Author Topic: Stereo mic with low noise ... - anyone tried Talinga? (Read 12944 times)

perik · « **on:** August 31, 2009, 02:56:02 PM »

Hi!

Im about upgrading my stereomic as well since it´s seems to be the cause of my noise problems. at the moment Im using audio technica AT825. Im using the audio technica mainly for recording for sounddesign and field recording.

It has the following specs:

Quote

Signal-to-noise ratio: 70 dB, 1 kHz at 1 Pa
Open circuit sensitivity: -47 db (4.4 mV) re 1V at 1 Pa

One of the reason I bought the AT825 is the possibility for use it with battery since some of my fieldrecording-gear havnt got any phantompower-supply.

I also like that its a stereo mic since I dont have so much gear to carry around.

My criterias for a new mic is:
* Stereo
* low-noise
* high sensitivity (have just got +45dB in gain of my preamp for fieldrecording so good if it´s have high sensitivity)
* pricerange maximum 550 dollars (rather less)

I have now fixed with phantompower so no need for batterypowered mic anymore. any more suggestions?

Any suggestions?

Thanks

Per

perik · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2009, 03:43:03 PM »

actually i was thinking of that one trying to compare.
how do these compare according to my criterias?

Quote

RÖDE nt-4:
· Sensitivity -38 dB re 1 Volt/Pascal (12 mV @ 94 dB SPL) +/- 2 dB @ 1kHz
· Output impedance 200Ω per side
· Signal noise ratio 78 dB SPL (A - weighted per IEC651)
· Equivalent noise <16 dB SPL (A - weighted per IEC651)
· Maximum SPL 143dB SPL (@ 1kHz, 1% THD into 1KΩ load)
· Maximum output voltage +13.9dBu (@ 1kHz, 1% THD into 1KΩ load

AT825
· Open Circuit Sensitivity: -47 dB (4.4 mV) re 1V at 1 Pa
· Impedance: 200 ohms balanced
· Signal to Noise Ratio: 70 dB, 1 kHz at 1 Pa

any other suggestions?

DSatz · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2009, 11:59:43 PM »

The noise specifications quoted above shouldn't be compared to one another because they're derived very differently. When all you have is an A-weighted RMS equivalent noise measurement, you can generally estimate the audible noise level by adding 9 - 12 dB or so. That is, of course, assuming that the noise figure is a real measurement and not just a statement of a general goal--which is really how some manufacturers interpret the role of specifications, especially in the Far East.

When CCIR-weighted quasi-peak equivalent noise specs are available, they mean a heck of a lot more--but those are usually provided only for professional-quality microphones. Marketing folks adore "A"-weighted RMS measurements, which always look as if they're better (e.g. for the Neumann KM 183 it makes the difference between a noise spec of 13 dB versus 24). And a noise specification "at 1 kHz" doesn't mean anything at all; the terms simply don't go together that way.

--I would caution against the Røde NT4 not for reasons of noise but because it has coincident cardioid capsules at an included angle of only 90°, which isn't a generally useful setup for semi-distant stereo music recording. It's fine for stereo spot-miking, or for recording round-table meetings in an office--but for most people's purposes here, the pickup angle is just way, way too wide, and the results would be too much like mono. If they'd angled the capsules farther apart and/or made them not be coincident and/or given them a more sharply directional pattern, that might have been a lot better.

--best regards

sunjan · « **Reply #3 on:** September 01, 2009, 02:53:35 AM »

Quote from: DSatz on August 31, 2009, 11:59:43 PM

I would avoid the Røde NT4 not for reasons of noise but because it has coincident cardioid capsules at an included angle of only 90°, which is not a generally useful setup for semi-distant stereo music recording.

IIUC, the OP will use it for ambient field recording, so the music part may not be relevant here.

