Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Internal mics question  (Read 18146 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline daspyknows

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2668
  • 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 Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
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: 902
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: 2668
  • 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: 391
  • 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 All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • 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 All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1071
  • 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: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 256
  • 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- AT 4041's, akg 460's ck 61's/63's/ck8's, akg active  couplings>naiant pfa's, naiant x-r's (cards,omnis). Pre- SD-302, naiant x-y amp, apogee mini-me X2, Lunatech V-3, Decks- R-44, dr-40,dr-100mkiii,  dr-03.....
ISO- pair of ADK a51 tl's

Offline Limit35

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 147
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: 902
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: 2668
  • 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: 4067
  • 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:         AKG460|CK61|CK1|CK3|CK8|Beyer M 201E
Recorders:Marantz PMD661 OADE Concert mod; Tascam DR680 MKI

Offline heesu

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 306
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: 3183
  • 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: 2169
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

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.24 seconds with 37 queries.
© 2002-2017 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF
Website Design by Foxtrot Media, Inc., a Baltimore Website Company