Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Internal mics question  (Read 63750 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline daspyknows

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 9617
  • 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: 5845
  • 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: 2277
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: (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5171
    • Recordings uploaded to TTD
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's, Schoeps MK41's, AT853's (C,SC,H,O), DPA 4061's
Preamps/converters: Schoeps VMS52UB (x2), Nbox (x2), E.A.A. PSP-2 (x2) Grace Lunatec V2, Sound Devices MP-2, DPA MMA6000, Naiant Tinybox v1.5, Naiant PiPsqueak, Church Ugly, Apogee Mini-Me, Benchmark AD2k+
Recorders: Tascam DR-680, Korg MR-1, Edirol R-05, Sony PCM-M10 (x2), Tascam DR-07, Marantz PMD-661, Sound Devices Mixpre-3

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 9617
  • 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: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 9617
  • 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: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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.

mfrench

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Internal mics question
« Reply #101 on: July 26, 2017, 12:40:31 AM »

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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

  • I think I found an error on the internet; #UnionStrong
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5944
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.

https://toad.social/@morst spoutible.com/morst post.news/@acffhmorst

Offline furburger

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
  • 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.

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.103 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF