-R-09HR.mp3
2. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13548894/MikeNockTrio-170708-TapedByVierstein91-R-09HR.mp3

Sony PCM-M10:
1. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13548894/TheShins-170709-TapedByJotjoqri-M10.mp3
2. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13548894/Coldplay-160723-TapedByJotjoqri-M10.mp3

Pretty bad samples but I hope it will make your decision, at least a bit, easier.
It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #40 on: July 16, 2017, 09:39:03 AM »

I've always been happy with my recordings sounding 90% as good as a mic-stand recording at a fraction (1/20th?) of the cost.


 :facepalm:

Not to criticize your personal preferences, and everyone hears and appreciates music differently, but to suggest a percentage is to is to measure actual statistics or facts.  Yes, YOU have always been happy with your recordings made with your DR-2D, and that is a wonderful thing, as it is important to create something you are happy with.  To suggest, however, that those recordings actually sound as good or even better than real microphones is simply ludicrous.  They can not offer the range as a full size microphone, and just can't handle the bottom end effectively.  Period.  That may not matter to you, which is cool, but it does matter to serious tapers that invest in better equipment in order to reproduce the sound as accurately as possible.  As stated above, I have used the internal mics on the Sony PCM-M10 and the Edirol R-09HR (and the Edirol R-09).  The Sony isn't bad and the Edirol R-09HR is better, but neither come close to the Church Audio CA-14's (much less a full sized microphone).  I find it both comical and sad that you can't tell the difference...but moreover, I think it's a blessing, as you can enjoy so much more live recordings than I can.  Please don't take offense to what I've said, it was not a personal attack, only my humble opinion.  Cheers. 
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #41 on: July 17, 2017, 04:22:03 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #42 on: July 17, 2017, 06:40:03 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)
Is it possible that you can share samples (without any added EQ of course) of these two recordings? I would love to make a comparison. I guess a few others here are curious as well.
It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2017, 12:07:38 PM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)
Is it possible that you can share samples (without any added EQ of course) of these two recordings? I would love to make a comparison. I guess a few others here are curious as well.

+1  as there are lots of definitions of "excellent"

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #44 on: July 18, 2017, 09:54:02 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:
Neumann KM-184> Tascam DR-680

Offline jbosco

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #45 on: July 18, 2017, 11:10:44 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.
---
Neumann KM 184 -> Tascam DR 70D
DPA 4061 -> Sony M10

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #46 on: July 18, 2017, 11:21:00 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?
In the torrent.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2017, 11:26:51 AM by Sloan Simpson »
Neumann KM-184> Tascam DR-680

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #47 on: July 18, 2017, 11:21:55 AM »
My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.

This. Just because they're asking $600 doesn't make them good.
Neumann KM-184> Tascam DR-680

Offline lsd2525

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Gender: Male
  • Eschew obfuscation
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #48 on: July 18, 2017, 11:35:04 AM »
Having the roll off on is pretty much a sure fire way to decrease bass response ::)

I just had my first internals (not by choice) incident last night. Went to suit up a Primus last night, and the BB>recorder cable missing. So it was M10 internals or nothing. Put it on some lighting scaffolding in the back of the grass (smaller shed). We'll see how it came out. Guarantee it won't be as good as if I was running the 91's :angry2:
Mics: ADK A51s; AT4041; Superlux S502; CK91 active w/homebrew BB; AT853; Naiant X-X; Nak 300's
Recorders: M10; DR-60D; DR-70D

Offline jbosco

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2017, 11:43:20 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?
In the torrent.

I didn't even care enough to look, nice catch, too funny  ::)
---
Neumann KM 184 -> Tascam DR 70D
DPA 4061 -> Sony M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2017, 11:52:08 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.

Sonic Studio mics that have been abused beyond believe if you have followed the variety of threads.  I agree, they are one step above internals and far from "nice mics" and I only grab the recordings if there is no other source and its something I want to hear.  Mostly its listen to a song, find it disappointing and I delete.  They are far from "elitist" mics.

Offline to_taper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 67
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #51 on: July 18, 2017, 12:03:03 PM »
Hi all,

Thanks for all of your insights. I did not mean to open Pandora’s box on this issue. I read all the posts with interest and took away a slight edge in using the Sony M10 rather than the Edirol. In the end I used that and taped the first set of the show I was interested in this past Saturday at the Distillery District here in Toronto.

Our play (Billy Bishop Goes to War) ended just before 4 pm and I went straight to the square while my wife went off to do some shopping. This would have been tough to tape in the best circumstances. The stage was set up in a major pedestrian traffic area and with a train line a couple of hundred yards behind the stage. The sound was good right in front of the stage in spite of the wandering, talking crowds. I was the only person standing in front of the stage since the sun was very bright. The crowd was off to the side in the shade.

I recorded the first set, and then sat down in the shade with a drink and enjoyed the second set with my wife and some people who sat near us in the theatre. Nice dinner afterwards and then a walk on the beach to cap off a terrific day.

To my ears, the recording is ok, and better than nothing. However, this exercise reinforced my bias against using the internals except in ultra-rare circumstances. I have only been willing to download or keep recordings with internal mics if I really like the artist and don’t have very many recordings by them. Same criteria as for a weaker sounding recording from the old days of snail mail trading and real-time copying.

If this type of situation comes up again, I would likely take my Church Audio omnis, clip them to my shirt collar and just run them on plug-in power, or maybe even use my old Aiwa mic, leaving the pre-amp at home.

Thanks again,

John

Offline KISSFAN

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #52 on: July 18, 2017, 01:27:09 PM »
Hi all,

Thanks for all of your insights. I did not mean to open Pandora’s box on this issue.

are you kidding?? this is a hilarious thread. Thanks for opening!

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #53 on: July 18, 2017, 02:41:54 PM »
One key difference I didn't see mentioned:

R-09 and M-10 both use internal omnis.
DR2d and Zoom H4 both use internal cardioids.

None of these have stellar microphones to begin with and all are compromised by being mounted in the recorder, yet you are more likely to get clearer, more pleasing results for music recording using a recorder with cardioids.  The necessary close-positioned mounting of the two mics in the recorder housing itself makes most internal omni recordings rather uninteresting in terms of stereo. 

However, if that's all you have on hand or all you want to deal with, you can at least improve the situation somewhat by fashioning a baffle between the omnis out of whatever you have on hand.  Below are photos of a small piece of cardboard I used to keep with one of my R-09s which improved the stereophonic qualities of recordings made with the internal omnis.   The wedge shape and the cutouts help maximize it's utility by arranging things so that each microphone element is as close as possible to it's own cardboard face.  Even though the stereo aspects were improved considerably using the baffle, the recordings simply weren't good enough that I ever used it for music recording.  I always had external mics on hand to make recordings I was far happier with.

But better-mediocre beats bad-mediocre. Whether better-mediocre beats no-recording or not is a question only you can answer for yourself.











Photos are from this thread exploring various baffles for internal and external omnis- Baffles for R-09 built-in mics & 4060 boundrisphere contraption
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #54 on: July 18, 2017, 02:48:54 PM »

Our play (Billy Bishop Goes to War) ended just before 4 pm and I went straight to the square while my wife went off to do some shopping. This would have been tough to tape in the best circumstances. The stage was set up in a major pedestrian traffic area and with a train line a couple of hundred yards behind the stage. The sound was good right in front of the stage in spite of the wandering, talking crowds. I was the only person standing in front of the stage since the sun was very bright. The crowd was off to the side in the shade.

If this type of situation comes up again, I would likely take my Church Audio omnis, clip them to my shirt collar and just run them on plug-in power, or maybe even use my old Aiwa mic, leaving the pre-amp at home.


The situation you describe suggests omnis would not be the best choice of pattern due to all the distracting ambient noise.  Still if that's all you have you do have something. 

As GB notes the M-10 mics are omnis too so that may not have helped exactly. 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #55 on: July 18, 2017, 02:49:47 PM »
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #56 on: July 18, 2017, 04:43:43 PM »
very stealthy.  no one will notice that.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #57 on: July 18, 2017, 05:31:20 PM »
Heh.  You're right, yet it's always situation dependent..

I once fashioned one of those wedge-baffles out of an upcoming-show / drink-special card for another taper who was sharing my stage-lip table recording using internal mics.   He planned to just set the recorder on the table anyway, with something partly covering it so as not to be blatantly obvious.  Was not an open taping show, though not particularly enforced security-wise.  I think it actually helped disguise the recorder rather well in that low-pressure situation from off-hand glances, covering the screen and controls.  Sort of made for good camouflage as it looked pretty much like the other upcoming-show / drink-special cards standing on all the other tables.

However, another recording made simultaneously at the same table using body baffled external omnis sounded significantly better when I compared them later.. and no one, including the guy recording with the internal mics knew that one was being made at the time.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #58 on: July 22, 2017, 07:03:08 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)
Is it possible that you can share samples (without any added EQ of course) of these two recordings? I would love to make a comparison. I guess a few others here are curious as well.


I will when I get home, along with Tim Easton, Ben Harper and 36 Crazyfists.

3 different styles of music (4, if you count Bush), and you can do the side-by-side.

guessing the Sonics will do better on Ben already, based on the venue and what I plan on doing (filming from the top of a motorhome, stealth)

the other 2 will be a tossup.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #59 on: July 22, 2017, 07:06:10 AM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:


um, have been running the bass rolloff since 1994, literally hundreds of shows....this was an anamoly, that being the thin(ner, NOT "thin", thinner compared to the interanls, fuck, it's Bush) bass sound. it's not a huge difference, I was just surprised, as the Sonics *usually* produce a much richer low end...but not this time.

it was a weird mix, it cut out at the beginning and the end a couple different times onstage
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #60 on: July 22, 2017, 07:07:43 AM »


Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.


you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #61 on: July 22, 2017, 09:33:42 AM »


Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.


you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.

I have a pair of Sonics (6's I believe).  My taping partner in crime was initially given a pair of 5's to use and review.  He wanted a pair customized for his connecting needs, and they sent him a pair of custom 6's. They're custom cables and the right angle work was impressive, by the way.  Anyway, I ultimately ended up with the 6's and used them several times.  They're far better than any internal I've ever heard, but nowhere near a quality, full-size microphone.  They were built for stealth situations, and handle that exceptionally well, but fall short in sound.  They are way better than nothing, and worth using if a stealth mic set-up is required.
As for them being any kind of standard...they were, in my opinion, the beginning of a quality mic being made exclusively for stealth and ease.  But that is where it ends.  Compared to the options today, I do not believe they hold up.  There are "older microphones" (not stealthy), that hold up to the quality of today's standards, because they sound great.  On the stealth level, I do not believe Sonics hold up compared to more modern offerings in the same category.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #62 on: July 22, 2017, 10:26:20 AM »
you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.

A lot has happened with technology the last twenty years. What was "pretty good" back in the 90's most likely can't compete with today's standards. Compare the Sonics with other stealth mics like Church Audio and it's obvious that things have developed for the better.
It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #63 on: July 22, 2017, 12:13:17 PM »
you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.

A lot has happened with technology the last twenty years. What was "pretty good" back in the 90's most likely can't compete with today's standards. Compare the Sonics with other stealth mics like Church Audio and it's obvious that things have developed for the better.

My Schoeps MK4 caps are 25 years old and sure hold their own.  I have a friend's pair of new MK4's and will be doing an A/B very soon.  The Sonic Studios are entry level stealth mics, nothing more.

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #64 on: July 22, 2017, 03:47:40 PM »
My Schoeps MK4 caps are 25 years old and sure hold their own.

They are bloody expensive caps so it would be really unfortunate if they didn't hold up to today's standards. :bigsmile:

I know they are used for stealth work, but just as my AKG CK61/63 caps, they are not as stealthy (size) as Church Audio, Audio Technica, Sonics and others. Comparing MK4 caps with Sonics is just...
It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #65 on: July 22, 2017, 04:44:25 PM »
My Schoeps MK4 caps are 25 years old and sure hold their own.

They are bloody expensive caps so it would be really unfortunate if they didn't hold up to today's standards. :bigsmile:

I know they are used for stealth work, but just as my AKG CK61/63 caps, they are not as stealthy (size) as Church Audio, Audio Technica, Sonics and others. Comparing MK4 caps with Sonics is just...

They have held up well.  Mine have been used for enough shows that on a per show basis they are probably less than CA-11's for many.  No problem stealthing with MK4's, all I do.

Offline CRUNCHY WATER

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #66 on: July 22, 2017, 05:02:39 PM »
I had and used Sonic Studio DSM6s mics with and without the roll-off.  I also had Neumann KM140's and A lunatec V2.  The Sonics smoked the Neumann/Lunatec V2 in Sound quality. I pulled off my best sounding shows with the Sonics over the Neumanns.  Needless to say I sold the Neumanns and Lunatec V2 because I fell for the BS from the taping community regarding large rigs.  I had to find out the hard way that this was a HUGE waste of money for taping concerts. On that note....When I taped Gov't Mule back in the day with my Neumann rig, the tapers with their rigs were the biggest assholes that thought their gear was the best and they knew it all about mic placement and gain settings, etc.  Everyone at the time was checking the serial numbers on the Lunatecs to see who had the lowest serial number.  Mine was like #9 and I could care less, but it was a big deal to these idiots. I picked up a few of their tapes to see how they sounded and they sounded like shit for what they had running. Sonics all the way for my money. I'll bet if a show was done with Sonics and released with false info, nobody would even know. One can say it was taped with mics Elvis Presley used in Sun Studio run with a Neumann prototype Pre and everyone would be like "wow that shit sounds good". Sonics or bust.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2017, 05:05:52 PM by CRUNCHY WATER »

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #67 on: July 22, 2017, 05:05:29 PM »
lol
Neumann KM-184> Tascam DR-680

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #68 on: July 22, 2017, 07:42:37 PM »
^^
a few words from a parallel community...   :shrug:
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #69 on: July 23, 2017, 06:55:30 AM »
No problem stealthing with MK4's, all I do.

Yes, I know, but some tapers think they're not stealthy enough. Which, in a way is hilarious comparing with the massive gear tapers and filmers had to sneak in to shows back in the days.  8)
It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #70 on: July 23, 2017, 09:24:32 AM »
No problem stealthing with MK4's, all I do.

Yes, I know, but some tapers think they're not stealthy enough. Which, in a way is hilarious comparing with the massive gear tapers and filmers had to sneak in to shows back in the days.  8)

Back in the day was pre-9/11, things were different then, venues weren't being blown up.  Yes we snuck in full sized gear, and it wasn't small, but it's all relative.  Now we have metal detectors to deal with and security that are often trained to look for us.  It's doable under any circumstance now, in my opinion, but sizes is definitely a factor. 
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #71 on: July 23, 2017, 11:22:20 AM »
No problem stealthing with MK4's, all I do.

Yes, I know, but some tapers think they're not stealthy enough. Which, in a way is hilarious comparing with the massive gear tapers and filmers had to sneak in to shows back in the days.  8)

Back in the day was pre-9/11, things were different then, venues weren't being blown up.  Yes we snuck in full sized gear, and it wasn't small, but it's all relative.  Now we have metal detectors to deal with and security that are often trained to look for us.  It's doable under any circumstance now, in my opinion, but sizes is definitely a factor.

Not really a factor.  I waltzed through metal detector wands into B'more Arena in the 90's for Little Feat with a video camera, lens, camera batteries, a nakamichi mic, xlr cable, etc. 

In the 10's I unwittingly took the Schoeps, cables, r44, DVD battery and a tripod stand through a walkthrough.

It's all relative and maybe how they're set (see the other thread on security).  Nothing is a factor or a problem if you've done it often enough and apply all the techniques.  Size is so much less a factor now though. 

Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #72 on: July 23, 2017, 12:18:03 PM »
No problem stealthing with MK4's, all I do.

Yes, I know, but some tapers think they're not stealthy enough. Which, in a way is hilarious comparing with the massive gear tapers and filmers had to sneak in to shows back in the days.  8)

Back in the day was pre-9/11, things were different then, venues weren't being blown up.  Yes we snuck in full sized gear, and it wasn't small, but it's all relative.  Now we have metal detectors to deal with and security that are often trained to look for us.  It's doable under any circumstance now, in my opinion, but sizes is definitely a factor.

Before 9/11?  He is talking the real old days.  Shit, we stealthed with a PCM F-1/SL200 batteries, pre-amp and mics.  I brought that through the front door many times.  It IS doable to bring a Schoeps rig in path walk throughs and wands.  Check out my uploads the past 12 months.

Offline TheMetalist

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #73 on: July 23, 2017, 02:01:36 PM »
Before 9/11?  He is talking the real old days.  Shit, we stealthed with a PCM F-1/SL200 batteries, pre-amp and mics.  I brought that through the front door many times.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant. Damn, that gear was huge. That demanded admirable dedication. I started taping in 1992 and the Sony WM-D3 I used was really stealthy. Can't even imagine the effort bringing that gear in.  8)

It's not about fancy equipment. It's about the thrill, passion and hard work. Liberate the music!

"The music is your passport - Your magic key - To all the madness that awaits you." B.L. '86

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #74 on: July 23, 2017, 02:34:03 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #75 on: July 23, 2017, 02:36:53 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.

You got it.  I was in London for Eric Clapton when Manchester bombing hit.  Did we leave gear home?  No we stepped up our game and got everything in. 

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5767
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #76 on: July 23, 2017, 05:55:08 PM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.

Sonic Studio mics that have been abused beyond believe if you have followed the variety of threads.  I agree, they are one step above internals and far from "nice mics" and I only grab the recordings if there is no other source and its something I want to hear.  Mostly its listen to a song, find it disappointing and I delete.  They are far from "elitist" mics.
You think? They are overpriced, being based on the same two dollar Panasonic cap as CSB, but they are way better than those. Worse than DPA 4061, but I think comparing those to internals is unfair. Sonics from the sweet spot can, I think, beat a better rig from a less-than-sweet spot. Shit I've made recordings of the same band, same venue, with Audix caps and Church Audio cables in a good spot and my Schoeps in a much worse spot, and the Audix were way better.

But even leaving placement aside, I don't think Sonics can be classed with internals, or CSBs, or probably even CA mics, TBH.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #77 on: July 23, 2017, 06:59:51 PM »
taped Bush last night in Anchorage, ran both the Sonics > DR-2D and another DR-2D with internals sitting on the armrest of an empty seat (of which there were many)

while the bass on the Sonics source is 'more defined', it's also much thinner than what the internals captured. the internals bass sounds richer, and has a wider range on the EQ.

basically it was a "draw" between internals in a $150 deck and a $650 set of mics.

again, proving my point that while nice mics are cool, they are NOT necessary at all to obtain an excellent capture.

Wait, you're running a bass rolloff and saying the resulting bass sounds thin?  :clapping: :iamwithstupid:

Where does he say he had a bass roll off engaged?

My question is at what point did "Sonic Studios" become the standard to measure against? I had a set back in '91 for a while, sure they were easy to stealth, and made a halfway listenable recording at the time, but I'd hardly list them as "nice mics" and as a source Sonics are just above internals and I generally only grab them if they are the only source of I show I really want, or if all other sources are internals.

Sonic Studio mics that have been abused beyond believe if you have followed the variety of threads.  I agree, they are one step above internals and far from "nice mics" and I only grab the recordings if there is no other source and its something I want to hear.  Mostly its listen to a song, find it disappointing and I delete.  They are far from "elitist" mics.
You think? They are overpriced, being based on the same two dollar Panasonic cap as CSB, but they are way better than those. Worse than DPA 4061, but I think comparing those to internals is unfair. Sonics from the sweet spot can, I think, beat a better rig from a less-than-sweet spot. Shit I've made recordings of the same band, same venue, with Audix caps and Church Audio cables in a good spot and my Schoeps in a much worse spot, and the Audix were way better.

But even leaving placement aside, I don't think Sonics can be classed with internals, or CSBs, or probably even CA mics, TBH.

Never said they were comparable to internals. The only thing comparable to internals are internals.  Sonics are imho average mics.  Not something I would choose to use if given options.  Side by side they do not compare to DPA 4061s, Schoeps, Neumans, Nak 700s and many others but yeah if you are in the perfect spot with Sonics and in the men's room or back corner with better mics you should get a better recording with Sonics.   Personally, I don't record from a location like that either.  Stealth taping is all about sacrifices.  I am not into sacrificing my mics beyond Schoeps or the location I tape from wherever possible.  I am willing to sacrifice using a babynbox versus an nbox platinum if I fail getting in the first try but that is it.  Placement is a bit of a crapshoot given its stealth and sound of venue beyond any of our control. 

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #78 on: July 24, 2017, 05:07:25 AM »


I have a pair of Sonics (6's I believe).  My taping partner in crime was initially given a pair of 5's to use and review.  He wanted a pair customized for his connecting needs, and they sent him a pair of custom 6's. They're custom cables and the right angle work was impressive, by the way.  Anyway, I ultimately ended up with the 6's and used them several times.  They're far better than any internal I've ever heard, but nowhere near a quality, full-size microphone.  They were built for stealth situations, and handle that exceptionally well, but fall short in sound.  They are way better than nothing, and worth using if a stealth mic set-up is required.
As for them being any kind of standard...they were, in my opinion, the beginning of a quality mic being made exclusively for stealth and ease.  But that is where it ends.  Compared to the options today, I do not believe they hold up.  There are "older microphones" (not stealthy), that hold up to the quality of today's standards, because they sound great.  On the stealth level, I do not believe Sonics hold up compared to more modern offerings in the same category.


but that's half the fun.

that being: pushing an *alleged* inferior mic to the limits of what it can do vs. coasting on mics that cost thousands of dollars.

again, I'm plenty happy with tapes that sound 90% as good as several thousand dollar setups...as are the hundreds if not thousands of different folks who download my stuff.

as for the Sonics, their range is a full 20hz to 20khz. I'm not aware of many mics that exceed that range.

it's too bad their maker is a putz of immense proportions.




-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #79 on: July 24, 2017, 05:09:16 AM »
you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.

A lot has happened with technology the last twenty years. What was "pretty good" back in the 90's most likely can't compete with today's standards. Compare the Sonics with other stealth mics like Church Audio and it's obvious that things have developed for the better.


not at all.

I'll take my Sonics and the hundreds of situations I've used them in over Church mics any day (I have a pair as backup that have never been used).

Chris uses cheaper matererials then Leonard, hence his higher break-down rate.

throw in his nearly-a-year repair time, and that's MORE of a hassle than setting up and tearing down a mic stand.


if you can't rely on your equipment, why even bother?
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #80 on: July 24, 2017, 05:15:16 AM »
you must be in the minority then, as I sold a dozen pairs for Leonard in the 90's, and I know more tapers than not who consider them a pretty good standard, starting with their dynamic range.

A lot has happened with technology the last twenty years. What was "pretty good" back in the 90's most likely can't compete with today's standards. Compare the Sonics with other stealth mics like Church Audio and it's obvious that things have developed for the better.

My Schoeps MK4 caps are 25 years old and sure hold their own.  I have a friend's pair of new MK4's and will be doing an A/B very soon.  The Sonic Studios are entry level stealth mics, nothing more.


yeth dathpy, we *get* that all stealth mics are "entry level mics".....***in your opinion***.


I'd be surprised if my Ben Harper show tomorrow doesn't smoke all of your BH recordings.

again, because I'm pretty well versed in mic placement.


just so you know.
I had and used Sonic Studio DSM6s mics with and without the roll-off.  I also had Neumann KM140's and A lunatec V2.  The Sonics smoked the Neumann/Lunatec V2 in Sound quality. I pulled off my best sounding shows with the Sonics over the Neumanns.  Needless to say I sold the Neumanns and Lunatec V2 because I fell for the BS from the taping community regarding large rigs.  I had to find out the hard way that this was a HUGE waste of money for taping concerts. On that note....When I taped Gov't Mule back in the day with my Neumann rig, the tapers with their rigs were the biggest assholes that thought their gear was the best and they knew it all about mic placement and gain settings, etc.  Everyone at the time was checking the serial numbers on the Lunatecs to see who had the lowest serial number.  Mine was like #9 and I could care less, but it was a big deal to these idiots. I picked up a few of their tapes to see how they sounded and they sounded like shit for what they had running. Sonics all the way for my money. I'll bet if a show was done with Sonics and released with false info, nobody would even know. One can say it was taped with mics Elvis Presley used in Sun Studio run with a Neumann prototype Pre and everyone would be like "wow that shit sounds good". Sonics or bust.

this man speaks more truth than 90% of the peeps here


.

But even leaving placement aside, I don't think Sonics can be classed with internals, or CSBs, or probably even CA mics, TBH.


utterly untrue and laughable.

CSB's are an utter joke of a mic, you have to be 10 ft. from the stack to pull anything usable.

CA, again, SHODDY MATERIALS that BREAK. why anyone would rely on them, I've no idea.

keep telling yourself that to feel better if you wish, but it's like comparing a Subaru Legacy (Sonics) to a Kia or a Yugo (CSB and CA, respectively).

they'll all get you where you're going, but which of the 3 would *you* pick if you were renting?
« Last Edit: July 24, 2017, 05:18:40 AM by furburger »
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #81 on: July 24, 2017, 05:17:35 AM »

Never said they were comparable to internals. The only thing comparable to internals are internals.  Sonics are imho average mics.  Not something I would choose to use if given options.  Side by side they do not compare to DPA 4061s, Schoeps, Neumans, Nak 700s and many others but yeah if you are in the perfect spot with Sonics and in the men's room or back corner with better mics you should get a better recording with Sonics.   Personally, I don't record from a location like that either.  Stealth taping is all about sacrifices.  I am not into sacrificing my mics beyond Schoeps or the location I tape from wherever possible.  I am willing to sacrifice using a babynbox versus an nbox platinum if I fail getting in the first try but that is it.  Placement is a bit of a crapshoot given its stealth and sound of venue beyond any of our control.


huh?

I've pulled recordings with the Sonics in the 300 level that sound like they were recorded from the 10th row, sans the 'geese'.

or, placement is not a crapshoot at all, IF you know what you're doing.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline if_then_else

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 196
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #82 on: July 24, 2017, 08:06:58 AM »
but that's half the fun.

that being: pushing an *alleged* inferior mic to the limits of what it can do vs. coasting on mics that cost thousands of dollars.

again, I'm plenty happy with tapes that sound 90% as good as several thousand dollar setups...as are the hundreds if not thousands of different folks who download my stuff.

as for the Sonics, their range is a full 20hz to 20khz. I'm not aware of many mics that exceed that range.

it's too bad their maker is a putz of immense proportions.

FWIW:
(1) Comparing some semi-decent tapes made with sub-par equipment to tapes made with top-of-the-line equipment from a less than ideal spot (or under circumstances beyond your control) is pretty pointless and reminds me of Schopenhauer's law of entropy:

"If you put a spoonful of wine in a barrel full of sewage, you get sewage. If you put a spoonful of sewage in a barrel full of wine, you get sewage."

(2) You can't beat physics (even with umpteen years of taping experience and an alleged legend status). And, yes, there are some UHF mics that go far below 20Hz or beyond 20 kHz. Actually, the Sennheiser MKH 8000 series goes from 10Hz to 60kHz. Whether you're can actually hear the difference is a completely different story.

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #83 on: July 24, 2017, 09:48:43 AM »
DPA 4060 acoustic sampling; no PA to be found anywhere near this music.
Yep,... that scan starts trending at 4hz, and quickly shows multiple sub-sonic peaks (not anomalies).
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #84 on: July 24, 2017, 09:59:39 AM »
I guess you can't really tell the difference.  Is that a good thing?


Never said they were comparable to internals. The only thing comparable to internals are internals.  Sonics are imho average mics.  Not something I would choose to use if given options.  Side by side they do not compare to DPA 4061s, Schoeps, Neumans, Nak 700s and many others but yeah if you are in the perfect spot with Sonics and in the men's room or back corner with better mics you should get a better recording with Sonics.   Personally, I don't record from a location like that either.  Stealth taping is all about sacrifices.  I am not into sacrificing my mics beyond Schoeps or the location I tape from wherever possible.  I am willing to sacrifice using a babynbox versus an nbox platinum if I fail getting in the first try but that is it.  Placement is a bit of a crapshoot given its stealth and sound of venue beyond any of our control.


huh?

I've pulled recordings with the Sonics in the 300 level that sound like they were recorded from the 10th row, sans the 'geese'.

or, placement is not a crapshoot at all, IF you know what you're doing.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #85 on: July 24, 2017, 10:07:52 AM »
Let's let others decide.  Post yours and I will post mine and how about a poll?   Let others decide.

Yes, I do have my opinion and you have yours.  If I thought I could make a better recording from the upper levels monkeying around with DR-2D I would do that.  In "my opinion" a Schoeps recording from the sweet spot sounds better than an internal mic recording from ANYWHERE in the venue.


My Schoeps MK4 caps are 25 years old and sure hold their own.  I have a friend's pair of new MK4's and will be doing an A/B very soon.  The Sonic Studios are entry level stealth mics, nothing more.


yeth dathpy, we *get* that all stealth mics are "entry level mics".....***in your opinion***.


I'd be surprised if my Ben Harper show tomorrow doesn't smoke all of your BH recordings.

again, because I'm pretty well versed in mic placement.





[/quote]

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #86 on: July 24, 2017, 01:37:28 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.

You got it.  I was in London for Eric Clapton when Manchester bombing hit.  Did we leave gear home?  No we stepped up our game and got everything in.

We're tapers...that's what we do!   :coolguy:
I'd love to get a copy of that recording, Clapton's a personal favorite.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #87 on: July 24, 2017, 02:35:26 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.

You got it.  I was in London for Eric Clapton when Manchester bombing hit.  Did we leave gear home?  No we stepped up our game and got everything in.

We're tapers...that's what we do!   :coolguy:
I'd love to get a copy of that recording, Clapton's a personal favorite.

Here you go.  In kick down section thread.     

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=182321.0

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #88 on: July 24, 2017, 02:52:01 PM »
 :yack: :yack: :yack:

I don't even know how to quote as many of the comments I'd like to in one reply...and I'm not going to try.  People, people. people, we are all connected within a wonderful community that enjoys preserving live music in the best quality that we are both able to, based on our economic condition, as well as our knowledge and preference for various sonic differences.  Although we all enjoy doing the same thing, we all have our own ways of doing things that yield different results.  The important thing is, that we are happy with our own results.  If we choose to put it out there for others to download and enjoy, that's fantastic, but to judge the 'enjoyment' of others based on them downloading our recordings doesn't mean we are taping gods, it means they like our recordings, are creatures of habit, or simply don't have or know of, better sources.  Simply put, they may not know good sound if it bit them in the ass.  However, if they are happy with it, isn't that all that really matters?

We are an opinionated lot, there's no question about that, and I am no different than the rest of you.  I've been recording live music for approximately 35 years and feel I know a thing or two about it.  I have experimented with location, and every configuration of equipment available to me that I could.  It's called a learning process.  That doesn't make me any more of an authority over anyone else here, but it does give me some insight.  Like all of you, my goal was to get to a point where I am happy with my equipment and know how to use it in a multitude of recording situations.  I have done this to my satisfaction.  The thing is, so have many others here, and they will defend their position (equipment & technique) until the cows come home.  I think we can all agree on that last point, can't we?

These things being said, this thread, however entertaining I find it to be, is spinning in a circle with no end in sight.  The same things are being reiterated over and over.  Why, because some people believe that internal mics, or Sonic Studio mics, or Church Audio mics are just as good, better, or suck compared to real microphones I mean full size, "high quality", or expensive mics.  Well, I've got news for ya'll, no matter how misguided some folks may be, what they are doing is right for them.  They don't want to be convinced otherwise, and I don't blame them.  If they are, they would have been wrong for a long time, or simply become unhappy with all they have recorded.  Live and let live.  The original poster had a question, that I think at this point, he got way more than he bargained for.  However, he did get a lot of food for thought and can make a decision based on all of our knowledge.  That's what these forums are all about, right?  I know I've asked many question when I've need other opinions or information...and I'm grateful for those who were kind enough to take the time to help.

I have nothing to close with here, but I wrote so much, I felt there should be a closing paragraph...

 :smash:
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #89 on: July 24, 2017, 03:32:53 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.

You got it.  I was in London for Eric Clapton when Manchester bombing hit.  Did we leave gear home?  No we stepped up our game and got everything in.

We're tapers...that's what we do!   :coolguy:
I'd love to get a copy of that recording, Clapton's a personal favorite.

Here you go.  In kick down section thread.     

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=182321.0

Thank you :-)
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #90 on: July 24, 2017, 04:09:05 PM »
Don't get me wrong, I should have been named Will, because where there's a will, there's a way.  I always got my stuff in, no matter the size or the metal detectors...I can write a book, believe me!  Nowadays though, they aren't looking for tapers as much as they're looking for bombs, guns, etc.  We live in a different world.  Not everyone is as capable as we are.

You got it.  I was in London for Eric Clapton when Manchester bombing hit.  Did we leave gear home?  No we stepped up our game and got everything in.


We're tapers...that's what we do!   :coolguy:
I'd love to get a copy of that recording, Clapton's a personal favorite.

Here you go.  In kick down section thread.     

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=182321.0

Thank you :-)

You are welcome.  2nd night best imho because I had the best location.  First night too close and last night a bit further back and off center.  Scooter123 also ran the 3 shows.  We sat side by side first night, 2nd night he was a bit further back and 3rd night had the better seat (2 seats from where I recorded night 2).  Both recorded with same rigs.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2017, 06:53:54 PM by daspyknows »

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5767
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #91 on: July 24, 2017, 05:58:42 PM »
utterly untrue and laughable.

CSB's are an utter joke of a mic, you have to be 10 ft. from the stack to pull anything usable.

CA, again, SHODDY MATERIALS that BREAK. why anyone would rely on them, I've no idea.

keep telling yourself that to feel better if you wish, but it's like comparing a Subaru Legacy (Sonics) to a Kia or a Yugo (CSB and CA, respectively).

they'll all get you where you're going, but which of the 3 would *you* pick if you were renting?

It's especially funny when you try to pick a fight when someone is at least partly agreeing with you. I was responding to Daspy's comment in which he more or less said they were closer to internals. IMHO Sonics are much better than internals and the others I mentioned (CA and CSB). While Sonics and CSBs are based on the same $2 Panasonic capsule, the Sonics IMHO sound much, much better.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #92 on: July 24, 2017, 07:33:41 PM »

Well, I've got news for ya'll, no matter how misguided some folks may be, what they are doing is right for them.  They don't want to be convinced otherwise, and I don't blame them.  If they are, they would have been wrong for a long time, or simply become unhappy with all they have recorded. 


 :smash:

Sold to the man with the 700's... 
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline perks

  • Trade Count: (22)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4091
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #93 on: July 24, 2017, 08:26:41 PM »


Here you go.  In kick down section thread.     

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=182321.0

Easily a full 11% better than any internal recording I've heard. Well done. You must know that taper trick to point the mics towards the PA. ;-)
Mics: Schoeps MK5, Schoeps MK41, AT853u (C,SC,H)
Preamps/converter: Schoeps VMS52UB (x2), Nbox (x2), Grace Lunatec V2, Sound Devices MP-2, DPA MMA6000, Naiant Tinybox v1.5, Apogee Mini-Me, Benchmark AD2k+
Recorders: Tascam DR-680, Korg MR-1, Edirol R-05, Sony M10

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #94 on: July 25, 2017, 12:10:07 PM »

(1) Comparing some semi-decent tapes made with sub-par equipment to tapes made with top-of-the-line equipment from a less than ideal spot (or under circumstances beyond your control) is pretty pointless and reminds me of Schopenhauer's law of entropy:

(2) Whether you're can actually hear the difference is a completely different story.




1. http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=182924.msg2235302#msg2235302




2. 20-20 is all the human ear can discern.

so anything "better than that" is pointless.




I guess you can't really tell the difference.  Is that a good thing?



having recorded hundreds of shows from both areas, pretty sure I know what I'm talking about.



Let's let others decide.  Post yours and I will post mine and how about a poll?   Let others decide.

Yes, I do have my opinion and you have yours.  If I thought I could make a better recording from the upper levels monkeying around with DR-2D I would do that.  In "my opinion" a Schoeps recording from the sweet spot sounds better than an internal mic recording from ANYWHERE in the venue.




mine will get more snatches than yours, then you'll blame geography.

I did nail it, btw.

I've heard your thin, sterile captures.

will even post a sample to save you the trouble of having to download it.

and you *could* make an *equal* recording (I've never said that internals were better-than), if you had the brains.

clearly, you do not.

were you the "parent of the year", or was that Sloan?

perhaps you should focus on that instead of taping a bunch of dead, bloated crap.

I get all you oldhead bluehairs mixed up, so if it wasn't your kid in "wilderness camp" (we *all* know what that  means), then my apologies.




:yack: :yack: :yack:

I don't even know how to quote as many of the comments I'd like to in one reply...and I'm not going to try.  People, people. people, we are all connected within a wonderful community that enjoys preserving live music in the best quality that we are both able to, based on our economic condition, as well as our knowledge and preference for various sonic differences.  Although we all enjoy doing the same thing, we all have our own ways of doing things that yield different results.  The important thing is, that we are happy with our own results.  If we choose to put it out there for others to download and enjoy, that's fantastic, but to judge the 'enjoyment' of others based on them downloading our recordings doesn't mean we are taping gods, it means they like our recordings, are creatures of habit, or simply don't have or know of, better sources.  Simply put, they may not know good sound if it bit them in the ass.  However, if they are happy with it, isn't that all that really matters?

We are an opinionated lot, there's no question about that, and I am no different than the rest of you.  I've been recording live music for approximately 35 years and feel I know a thing or two about it.  I have experimented with location, and every configuration of equipment available to me that I could.  It's called a learning process.  That doesn't make me any more of an authority over anyone else here, but it does give me some insight.  Like all of you, my goal was to get to a point where I am happy with my equipment and know how to use it in a multitude of recording situations.  I have done this to my satisfaction.  The thing is, so have many others here, and they will defend their position (equipment & technique) until the cows come home.  I think we can all agree on that last point, can't we?

These things being said, this thread, however entertaining I find it to be, is spinning in a circle with no end in sight.  The same things are being reiterated over and over.  Why, because some people believe that internal mics, or Sonic Studio mics, or Church Audio mics are just as good, better, or suck compared to real microphones I mean full size, "high quality", or expensive mics.  Well, I've got news for ya'll, no matter how misguided some folks may be, what they are doing is right for them.  They don't want to be convinced otherwise, and I don't blame them.  If they are, they would have been wrong for a long time, or simply become unhappy with all they have recorded.  Live and let live.  The original poster had a question, that I think at this point, he got way more than he bargained for.  However, he did get a lot of food for thought and can make a decision based on all of our knowledge.  That's what these forums are all about, right?  I know I've asked many question when I've need other opinions or information...and I'm grateful for those who were kind enough to take the time to help.

I have nothing to close with here, but I wrote so much, I felt there should be a closing paragraph...

 :smash:

quoted it all as it's wise, sage advice.


here's where I'm coming from:

when I see 8 people jump on an internals thread in the first day, and all 8 (an arabitrary number) tell the person (usually new to the game) that what they are doing is wrong and that they need to buy an expensive setup to obtain something even usable, I take great umbrage to that, as I *have* done it on the cheap, and I have made numerous fantastic-sounding recordings....with a deck that hit the market at $150  5-6 years ago (I think, maybe a bit more).

or, it's as if folks are saying internal mics are like the condenser hand-held walkman mics of the 80's.

if I tried and failed miserably, I'd be the first to admit it and say so.

the R-09 internals ***are shitty microphones***...waaaaaaaay too hot, minimal lo-end (or distorted lo-end), and not a very pleasurable internal.

the Zoom H4n (I also own one), isn't much better, BUT it has 100 "level settings"...the R-09 only has 30.

the DR-2D, however, has bascially 140 (lo/med/high gain, each with 100 levels per, however, 0 on med gain is like 20 on lo gain, just as 0 on high is like 20 on medium/40 on low), or 160 of the settings "overlap" the others (pretty sure each attentuation is -20dB, if I'm saying that right).

and, the gain also seems to affect the brightness.

AND if mics are plugged in, that also affects the gain setting (only ever used "high" with the Sonics, due to the lo-cut being "permanently taped into" the mics due to the short I isolated)


all that said, 140 sensitivity levels is a LOT more choice than the 30 in the Edirol, AND the mics in the DR-2D, to these ears, sound rich and full, and occasionally outperform the Sonics.

that's just how it is.

pretty sure the Black Mountain and Mulvey links I posted are on archive/etree (I think it was you who asked)



It's especially funny when you try to pick a fight when someone is at least partly agreeing with you. I was responding to Daspy's comment in which he more or less said they were closer to internals. IMHO Sonics are much better than internals and the others I mentioned (CA and CSB). While Sonics and CSBs are based on the same $2 Panasonic capsule, the Sonics IMHO sound much, much better.

daspy will try to say anything to get a rise out of me, he backs up his insults with nothing of substance, which is what makes him so laughable.

your recordings are actually pretty good, the few I've heard...as are edtyre's.

I'm not 100% anti-mic stand (see what i said about Datfly in the link at the top of this post); it's more the attitudes of the bulk of their owners/users that are particularly grating.




Easily a full 11% better than any internal recording I've heard. Well done. You must know that taper trick to point the mics towards the PA. ;-)


why anyone would bother taping/listening to 2017 Clapton/Waters/et al I've no idea.

Clapton's last "amazing" playing was with Cream, he's been coasting ever since...one of the most overrated players I've ever heard, output-wise the last 40+ years.

the junk took his skills away quick.



what's the difference between a 4 year old and a bag of heroin?

Clapton won't drop the heroin.


#CHECKaaaaaaaaaaaandMATE











-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #95 on: July 25, 2017, 12:14:04 PM »
one more Clapton comment (as I don't feel like editing)

instead of wasting time watching a sad old man go thru the motions, GO TAPE THE MARCUS KING BAND

that cat is the real deal, and you'll be much more entertained for a fraction of the cost.

kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics...... :snickers:
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #96 on: July 25, 2017, 02:01:29 PM »
one more Clapton comment (as I don't feel like editing)

instead of wasting time watching a sad old man go thru the motions, GO TAPE THE MARCUS KING BAND

that cat is the real deal, and you'll be much more entertained for a fraction of the cost.

kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics...... :snickers:

You are too hung up about saving money.  That I can fly to Europe with friends to record Clapton is like owning an "elitist rig"  Either you can do it or you can't.  Yes kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics if thats all you choose to do...... :snickers:

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #97 on: July 25, 2017, 02:35:22 PM »

You are too hung up about saving money.  That I can fly to Europe with friends to record Clapton is like owning an "elitist rig"  Either you can do it or you can't.  Yes kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics if thats all you choose to do...... :snickers:

if I was so 'hung up on money', why the hell would I fly out of state so often for shows?
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #98 on: July 25, 2017, 03:51:06 PM »

You are too hung up about saving money.  That I can fly to Europe with friends to record Clapton is like owning an "elitist rig"  Either you can do it or you can't.  Yes kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics if thats all you choose to do...... :snickers:

if I was so 'hung up on money', why the hell would I fly out of state so often for shows?

Most of the tapers on here fly out of state or drive out of state for shows.   Many buy tickets too instead of begging for freebies. 

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #99 on: July 25, 2017, 10:03:44 PM »

You are too hung up about saving money.  That I can fly to Europe with friends to record Clapton is like owning an "elitist rig"  Either you can do it or you can't.  Yes kinda like recording with a deck with only internal mics if thats all you choose to do...... :snickers:

if I was so 'hung up on money', why the hell would I fly out of state so often for shows?

Most of the tapers on here fly out of state or drive out of state for shows.   Many buy tickets too instead of begging for freebies.


I don't "beg".

artists are happy with the quality of what I do, and compensate me accordingly.

and that matters oh-so-much-more than the opine of one who has to send their kid to wilderness camp

shit, my father helped me kill 3 moose, 2 caribou and a bear before age 16, or, REAL wilderness camp *with him*, vs. away from him.

he didn't farm me out because he failed on numerous fronts as a father.

do you even take your kid to shows?
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #100 on: July 25, 2017, 11:54:10 PM »
That I can fly to Europe with friends to record Clapton is like owning an "elitist rig"  Either you can do it or you can't. 


huh?

I've taped shows in right at 40 of the 50 states (maybe 39, maybe 41, I know Hawaii, every Pacific and Mountain state, and the only central ones I haven't are North Dakota and Nebraska....as for the East Coast, there's a bunch (6-8 at least) in the NE I've not been to or taped in (have NY, PA and VA masters for sure, does DC count?) or, I could make it 48-out-of-50 in a bit over a week. even did one in Canada, I think.
 

simply put, the NE is kinda like Europe for me.
#NODESIRETOGOTHERE

and seeing Clapton even less so. have had 4 chances to see him (twice free), and passed them all up, easily at that.

see, it's not an either/or, "you can or you can't" type scenario.....


as just like taping....there's MORE than "one way to do it".


you silly rabbit you.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #101 on: July 26, 2017, 12:40:31 AM »
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #102 on: July 26, 2017, 01:25:31 AM »


Most of the tapers on here fly out of state or drive out of state for shows.   Many buy tickets too instead of begging for freebies.

and do most tapers pay an average of $400 just to get to Seattle?


not to mention your "most tapers here" comment is pretty bunk.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline morst

  • Archivist: Camper Van Beethoven & Cracker
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
  • Get in touch if you wanna record Cracker or CVB!
    • Soundscape Preservation Society
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #103 on: July 26, 2017, 01:36:27 AM »
Interesting perspective, thanks for the comprehensive rundown. I doubt many of us have used that many different "shirt pocket" size setups.




the R-09 internals ***are shitty microphones***...waaaaaaaay too hot, minimal lo-end (or distorted lo-end), and not a very pleasurable internal.

the Zoom H4n (I also own one), isn't much better, BUT it has 100 "level settings"...the R-09 only has 30.

the DR-2D, however, has bascially 140 (lo/med/high gain, each with 100 levels per, however, 0 on med gain is like 20 on lo gain, just as 0 on high is like 20 on medium/40 on low), or 160 of the settings "overlap" the others (pretty sure each attentuation is -20dB, if I'm saying that right).


I think you might be saying that right. Don't know if it's correct, but I think I get what you mean.

Quote

and, the gain also seems to affect the brightness. {VERY INTERESTING (morst note)}

AND if mics are plugged in, that also affects the gain setting (only ever used "high" with the Sonics, due to the lo-cut being "permanently taped into" the mics due to the short I isolated)


all that said, 140 sensitivity levels is a LOT more choice than the 30 in the Edirol, AND the mics in the DR-2D, to these ears, sound rich and full, and occasionally outperform the Sonics.

140 clicks versus 30 clicks is one thing, but it's more a question of whether click 130 can amplify birdcalls better than click 27 on the other, while still recording jet planes or fireworks on click 5 or 10? Unless you only record birdcalls, or only record jet planes, or some such... To all, their own.

Teams: Neumann, Bay Area Tapers, Multitrack, Pioneertown Tapers, Mac Geeks, Cassette Masters, Poster Collectors, Alumni of teams St Louis, Upper Midwest & Milwaukee / Southern Wisco

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #104 on: July 26, 2017, 05:37:39 AM »
Interesting perspective, thanks for the comprehensive rundown. I doubt many of us have used that many different "shirt pocket" size setups.





the R-09 internals ***are shitty microphones***...waaaaaaaay too hot, minimal lo-end (or distorted lo-end), and not a very pleasurable internal.

the Zoom H4n (I also own one), isn't much better, BUT it has 100 "level settings"...the R-09 only has 30.

the DR-2D, however, has bascially 140 (lo/med/high gain, each with 100 levels per, however, 0 on med gain is like 20 on lo gain, just as 0 on high is like 20 on medium/40 on low), or 160 of the settings "overlap" the others (pretty sure each attentuation is -20dB, if I'm saying that right).


I think you might be saying that right. Don't know if it's correct, but I think I get what you mean.

Quote

and, the gain also seems to affect the brightness. {VERY INTERESTING (morst note)}

AND if mics are plugged in, that also affects the gain setting (only ever used "high" with the Sonics, due to the lo-cut being "permanently taped into" the mics due to the short I isolated)


all that said, 140 sensitivity levels is a LOT more choice than the 30 in the Edirol, AND the mics in the DR-2D, to these ears, sound rich and full, and occasionally outperform the Sonics.

140 clicks versus 30 clicks is one thing, but it's more a question of whether click 130 can amplify birdcalls better than click 27 on the other, while still recording jet planes or fireworks on click 5 or 10? Unless you only record birdcalls, or only record jet planes, or some such... To all, their own.

to clarify: gain seems to affect brightness only when the Sonics are plugged in.  or, the internals are very "even sounding" during playback, 9 times out of 10 10khz is bouncing just as pretty as 63/98hz.

or, a pretty full range (40hz and 12.5/16khz also bounce, just not as dramatic)

the Sonics, however, seem to come out bassier on low, pretty even on medium, and really bright on high (though with the levels turned down)

also, max levels with the internals on medium gain is 75 (for 'hard' music), and 68-72 is a great range to get to -4 or -6dB peaks

with the Sonics plugged in, however, I can jack the levels to 98 out of 100 on medium, and still only peak at -10 to -12db, which *does* allow more headroom should one choose to use some EQ.

the Ben Harper is up. again, I truly think it sounds fantastic:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257


if anything, bump your bass knob a tiny bit to the left (down) if the rumble doesn't suit your ears.

no other frequencies over 400hz were touched.


and the last part of your post....68 to 72 on med gain, 88 to 92 on low (again, ONLY with the internals)

or, yeah, I only use 8 of the 'clicks' (out of 130) 90% of the time....with the internals.

with the Sonics, almost always between 95 and 98 on med....occasionally 100.


« Last Edit: July 26, 2017, 05:54:39 AM by furburger »
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline morst

  • Archivist: Camper Van Beethoven & Cracker
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
  • Get in touch if you wanna record Cracker or CVB!
    • Soundscape Preservation Society
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #105 on: July 26, 2017, 11:07:47 PM »
Sounds like not much bass is getting through on high gain due to low levels. If you record something quiet like an acoustic guitar on high gain, does it lack bass with a higher record level than you would have for something louder that you'd record on the high setting?

I'm curious why the gain setting would affect the sound so much, but I guess you can choose to use it as an effect if you know what to expect.

to clarify: gain seems to affect brightness only when the Sonics are plugged in.  or, the internals are very "even sounding" during playback, 9 times out of 10 10khz is bouncing just as pretty as 63/98hz.

or, a pretty full range (40hz and 12.5/16khz also bounce, just not as dramatic)

the Sonics, however, seem to come out bassier on low, pretty even on medium, and really bright on high (though with the levels turned down)


also, max levels with the internals on medium gain is 75 (for 'hard' music), and 68-72 is a great range to get to -4 or -6dB peaks

with the Sonics plugged in, however, I can jack the levels to 98 out of 100 on medium, and still only peak at -10 to -12db, which *does* allow more headroom should one choose to use some EQ.

the Ben Harper is up. again, I truly think it sounds fantastic:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257


if anything, bump your bass knob a tiny bit to the left (down) if the rumble doesn't suit your ears.

no other frequencies over 400hz were touched.


and the last part of your post....68 to 72 on med gain, 88 to 92 on low (again, ONLY with the internals)

or, yeah, I only use 8 of the 'clicks' (out of 130) 90% of the time....with the internals.

with the Sonics, almost always between 95 and 98 on med....occasionally 100.
Teams: Neumann, Bay Area Tapers, Multitrack, Pioneertown Tapers, Mac Geeks, Cassette Masters, Poster Collectors, Alumni of teams St Louis, Upper Midwest & Milwaukee / Southern Wisco

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #106 on: July 26, 2017, 11:37:23 PM »
Sounds like not much bass is getting through on high gain due to low levels. If you record something quiet like an acoustic guitar on high gain, does it lack bass with a higher record level than you would have for something louder that you'd record on the high setting?

I'm curious why the gain setting would affect the sound so much, but I guess you can choose to use it as an effect if you know what to expect.

to clarify: gain seems to affect brightness only when the Sonics are plugged in.  or, the internals are very "even sounding" during playback, 9 times out of 10 10khz is bouncing just as pretty as 63/98hz.

or, a pretty full range (40hz and 12.5/16khz also bounce, just not as dramatic)

the Sonics, however, seem to come out bassier on low, pretty even on medium, and really bright on high (though with the levels turned down)


also, max levels with the internals on medium gain is 75 (for 'hard' music), and 68-72 is a great range to get to -4 or -6dB peaks

with the Sonics plugged in, however, I can jack the levels to 98 out of 100 on medium, and still only peak at -10 to -12db, which *does* allow more headroom should one choose to use some EQ.

the Ben Harper is up. again, I truly think it sounds fantastic:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257


if anything, bump your bass knob a tiny bit to the left (down) if the rumble doesn't suit your ears.

no other frequencies over 400hz were touched.


and the last part of your post....68 to 72 on med gain, 88 to 92 on low (again, ONLY with the internals)

or, yeah, I only use 8 of the 'clicks' (out of 130) 90% of the time....with the internals.

with the Sonics, almost always between 95 and 98 on med....occasionally 100.


not really sure if it's in conjunction with the lo-cut on the Sonics...but the internals are *always* bright, even on low.

with the Sonics, low gain won't let you get much above -20dB (wayyy too low). on medium, cranked to 100, it may bounce up to -10, -8, depending on distance from the stage.

only on high gain can I get any "flex", or I don't have to max out to 100.

internals, it's simple

never used high (mainly because of clappers, they'll always override the music on high)

med: 68 to 72 will give you levels between -8 and -4

low: 88 to 92 will give you the same levels, but is much, much better for heavier music.


med is like for the Natalie Merchant/blues/Ann Wilson kinda stuff. low is for Testament/Tool/Pearl Jam/etc...unless yer in the 300's, then bump it up to medium (unless you have too many screamers or talkers)
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #107 on: July 27, 2017, 12:37:03 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.



again, your recordings aren't as good you think they are, nor are mine as bad as you say they are.


that much is certain.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 133
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #108 on: July 27, 2017, 01:17:46 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.



again, your recordings aren't as good you think they are, nor are mine as bad as you say they are.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #109 on: July 27, 2017, 08:23:52 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.



again, your recordings aren't as good you think they are, nor are mine as bad as you say they are.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?


daspys schweppes bottlerockets ben harper on dime, two months or so back.


or whatever foo-foo thingamabob he swears by.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (27)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18684
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #110 on: July 27, 2017, 09:54:31 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...

For those looking and not wanting to sift through the entire back and forth between daspy and furry, here are the two recordings they've provided.  Both daspy and furry are very opinionated, but you all should decide for yourselves.  Personally, I have a very strong preference for one over the other -- and find the 'other' painful to listen to for more than a short sample -- but everyone should decide individually which they prefer:

https://we.tl/hnxhnrM8h9
https://we.tl/eKlmn3vcjq
Milab VM-44 Links >
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 133
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #111 on: July 27, 2017, 02:02:15 PM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...


Yeah, I just downloaded a couple files from the past few shows on dime. The Mk5 source from 7/06 and Mk41 from 5/27  sound pretty damn good to me. While the sonic studios source phases a lot and really needs some EQ. Should have known.

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #112 on: July 29, 2017, 04:39:35 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...

For those looking and not wanting to sift through the entire back and forth between daspy and furry, here are the two recordings they've provided.  Both daspy and furry are very opinionated, but you all should decide for yourselves.  Personally, I have a very strong preference for one over the other -- and find the 'other' painful to listen to for more than a short sample -- but everyone should decide individually which they prefer:

https://we.tl/hnxhnrM8h9
https://we.tl/eKlmn3vcjq


well when you look at all the work that daspy put into his 'story', and the responses compared to mine, I'd have to say the fans of my recordings (and what I record) care a little more.

it's hard to admit that mic-stands and $1000 stealth mics really aren't all that...especially to those heavily invested in such.


but there is no doubt that an excellent pull can be obtained with internals. I posted 5 examples, and probably have 100 more.


if one can't figure out how to do so, that's on them, not me.


a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...


Yeah, I just downloaded a couple files from the past few shows on dime. The Mk5 source from 7/06 and Mk41 from 5/27  sound pretty damn good to me. While the sonic studios source phases a lot and really needs some EQ. Should have known.

it was EQ'd, and has a fuller range than what daspy offered as his representative recording.  any basic parametric equalizer will confirm this.

if one is into compression, then daspy is their man!


ok, time to get back to humpin' the gal from Indy....you kids have fun comparing serial numbers.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (27)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18684
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #113 on: July 29, 2017, 10:28:29 PM »
I'd have to say the fans of my recordings (and what I record) care a little more.

it's hard to admit that mic-stands and $1000 stealth mics really aren't all that...especially to those heavily invested in such.

but there is no doubt that an excellent pull can be obtained with internals. I posted 5 examples, and probably have 100 more.

Ooo...yeah...uhmmm...I'm going to have to disagree with you there.  At least if your BHIC recording is held up as an example of 'excellent'.



The two BHIC recordings illustrate the differences between internals v. good external mics quite obviously, IMO.  Everyone interested in internals v. externals should have a listen.
At any rate, glad you and others like your recordings!   :cheers:
Milab VM-44 Links >
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #114 on: July 30, 2017, 12:32:13 AM »
I really don't understand the EQ vs. no EQ argument. If the result is good, who cares how you got there? And, yes, good is subjective so everyone will have a slightly different opinions if it is somewhere in the good range.

I'm not a fan of the shenanigans that have gone on in the thread from both sides, but this argument that you can only compare the raw recordings from the same location is nonsense. If furbie can get a good recording using his gear and post methods, that seems to support his argument that you don't need a set of $1000 mics to get a good recording. You may not like it as well as the $1000 recording, but his argument is that it is good enough and that many people enjoy the recordings. Now, he says a lot of other things, too, that makes it hard to swallow this argument.

As for the two reference recordings - has the furbie version been EQ'd or is that the raw file? To my taste, the daspy version is more listenable, but I can see where some EQ on the furbie version would make it probably close to as listenable. Furbie's comment that daspy's has some phasing is correct. In headphones, this can be distracting, but in my listen, it wasn't dramatic and I wasn't put off too much by it. I wouldn't not listen to it because of this.

To further furbie's point (I know, quite shocking considering he thinks I'm one of the elitist mic-standers), compare these two recordings:

https://archive.org/details/nma2016-07-09.ca-11.flac16/nma2016-07-09t08.flac
https://archive.org/details/NMAS2016-07-09.AKG/Nmas2016-07-09Track07.flac

I'm pretty sure the AKG source was not EQ'd. The Church Audio source was EQ'd. Now they weren't recorded from the same spot - far from it. The CA source is done from the rail, shoulder mounted (which relates to one of furbie's techniques). The AKG source is about 50 ft. back on a stand. Now, I prefer my CA source over the AKG source and not just because it is my recording. I don't know what I'd think if I compared the raw CA source, but I always EQ my CA recordings because they need it. But, if I didn't use my CA gear sometimes, the recording wouldn't get done.

I think this is furbie's point. He's saying he can get a good recording with his $150 deck. Is it the best? Probably not, but it is good enough for him (and others) and we should probably stop pissing on him (at least with regards to this aspect.) And EQ can be an okay thing, not something to look down your nose at. You may not agree with his attitude or even his technique, but at the end of day, the result is what matters.

And, another example to consider.

https://archive.org/details/ttb2016-12-02.ca11.flac24

An open taping band - Tedeschi Trucks Band. I could have brought my "elitist" rig, but it wasn't going to work. My seats were less than ideal (way back in the orchestra, under the balcony). Seats are very tight in this old theater and I was with friends. The only way I was recording was to use my low profile rig. My buddies didn't even know I was taping. Yes, there is some phasing, but the sound quality is at least good enough (after some EQ) and more importantly, it is the only recording circulating of the show. Definitely listenable.

Furbie's message can get lost among the arrogance and misogyny, but I think he has a point if you can find it. Just food for thought.
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #115 on: July 30, 2017, 03:20:43 AM »
Ooo...yeah...uhmmm...I'm going to have to disagree with you there.  At least if your BHIC recording is held up as an example of 'excellent'.

The two BHIC recordings illustrate the differences between internals v. good external mics quite obviously, IMO.  Everyone interested in internals v. externals should have a listen.
At any rate, glad you and others like your recordings!   :cheers:

the recording I posted was Sonics > Tascam...pretty sure them'r external, and was listed such on the link.

the first couple songs, as with nearly *any* show, were being dialed in. the 75-90m part of the show was pretty amazing.


but, most importantly, I never said here that it was "excellent" (that was for the dime'rs), I merely said that it was ***better than daspys***.

you never did respond the other times I posted *much* better examples (the 5 link list that starts with Mulvey, strictly internal recordings, and a list of I think 10 in the Church Audio thread)....I expected as much, but it is what it is. 






As for the two reference recordings - has the furbie version been EQ'd or is that the raw file? To my taste, the daspy version is more listenable, but I can see where some EQ on the furbie version would make it probably close to as listenable. Furbie's comment that daspy's has some phasing is correct. In headphones, this can be distracting, but in my listen, it wasn't dramatic and I wasn't put off too much by it. I wouldn't not listen to it because of this.

To further furbie's point (I know, quite shocking considering he thinks I'm one of the elitist mic-standers), compare these two recordings:

https://archive.org/details/nma2016-07-09.ca-11.flac16/nma2016-07-09t08.flac
https://archive.org/details/NMAS2016-07-09.AKG/Nmas2016-07-09Track07.flac

I'm pretty sure the AKG source was not EQ'd. The Church Audio source was EQ'd. Now they weren't recorded from the same spot - far from it. The CA source is done from the rail, shoulder mounted (which relates to one of furbie's techniques). The AKG source is about 50 ft. back on a stand. Now, I prefer my CA source over the AKG source and not just because it is my recording. I don't know what I'd think if I compared the raw CA source, but I always EQ my CA recordings because they need it. But, if I didn't use my CA gear sometimes, the recording wouldn't get done.

I think this is furbie's point. He's saying he can get a good recording with his $150 deck. Is it the best? Probably not, but it is good enough for him (and others) and we should probably stop pissing on him (at least with regards to this aspect.) And EQ can be an okay thing, not something to look down your nose at. You may not agree with his attitude or even his technique, but at the end of day, the result is what matters.


Furbie's message can get lost among the arrogance and misogyny, but I think he has a point if you can find it. Just food for thought.



I always thought you were alright there R, until ya blocked me from FB and from here for reasons that I've really no idea they may be.

that aside, you  pretty much hit the nail on the head.

though this bit of history has been explained before,  I've been a taper for 25 years on August 25.

the attitudes that some of the mic-stand'rs have currently mimic to a tee the DATtitudes from 1995, when people turned their nose at my recordings ***simply because they were on a D6 vs. a DAT***?

I mean.........seriously?  without even listening to them?

just because I didn't wanna shift to "Betamax mini" at twice the cost, when living in Alaska (that's ticket money, plane or concert, when you get into blanks, DAT home decks that *failed* quite often), that's a 'reason' to not want to trade with someone (oh yeah, the hassle of having to DAT > analog, fergot that one)

fortunately, I had a good chunk of friends who did have DAT's, who did mix down, and send to those who would not listen initially.  and soon I had a nice chunk of DAT master > 1g analog tapes. and over the years some DAT traders have actually asked for their analog copies back, as their DAT's *failed*

never had that happen to an analog tape, sans a deck getting hungry.....

basically, this kinda reminds me of 20 years ago all over again, I *could* see if I was using an Aiwa handheld condenser-mic walkman with a limiter built in...but I shit you not, the internals in that DR-2D are ***not that bad***.

anyhow, regarding the Harper, this is the dime torrent. it has been EQ'd (lightly, other than one frequency), and I think Dennis did a bangsnap job. I didn't even re-record in in real time as I sometimes do, he simply applied the settings I recommended with his EQ (running 98hz at -6dB only on a 2nd run, bringing it down to -12), and when I look at mine vs. daspy's on an EQ, it's not even close to a contest in terms of overall range (left > right lift) and bounce.  realistically, not only is it a *headline* set (vs. festival), but it's also fluffed pretty decent by me AND there's the novelty of an "Alaskan" show, which I'm sure has contributed to why it got more d/'s than dapsy's right out of the gate (yes, regardless of my comments, my head is pretty much grounded in reality about this):

www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257



there are samples there of segments in the top comments I thought sounded pretty good if you don't wanna download it.



and thanks for the kind words, btw....a lot of the misogyny is an act.....promise.


after my friend from Indiana leaves Thursday night, I'm gonna pop the Ben internals source in (still haven't even listened yet) to see if it's better than the Sonics. it's doubtful, but there's a chance that it is. if there's a big enough difference, I may post a WT link of it as well.

but yes, my initial link was the raw one, the dime torrent was EQ'd and what was done was listed in the comments.

-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline anr

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 347
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #116 on: July 30, 2017, 03:48:58 AM »
Quote
www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257


My tuppence.  That's a pretty good capture.  But the crowd noise would have made me delete it.  Drives me nuts.  But that is why you put up samples, because I'm sure others aren't as sensitive.  (It follows that I believe there is no point providing links here to Dime torrents that don't have samples).

I collect recordings of one particular singer/guitarist.  Due to this crowd issue, I find I am continually chasing a recording I can comfortably listen to (as distinct from an accurate recording of the show).  By far the best recording I have, out of over 300, over a 35 year period, was done with an Edirol RO-9, with internals, placed on the stage lip.  Got lucky with the basic sound, but it was a conscious attempt to eliminate the crowd.  There's far more to it than just what gear you use, as many before me have pointed out.


Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #117 on: July 30, 2017, 04:24:45 AM »
Quote
www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=597257


My tuppence.  That's a pretty good capture.  But the crowd noise would have made me delete it.  Drives me nuts.  But that is why you put up samples, because I'm sure others aren't as sensitive.  (It follows that I believe there is no point providing links here to Dime torrents that don't have samples).

I collect recordings of one particular singer/guitarist.  Due to this crowd issue, I find I am continually chasing a recording I can comfortably listen to (as distinct from an accurate recording of the show).  By far the best recording I have, out of over 300, over a 35 year period, was done with an Edirol RO-9, with internals, placed on the stage lip.  Got lucky with the basic sound, but it was a conscious attempt to eliminate the crowd.  There's far more to it than just what gear you use, as many before me have pointed out.


understood, I accepted long ago that this is 'live' music, and that I'd have to accept some crowd noise over the course of time. I now call it "flavor", and over the years, there are some doozies. to the point I wanna make a 2 cd set of my nose getting broken at White Zombie '96 (unintentional, at that, the guy had his back to me)/seats at '99 Metallica Anchorage 'not exisitng' when I go there/getting tossed from The Cult '95 Tempe for lighting up a fattie, then lettind down the then-long hair and sneaking back in to finish taping/etc

you seem to get another thing I'm saying:  that being; 'positioning' is a good 80% of the battle.

the Ben Harper torrent is far from my best capture, but he and his band pretty much lit it up, and for what little was invested in taping it (a $60 ticket and an extra day rental car, though the trip was based around Ben), it came out plenty good for these ears.




and you never know, I may have recorded that artist..... ;)
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #118 on: July 30, 2017, 04:33:29 AM »
a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...

For those looking and not wanting to sift through the entire back and forth between daspy and furry, here are the two recordings they've provided.  Both daspy and furry are very opinionated, but you all should decide for yourselves.  Personally, I have a very strong preference for one over the other -- and find the 'other' painful to listen to for more than a short sample -- but everyone should decide individually which they prefer:

https://we.tl/hnxhnrM8h9
https://we.tl/eKlmn3vcjq


well when you look at all the work that daspy put into his 'story', and the responses compared to mine, I'd have to say the fans of my recordings (and what I record) care a little more.

it's hard to admit that mic-stands and $1000 stealth mics really aren't all that...especially to those heavily invested in such.


but there is no doubt that an excellent pull can be obtained with internals. I posted 5 examples, and probably have 100 more.


if one can't figure out how to do so, that's on them, not me.


a crappy 2 dollar Panasonic mic capsule Ben Harper show already has equalled, make that exceeded snatches of your fancy-schmancy microphone recording....in less than 24 hours daspy.

Which source are you referring to as the "fancy-schmancy" one?

Limit35 -- furry equates # of downloads with quality.  You should decide for yourself.  From another thread...


Yeah, I just downloaded a couple files from the past few shows on dime. The Mk5 source from 7/06 and Mk41 from 5/27  sound pretty damn good to me. While the sonic studios source phases a lot and really needs some EQ. Should have known.

it was EQ'd, and has a fuller range than what daspy offered as his representative recording.  any basic parametric equalizer will confirm this.

if one is into compression, then daspy is their man!


ok, time to get back to humpin' the gal from Indy....you kids have fun comparing serial numbers.

This sounds like who had more people at their inauguration.  Ears and eyes don't lie.

Here is a raw sample from Ben Harper tonight at Robert Mondavi Winery in St. Helena California.  Small outdoor venue similar to Furby's Moose whatever venue.  I guess it holds about 800 to 1,000 people.  I was in the 7th row a seat of dead center (25 feet appx) 

https://we.tl/DzWDpwSFqb

Since furby is to chicken to undertake Nak 700's comparison this will have to do.   This is not what I would call excellent like all of furby's internal mics recordings, as there are some issues but it's a decent representation of what I heard tonight.

Just a point about compression.  Obviously furby has NO clue what he is talking about. It is also not meant to be a representative recording of Ben Harper, but just the most recent comp.  I am not trying to cherry pick my best recording to compare, but just any recording. It is a stealth festival recording which will sound much different than a small intimate venue.  Now we have a closer comp.   Can't wait to hear what our resident aural expert has to say.   I have missed fake news the past few days.

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #119 on: July 30, 2017, 09:11:39 AM »

I always thought you were alright there R, until ya blocked me from FB and from here for reasons that I've really no idea they may be.
[snip]

and thanks for the kind words, btw....a lot of the misogyny is an act.....promise.

Furbie's message can get lost among the arrogance and misogyny


I think this clarifies why ... and the act wore thin at some point. I've always said most of it was an act, but it is relentless and not at all entertaining to me. The misogyny isn't funny even if you are mostly joking. I decided to reduce it with the tools I had available. I'm not going to get you to change, nor am I trying to. I didn't post, "Enough of this, I'm blocking you". I just did it. I'm surprised you even noticed, to be honest.


If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (27)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18684
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #120 on: July 30, 2017, 12:32:45 PM »
but, most importantly, I never said here that it was "excellent" (that was for the dime'rs), I merely said that it was ***better than daspys***.

you never did respond the other times I posted *much* better examples (the 5 link list that starts with Mulvey, strictly internal recordings, and a list of I think 10 in the Church Audio thread)....I expected as much, but it is what it is.

Ahhh...my mistake on the Sonic's v. internals.  Nonetheless, I prefer Daspy's in this instance.  I haven't chimed in on the others because you tend to take critical feedback defensively and I didn't really have anything positive to say.  All the samples I've heard -- whether comparing against others' recordings or not -- have been underwhelming.  Not horrendous, but not particularly good, either, IMO.  But I missed the samples in the CA thread, which I'll check out -- I generally find I tend to like the sound of the CA mics and the way many put them to good use.

Again, all that said, I'm glad you and others like your recordings!

vanark -- I get what you're saying and agree wholeheartedly, and I've encountered plenty of instances in which I prefer the recording with cheaper gear v. others (though not typically furry's...yet).  Thank you for taking the time to 'translate', though I have trouble reconciling it with furry's arrogant, binary, and hyperbolic commentary.
Milab VM-44 Links >
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #121 on: July 30, 2017, 02:02:40 PM »
but, most importantly, I never said here that it was "excellent" (that was for the dime'rs), I merely said that it was ***better than daspys***.

you never did respond the other times I posted *much* better examples (the 5 link list that starts with Mulvey, strictly internal recordings, and a list of I think 10 in the Church Audio thread)....I expected as much, but it is what it is.

Ahhh...my mistake on the Sonic's v. internals.  Nonetheless, I prefer Daspy's in this instance.  I haven't chimed in on the others because you tend to take critical feedback defensively and I didn't really have anything positive to say.  All the samples I've heard -- whether comparing against others' recordings or not -- have been underwhelming.  Not horrendous, but not particularly good, either, IMO.  But I missed the samples in the CA thread, which I'll check out -- I generally find I tend to like the sound of the CA mics and the way many put them to good use.

Again, all that said, I'm glad you and others like your recordings!

vanark -- I get what you're saying and agree wholeheartedly, and I've encountered plenty of instances in which I prefer the recording with cheaper gear v. others (though not typically furry's...yet).  Thank you for taking the time to 'translate', though I have trouble reconciling it with furry's arrogant, binary, and hyperbolic commentary.

I do get furby's game.  I sense similarities to another situation that affects all of us today.  I could post his recording as "mine" and he would say his is better just because he seems to have an inferiority complex he can't get past.  There is a way to settle this but he isn't man enough to take the challenge but will just call it "fake news". 

Brian,  I agree with your points spot on.  No arguments here and no issue with critical comments from peers and people who actually have useful comments, not just "arrogant, binary, and hyperbolic commentary".  That is how most oof us learn and improve techniques. 

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #122 on: July 30, 2017, 02:35:05 PM »
When you go to "he isn't man enough", you lose me, daspy. You have sunk to levels you don't need to. At the end of the day, you've lost me on what argument you are trying to make here. Your recordings will likely be better in almost every instance. But, furby's recordings are likely good enough in most instances. His point is he wouldn't record if he needed $3000 in gear to do it, so he does it with the gear he has and he, and others, are happy enough. No one is going to release one of his recordings as a commercial product, but it seems the fans like them well enough, esp. when they are the only recording of a show.
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #123 on: July 30, 2017, 02:51:33 PM »
When you go to "he isn't man enough", you lose me, daspy. You have sunk to levels you don't need to. At the end of the day, you've lost me on what argument you are trying to make here. Your recordings will likely be better in almost every instance. But, furby's recordings are likely good enough in most instances. His point is he wouldn't record if he needed $3000 in gear to do it, so he does it with the gear he has and he, and others, are happy enough. No one is going to release one of his recordings as a commercial product, but it seems the fans like them well enough, esp. when they are the only recording of a show.

Sorry, but when subjected to his personal insults here and elsewhere I have had enough.  There is also a difference between good enough to satisfy his minions and his idiotic rationalization.  My basic argument is either STFU or back up your claims in a true competitive matter like suggested like Nak700.  This is like the Twitter trolls who can only spew from a keyboard but will never do anything in person. 

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #124 on: July 30, 2017, 02:56:13 PM »
Sorry, but you are achieving the same level of douchenozzlery as him at this point. I don't have a horse in this race. If you don't like that, you can do something about it and stop taking his bait. He has admitted most of it is an act, to get reactions.
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #125 on: July 30, 2017, 03:03:26 PM »
Sorry, but you are achieving the same level of douchenozzlery as him at this point. I don't have a horse in this race. If you don't like that, you can do something about it and stop taking his bait. He has admitted most of it is an act, to get reactions.

Really?  So,  I should just not post anything or ignore it when he posts crap about me?  I've tried that before, doesn't work either. 

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #126 on: July 30, 2017, 03:12:04 PM »
Really?  So,  I should just not post anything or ignore it when he posts crap about me?  I've tried that before, doesn't work either.

Yes, that is what you should do. Who cares what he says? Why are you allowing him to validate you and your recordngs? We all know the deal.

"Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it."
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5767
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #127 on: July 30, 2017, 03:41:42 PM »
but, most importantly, I never said here that it was "excellent" (that was for the dime'rs), I merely said that it was ***better than daspys***.

you never did respond the other times I posted *much* better examples (the 5 link list that starts with Mulvey, strictly internal recordings, and a list of I think 10 in the Church Audio thread)....I expected as much, but it is what it is.

Ahhh...my mistake on the Sonic's v. internals.  Nonetheless, I prefer Daspy's in this instance.  I haven't chimed in on the others because you tend to take critical feedback defensively and I didn't really have anything positive to say.  All the samples I've heard -- whether comparing against others' recordings or not -- have been underwhelming.  Not horrendous, but not particularly good, either, IMO.  But I missed the samples in the CA thread, which I'll check out -- I generally find I tend to like the sound of the CA mics and the way many put them to good use.

Again, all that said, I'm glad you and others like your recordings!

vanark -- I get what you're saying and agree wholeheartedly, and I've encountered plenty of instances in which I prefer the recording with cheaper gear v. others (though not typically furry's...yet).  Thank you for taking the time to 'translate', though I have trouble reconciling it with furry's arrogant, binary, and hyperbolic commentary.

I was just talking last night about some recordings I did a few years ago. Most nights I just put some Audix with CA cables on my hat and ran near a stack. One night I ran Schoeps on a stand from back by the SBD. The better recording wasn't even close... and definitely not the Schoeps. Similar to Rory's example, if the only "official" spot is grossly inferior, somebody up close with lesser gear who knows what they're doing may well take it on any given night.

Which only goes back to, if you spend the time to get the right placement, EQ properly, etc. you can make great recordings with pretty humble mics. But if you have expensive mics, you should also be doing those things, and if you are, they will be better every time than the comparable lower-end product. But yeah, Schoeps, DPA, whatever also pick up loads more of the signal, and sometimes what they pick up is not desirable for listening.... hence also why people's tapes who don't EQ and post-process correctly can be pretty bad.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5767
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #128 on: July 30, 2017, 03:43:01 PM »
Sorry, but you are achieving the same level of douchenozzlery as him at this point. I don't have a horse in this race. If you don't like that, you can do something about it and stop taking his bait. He has admitted most of it is an act, to get reactions.

Really?  So,  I should just not post anything or ignore it when he posts crap about me?  I've tried that before, doesn't work either.

There's an "ignore" function here that is really helpful to achieving your goal. I'd recommend you do that. You don't need to validate your recordings by arguing about them.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #129 on: July 31, 2017, 09:08:45 PM »
daspy, the reason I'm not "man enough" is because the rules suck right out of the gate.


you take your setup, I take mine, we tape the same show from wherever, and that's the contest.



anything else reeks of sterility and pigeonholing.


-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #130 on: July 31, 2017, 10:39:57 PM »
daspy, the reason I'm not "man enough" is because the rules suck right out of the gate.


you take your setup, I take mine, we tape the same show from wherever, and that's the contest.



anything else reeks of sterility and pigeonholing.

What are your rules?  You say you can make better recording with your gear than me,  let's prove it.  Got hear this excuse. 

Offline jbosco

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #131 on: August 01, 2017, 08:12:03 AM »
daspy, the reason I'm not "man enough" is because the rules suck right out of the gate.


you take your setup, I take mine, we tape the same show from wherever, and that's the contest.



anything else reeks of sterility and pigeonholing.

He's actually right here, his claim has always been he can take his stuff (Sonic, internals, doesn't matter) and do his "thing" and the recording will be as good (or 90% whatever that means) as anyone's. You can't make him stand somewhere he wouldn't or not finger someone or even take away whatever he does in post, because that's all a part of his thing. Perhaps he knows that his unit can't handle X amount of low end, so he cuts it, knowing full well he's gonna add it back in post, if he can't do that, then it's not doing his thing, it's doing someone else's, he's never claimed that other methods would produce a good tape, just his own.

The only "fair" way of doing it (scientific or not) is both tapers recording the same show using whatever means they use (mics, gear, location, etc, all up to taper) and both doing what ever they do in post. Then conduct an independent poll online where the listeners have no idea as to who made the recording, the equipment used or the tapers location. Any other way would produce results slanted one way or the other.
---
Neumann KM 184 -> Tascam DR 70D
DPA 4061 -> Sony M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #132 on: August 01, 2017, 11:10:18 AM »
daspy, the reason I'm not "man enough" is because the rules suck right out of the gate.


you take your setup, I take mine, we tape the same show from wherever, and that's the contest.



anything else reeks of sterility and pigeonholing.

He's actually right here, his claim has always been he can take his stuff (Sonic, internals, doesn't matter) and do his "thing" and the recording will be as good (or 90% whatever that means) as anyone's. You can't make him stand somewhere he wouldn't or not finger someone or even take away whatever he does in post, because that's all a part of his thing. Perhaps he knows that his unit can't handle X amount of low end, so he cuts it, knowing full well he's gonna add it back in post, if he can't do that, then it's not doing his thing, it's doing someone else's, he's never claimed that other methods would produce a good tape, just his own.

The only "fair" way of doing it (scientific or not) is both tapers recording the same show using whatever means they use (mics, gear, location, etc, all up to taper) and both doing what ever they do in post. Then conduct an independent poll online where the listeners have no idea as to who made the recording, the equipment used or the tapers location. Any other way would produce results slanted one way or the other.

I'm fine with that too.  He can put as much lipstick on his recording as HE wants.   If you follow his posts that task is farmed out to others.

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #133 on: August 01, 2017, 04:24:00 PM »

He's actually right here, his claim has always been he can take his stuff (Sonic, internals, doesn't matter) and do his "thing" and the recording will be as good (or 90% whatever that means) as anyone's. You can't make him stand somewhere he wouldn't or not finger someone or even take away whatever he does in post, because that's all a part of his thing. Perhaps he knows that his unit can't handle X amount of low end, so he cuts it, knowing full well he's gonna add it back in post, if he can't do that, then it's not doing his thing, it's doing someone else's, he's never claimed that other methods would produce a good tape, just his own.

The only "fair" way of doing it (scientific or not) is both tapers recording the same show using whatever means they use (mics, gear, location, etc, all up to taper) and both doing what ever they do in post. Then conduct an independent poll online where the listeners have no idea as to who made the recording, the equipment used or the tapers location. Any other way would produce results slanted one way or the other.

I disagree.  Furburger said that internals are as good or better than "expensive" microphones (yes, percentages were cited).  A true test for that is to eliminate all variables other than the actual equipment being used to record and make an accurate comparison.  Had I been able to score a ticket for tonight's Phish show (in the tapers section), I was prepared to bring 3 rigs with me to do just that.  Yes, it is all packed!  Although different set-ups than our two combatants, it would have been a fair representation for most.  I was prepared to run my regular rig (Nak 700's > SD 744T), CA-14's > CA9200 > Sony PCM-M10, and a Sony PCM-M10 using its internals, all mounted on the same stand.  It would have been a direct comparison of internals vs. 2 different externals, all other factors being equal.  After all of this arguing, I would have gladly done all the work, if for no other reason, to satisfy my own curiosity.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #134 on: August 01, 2017, 04:52:34 PM »
^Nah.  This isn't primarily about gear comparison, it's a taper cage-match throw-down!  A battle of styles, methods and means, mostly.

May the best recording win, each taper doing what they do the way they do it, with the results judged not by popularity elsewhere or by any other measure except blind comparison vote by their collective taper peers here at TS where the row has been sown.
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline acidjack

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (37)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 5767
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #135 on: August 01, 2017, 04:56:25 PM »
^Nah.  This isn't primarily about gear comparison, it's a taper cage-match throw-down!  A battle of styles, methods and means, mostly.

May the best recording win, each taper doing what they do the way they do it, with the results judged not by popularity elsewhere or by any other measure except blind comparison vote by their collective taper peers here at TS where the row has been sown.
I hope this competition actually occurs.
Mics: Schoeps MK4V, MK41V, MK5, MK22> CMC6, KCY 250/5, KC5, NBob; MBHO MBP603/KA200N, AT 3031, DPA 4061 w/ d:vice, Naiant X-X, AT 853c, shotgun, Nak300
Pres/Power: Aerco MP2, tinybox v2  [KCY], CA-UBB
Decks: Sound Devices MixPre 6, Zoom F8, M10, D50

My recordings on nyctaper.com: http://www.nyctaper.com/?tag=acidjack | LMA: http://www.archive.org/bookmarks/acidjack | twitter: http://www.twitter.com/acidjacknyc | Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/acidjacknyc

Offline nak700s

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 283
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #136 on: August 01, 2017, 05:11:55 PM »
^^ I hope it happens too.  I'd love to see this played out.
Normal: Nakamichi CM-700's >> SD 744T (or) Sony PCM-M10
Stealth: CA-14c >> CA 9200 >> Edirol R-09HR
Ultra stealth: AudioReality >> AudioReality battery box >> Edirol R-09HR
Simple & Sweet!

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #137 on: August 01, 2017, 05:17:05 PM »
^Nah.  This isn't primarily about gear comparison, it's a taper cage-match throw-down!  A battle of styles, methods and means, mostly.

May the best recording win, each taper doing what they do the way they do it, with the results judged not by popularity elsewhere or by any other measure except blind comparison vote by their collective taper peers here at TS where the row has been sown.

Only one taper is willing   :bigsmile: 

Only way to do it would be a completely independent party gets both of our files and posts the poll.  I am fine with any of the rules proposed so far by those on the board.   


Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #138 on: August 01, 2017, 05:39:27 PM »
https://we.tl/yskBf4qfez

R09 vs. DPA 4022 -> Grace V3 -> SD 722 (DIN stereo @ 9')
Same mic stand, w/ R09 a bit lower due to no sound checking; an impromptu recording by conductors request. He was curious as to how the internals of the R09 sounded, as he was considering buying one for rehearsals, music lessons, composing.

Hall,... multi-purpose room at Country Club Golf Course - not a music hall.  You'll hear stuff in the recording, like HVAC.
And, its acoustic music, and not some bloated PA sounds.
« Last Edit: August 01, 2017, 05:44:37 PM by Moke »
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 962
  • Gender: Male
  • UH-LASS-KUH
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #139 on: August 02, 2017, 04:48:31 AM »

He's actually right here, his claim has always been he can take his stuff (Sonic, internals, doesn't matter) and do his "thing" and the recording will be as good (or 90% whatever that means) as anyone's. You can't make him stand somewhere he wouldn't or not finger someone or even take away whatever he does in post, because that's all a part of his thing. Perhaps he knows that his unit can't handle X amount of low end, so he cuts it, knowing full well he's gonna add it back in post, if he can't do that, then it's not doing his thing, it's doing someone else's, he's never claimed that other methods would produce a good tape, just his own.

The only "fair" way of doing it (scientific or not) is both tapers recording the same show using whatever means they use (mics, gear, location, etc, all up to taper) and both doing what ever they do in post. Then conduct an independent poll online where the listeners have no idea as to who made the recording, the equipment used or the tapers location. Any other way would produce results slanted one way or the other.


this guy gets it.

"90% as good as": if a mic stand recording is an "A to A+" (as per you folks), I can pull a recording that sounds at least like a B+/A- 100% of the time with internals on the DR-2D


to me, it's not worth the $1000's of extra dollars, hauling crap around, set up/tear down time for maybe a 10% improvement in sound quality.


what daspy proposes is ridiculous on numerous levels.



I disagree.  Furburger said that internals are as good or better than "expensive" microphones (yes, percentages were cited).  A true test for that is to eliminate all variables other than the actual equipment being used to record and make an accurate comparison.  Had I been able to score a ticket for tonight's Phish show (in the tapers section), I was prepared to bring 3 rigs with me to do just that.  Yes, it is all packed!  Although different set-ups than our two combatants, it would have been a fair representation for most.  I was prepared to run my regular rig (Nak 700's > SD 744T), CA-14's > CA9200 > Sony PCM-M10, and a Sony PCM-M10 using its internals, all mounted on the same stand.  It would have been a direct comparison of internals vs. 2 different externals, all other factors being equal.  After all of this arguing, I would have gladly done all the work, if for no other reason, to satisfy my own curiosity.


pretty sure that I said the internals are at least 90% as good. don't think I ever said that the internals were "better than" (unless in response to daspy's vitriol).

the Mulvey link I posted, a mic stand isn't going to sound much better. (just one example).


the first time I pulled an internals recording that was significantly better than the Sonics, I was puzzled myself.

now I never run only the Sonics, and the internals "win" in terms of sound quality 20-30% of the time.


it'll be hard to find a venue that I've not taped in before, one that neither of us have ever taped at would add even another variable for me to thump his sorry ass in, as it's incredibly satisfying to go on a 3 week trip and not pick a single lemon.

and it happens very often.
-------------
people who are fans of the music, they LOVE what I document and capture...people who are fans of themselves....not so much.

Offline Sloan Simpson

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
  • Gender: Male
    • Southern Shelter
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #140 on: August 02, 2017, 08:03:36 AM »
I wonder when this moron is going to realize daspy still doesn't use a mic stand.
Neumann KM-184> Tascam DR-680

Offline jbosco

  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #141 on: August 02, 2017, 08:43:43 AM »

I disagree.  Furburger said that internals are as good or better than "expensive" microphones (yes, percentages were cited).  A true test for that is to eliminate all variables other than the actual equipment being used to record and make an accurate comparison. 

What's the point in that? That test has been done tons of times, hell I've even done that, you don't need daspy or furburger, just an "expensive" rig and a deck with internals mounted on the same mic stand, it wouldn't prove anything that most people haven't already determined for themselves. This is a tapers throw-down, one taper claims he can make a recording as good as another's using internals (or Sonics), time to put up or shut up, put them both in the same ring and let them have at it.

How's this sound for starters:
1) Same show, artist and venue.
2) Each taper picks their favorite song, and the other taper submits same song, then from the set-list someone else picks a song, so each taper submits the same 3 songs, one of which they feel is their best.
3) Someone collects the data and music and hosts the files, with no identifiers other then Song1-A or Song1-B, switch it around so A and B aren't always the same taper.
---
Neumann KM 184 -> Tascam DR 70D
DPA 4061 -> Sony M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #142 on: August 02, 2017, 10:27:00 AM »


this guy gets it.

"90% as good as": if a mic stand recording is an "A to A+" (as per you folks), I can pull a recording that sounds at least like a B+/A- 100% of the time with internals on the DR-2D


to me, it's not worth the $1000's of extra dollars, hauling crap around, set up/tear down time for maybe a 10% improvement in sound quality.


what daspy proposes is ridiculous on numerous levels.


What I propose is ridiculous.  You claim your recordings are better than mine but you will do nothing to back up your claim.  Its put up or shut up.   Fellow tapers agree there needs to be a throw down but you are the only one unwilling. Your internal mic recordings are NOT as good and it is not 10% as you say.  Funny this is you probably carry MORE gear than I do with your multiple DR-2D's than I carry with 1 DR-2D, 2 Schoeps capsules, 1 NBox Platinum and 4 foot active cables.  It takes me minutes to set up and tear down so no more effort.  Just better results using 25 year old mics that have been used more than 1,000 times. 

You are just afraid of the challenge.  It's ok to be chicken but claiming the challenge is ridiculous just makes you look weak.  Others here have proposed the rules, there responses are not nearly as ridiculous as FLAC file size or Dime downloads as a means of measuring quality. 

The funniest part is you are the one who constantly posts all the quality fluffing on your uploads.  I don't need to do that. 

Offline KISSFAN

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 80
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #143 on: August 02, 2017, 11:50:08 AM »
this argument started off funny, but now it is just sad. I have checked my list and it turns out that to date I have listened to 29 daspy masters and 62 fur masters. And I, for one, appreciate equally all of the efforts that each bring to this community. I will plan to continue listening and enjoying shows from each, but with all of this bickering and baiting, I have come to the conclusion that I probably wouldn't want to hang out with either one. Keep up the great work, kids.

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #144 on: August 02, 2017, 12:53:55 PM »
but with all of this bickering and baiting, I have come to the conclusion that I probably wouldn't want to hang out with either one. Keep up the great work, kids.

It isn't a great representation of the taping community, is it? If I was someone here looking to get into taping, I'd be scratching my head saying, "Do I really want to do this? These guys are assholes to each other? What will happen when I meet another one at a show?"

Luckily, I met tapers in real life before I ventured here and even then, this place was a much more pleasant place to hang out. Now, get offa my lawn!
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #145 on: August 02, 2017, 01:10:14 PM »
but with all of this bickering and baiting, I have come to the conclusion that I probably wouldn't want to hang out with either one. Keep up the great work, kids.

It isn't a great representation of the taping community, is it? If I was someone here looking to get into taping, I'd be scratching my head saying, "Do I really want to do this? These guys are assholes to each other? What will happen when I meet another one at a show?"

Luckily, I met tapers in real life before I ventured here and even then, this place was a much more pleasant place to hang out. Now, get offa my lawn!

I have met many tapers on this site and I am sure they would vouch for me.  I am sick and tired of the character assassination and personal insults on here and other places from one said troll.  I will gladly ignore if the personal insults stop and don't start again in 2 months.  I have been told to ignore him but that doesn't work in this case so I am doing what I am doing.    If he is so sure his recordings are superior then let him prove it, otherwise he needs to STFU and leave me alone.

 

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #146 on: August 02, 2017, 03:04:59 PM »
What exactly does "that doesn't work" mean? If you ignore him and don't care what he says, what happens? He continues to post? Who cares? Why do you care? You have allowed him to get under your skin and you have control over that.

I understand, really. I just think you can make a choice to end it. Otherwise the troll gets what he wants - your reaction to him.
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #147 on: August 02, 2017, 03:11:36 PM »
What exactly does "that doesn't work" mean? If you ignore him and don't care what he says, what happens? He continues to post? Who cares? Why do you care? You have allowed him to get under your skin and you have control over that.

I understand, really. I just think you can make a choice to end it. Otherwise the troll gets what he wants - your reaction to him.

I do not appreciate the personal insults.  You are not the recipient of the nonsense so you really can't understand it.  He has jumped on threads on other sites with same crap.  Ignoring it doesn't work.  Every few months I get subjected to it.  I am not willing to sit here and take the abuse because you think I should.  Sorry if you have a problem with it but I have tried it and it does not work.

Online vanark

  • TDS
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6396
  • If you ain't right, you better get right!
    • The Mudboy Grotto - North Mississippi Allstar fan site
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #148 on: August 02, 2017, 08:06:27 PM »
I just expected more from you than him. I have zero expectation of reasoning with Steve, but, I held out hope there was some reasoning with you that could be done to end this. To Steve, all this back and forth is a game and he is winning. I was trying to point that out to you. I have no ill will toward you, or Steve. I've said my piece and I'll try not to open this thread again.
If you have a problem relating to the Live Music Archive (http://www.archive.org/details/etree) please send an e-mail to us admins at etree(AT)archive(DOT)org or post in the LMA thread here and we'll get on it.

Link to LMA Recordings

Link to Team Dirty South Recordings on the LMA

Mics: AKG C480B/CK61, CK63 | Church Audio CA-11 (cards) (with CA UBB)
Pres: <empty>
Recorders: Tascam DR-60D | Sony PCM-M10

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #149 on: August 03, 2017, 09:33:07 PM »
https://we.tl/yskBf4qfez

R09 vs. DPA 4022 -> Grace V3 -> SD 722 (DIN stereo @ 9')
Same mic stand, w/ R09 a bit lower due to no sound checking; an impromptu recording by conductors request. He was curious as to how the internals of the R09 sounded, as he was considering buying one for rehearsals, music lessons, composing.

Hall,... multi-purpose room at Country Club Golf Course - not a music hall.  You'll hear stuff in the recording, like HVAC.
And, its acoustic music, and not some bloated PA sounds.

So, did anyone listen?
Thoughts??
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline bombdiggity

  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2067
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #150 on: August 04, 2017, 01:20:35 AM »
In the shitstorm that is the bulk of this thread I lost track of this offer but am downloading now.  Maybe I'll have a few minutes to listen. 

It is an obvious simple test of one aspect but will not satisfy the fundamental cage match argument of the threadjack, which of course will still not be answered even if the parties did wind up in the same place.  That argument is not intended to be answered or even tested.  It's:  :tomato:
Gear:
Audio:
Schoeps MK4V
Nak CM-100/CM-300 w/ CP-1's or CP-4's
SP-CMC-25
>
Oade C mod R-44  OR
Tinybox > Sony PCM-M10 (formerly Roland R-05) 
Video: Varied, with various outboard mics depending on the situation

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #151 on: August 04, 2017, 09:12:16 AM »
Quote
Quote
Quote from: Moke on August 01, 2017, 05:39:27 PM
https://we.tl/yskBf4qfez

R09 vs. DPA 4022 -> Grace V3 -> SD 722 (DIN stereo @ 9')
Same mic stand, w/ R09 a bit lower due to no sound checking; an impromptu recording by conductors request. He was curious as to how the internals of the R09 sounded, as he was considering buying one for rehearsals, music lessons, composing.

Hall,... multi-purpose room at Country Club Golf Course - not a music hall.  You'll hear stuff in the recording, like HVAC.
And, its acoustic music, and not some bloated PA sounds.

So, did anyone listen?
Thoughts??

I remember this one from years ago.  Classic  R-09 era Bodyglove case in the photo, BTW.
Just listened again.

I can identify which is which via several audible ques, and prefer the 4022s overall, but that's not really the point being made.  The R-09 internals hold up really well here, perhaps the best I've ever heard from them, which to me is further evidence confirming that recording is always situation dependent, and this was a situation to which the internal R-09 mics were quite well suited.

To avoid being the spoiler, I'll withhold disclosing file identity or the specific ques I'm listening for. 
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #152 on: August 05, 2017, 04:41:17 PM »
You are right on, Lee.
The biggest thing that I hear in them is in the amount of air conditioner noise that is apparent. Omnis always pick that up more, and there is no way around it. In this particular case, I had the main mic array up around 9', which is really high for me.  I had them angled downward at a fairly steep pitch, to focus on the mid-to-rear of the orchestra, which put the ceiling vents towards the rear null of the stereo pattern response. So,  the HVAC noise is less so in the 4022 track.
One thing I am impressed with the R09 is in the amount of stereo separation. Now that might be in part due to the fact that the recorder was in that Body Glove case, which only provides a clean aural view from the sides? guesstulatiing.
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline Scooter123

  • "I am not an alcoholic. I am a drunk. Drunks don't go to meetings."
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 897
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #153 on: August 06, 2017, 01:51:10 PM »
I have used DR2ds for over five years and still own that recorder for ALD and IEM pulls. 

It would seem to me that the easy answer to this question is simply have Da-Spy make his usual Schoeps masterpiece with his DR2d and make a second recording using another DR2d with the internals.  Do it in a low key show, so people don't get too freaked out by a guy holding up a recorder. 

Unless I am missing something, isn't that the easy answer?  Unless of course, something special is being done with the DR2d that I am not aware of. 
Regards,

Scooter123

mk41 > N Box  > Sony M-10
mk4 > N Box > Sony M-10

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2545
  • Gender: Male
  • Don't ask, don't tell, don't get get caught
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #154 on: August 06, 2017, 09:00:00 PM »
I have used DR2ds for over five years and still own that recorder for ALD and IEM pulls. 

It would seem to me that the easy answer to this question is simply have Da-Spy make his usual Schoeps masterpiece with his DR2d and make a second recording using another DR2d with the internals.  Do it in a low key show, so people don't get too freaked out by a guy holding up a recorder. 

Unless I am missing something, isn't that the easy answer?  Unless of course, something special is being done with the DR2d that I am not aware of.

I don't have Furby's special  :zoomie1: skills though like rolling off the bass.

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #155 on: August 08, 2017, 11:00:37 AM »
One thing I am impressed with the R09 is in the amount of stereo separation.

Interesting that you say that.  To me, the most immediately obvious difference was the much better separation on the DPA recording, and that was after having read vanark's post about the noise in the other thread (so I was anticipating the noise).

I'm thinking that part of the reason the R09 sounds as good as it does is that it was up on a stand.  Most internal recordings I have heard have been from inside a pocket...

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #156 on: August 08, 2017, 11:27:07 AM »
My suggestion about separation was based purely on the fact that there was any, at all.  I was expecting it to come out as a two channel mono sound, due to the closeness of the mics (to each other). So, it was quite a surprise on first listen.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2017, 11:35:02 AM by Moke »
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 11301
  • Gender: Male
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #157 on: August 08, 2017, 12:39:43 PM »
I think your speculation about the case creating additional directionality compared to an R-09 without that case has merit.

With the recorder in the Bodyglove case, you can only see the microphone grid openings when looking from the sides, not from the front or back.  That particular phone case curved around the recorder at the bottom, but had flat front and back surfaces at the top where the microphones are located which sort of formed small ear-like flaps blocking direct sound arriving from directly in front or behind the recorder yet open to the sides and top. 
volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values | numeric values > voltages > vibrations > virtual teleportation time-machine experience

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #158 on: August 08, 2017, 01:05:29 PM »
In my time with the R09-class, and possible uses as a standalone.... I've used it in the sample here, and, had a need for it another time. 
That other time,.. *[rolls eyes, smacks forehead, feels sick smilies here]
I was at an organ recital. I was rushed, and needed a battery for my mma6k.  I bought a new one at a convenience store en route. New battery dies before end of first set.
I could just use the internal mics, right? You'd think...
Nope, I totally forgot about them, and folded up shop. *[apply same smilie set here]

Let me tell you about the time that I used the DR70D internals,... without knowing it.  I'd somehow gotten confused in the manual, and turned the internals on, and then dropped the deck into my recording bag, and recorded those two channels from inside my bag, thinking that I was on external mics.  This one sucked. But it did explain the weird reaction to attempted level changes for those two channels.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2017, 01:08:14 PM by Moke »
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (6)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #159 on: August 08, 2017, 06:54:27 PM »
My suggestion about separation was based purely on the fact that there was any, at all.  I was expecting it to come out as a two channel mono sound, due to the closeness of the mics (to each other). So, it was quite a surprise on first listen.

Yeah, definitely better than you might expect from (essentially) coincident omnis.  The explanation that you guys postulate seems reasonable to me; a little baffling can really make a big difference.

Offline Moke

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3022
  • m0k3 - √!n¥¬ 633|<
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #160 on: August 08, 2017, 07:13:48 PM »
I love baffles. This one is my handiest...

But seriously. In my experiments in seeing how small I could go with baffles, this one was really neat. I wandered around this park area listening to life going by.  It was really quite a lesson.
I totally concur, that it doesn't take much to make a substantial difference.
Sent From My Craftsman Garage Door Opener

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 1.953 seconds with 183 queries.
© 2002-2017 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF
Website Design by Foxtrot Media, Inc., a Baltimore Website Company