That said, I think it'll be tough to find anything with better specs and still battery powered.
The AT8022 comes to mind, but isn't really any improvement to the ones already mentioned:
http://www.audio-technica.com/cms/wired_mics/5c9c0e5adaceb659/index.html/

Quote

POLAR PATTERN    X/Y Stereo
FREQUENCY RESPONSE    20-15,000 Hz
LOW FREQUENCY ROLL-OFF    80 Hz, 12 dB/octave
OPEN CIRCUIT SENSITIVITY    Battery: –38 dB (12.5 mV) re 1V at 1 Pa
CHANNEL BALANCE    <2.5 dB
IMPEDANCE    Battery: 300 ohms
MAXIMUM INPUT SOUND LEVEL    Battery: 120 dB SPL, 1 kHz at 1% T.H.D.
DYNAMIC RANGE (typical)    Battery: 101 dB, 1 kHz at Max SPL
SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO    75 dB, 1 kHz at 1 Pa

Per (from Sweden?), why don't you take the plunge and get a small external phantom supply to your mics instead?! Take a look at the Naiant Littlebox, best bang for your bucks right now:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,122871.0.html

Nick's Picks · « **Reply #4 on:** September 01, 2009, 07:54:12 AM »

what about any of the Sony stereo mics ?
I've never used one, but the 9xx series sound pretty good from what I've heard.

IMO, buck up the $70 and buy a phantom supply like the Rolls or something.

digifish_music · « **Reply #5 on:** September 02, 2009, 08:02:21 AM »

Quote from: sunjan on September 01, 2009, 02:53:35 AM

IIUC, the OP will use it for ambient field recording, so the music part may not be relevant here.

I use an NT4 for field recording. The results are great, convenience is the biggest factor, low noise is another. It is a bit heavy tho in comparison to the AT825 (indeed most AT mics are nice an light).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LNxAjjKH3M

One reason I don't care much about the NT4's X/Yconfig is that the stereo image of an ambient sound is not easy to subjectively assess after the fact at home, and so the stereo separation of the 90 degree coincident array doesn't worry me much. Occasionally I do use a stereo-enhancer effect to widen the image in post if I want it.

BUT: To the OP, I don't think you have the correct end of the stick here. Your AT will make excellent low-noise recordings, you need a decent preamp and phantom power. Getting a MixPre is likely to give you a much bigger 'wow' factor than changing mics...the NT4 used with internal battery and recorder preamp sucks (just a little) IMO compared to MixPre --> line-in.

digifish

Nick's Picks · « **Reply #6 on:** September 02, 2009, 08:41:25 AM »

w/the NT4, you can take the stereo signal in post, encode it to raw M-S and then re-mix it w/the width of your desire and decode back to stereo.
the beauty of XY.

digifish_music · « **Reply #7 on:** September 02, 2009, 08:44:58 AM »

Quote from: Nick's Picks on September 02, 2009, 08:41:25 AM

w/the NT4, you can take the stereo signal in post, encode it to raw M-S and then re-mix it w/the width of your desire and decode back to stereo.
the beauty of XY.

That's what I do if I need a wider image.

digifish

huskerdu · « **Reply #8 on:** September 02, 2009, 05:43:39 PM »

Quote from: digifish_music on September 02, 2009, 08:02:21 AM

To the OP, I don't think you have the correct end of the stick here. Your AT will make excellent low-noise recordings, you need a decent preamp and phantom power. Getting a MixPre is likely to give you a much bigger 'wow' factor than changing mics...the NT4 used with internal battery and recorder preamp sucks (just a little) IMO compared to MixPre --> line-in.

digifish

Agreed. I couldn't believe how much better my NT4 sounded after I bought a MixPre...

rastasean · « **Reply #9 on:** September 02, 2009, 06:08:32 PM »

Its like clockwork with inquiries about sound/nature recordings. There are many posts on the NT4 for this purpose and the discontinued at3031/3020 and how they have been replaced by the at4041 & 4042.

If you're serious about sound/nature, join naturerecordists @ yahoogroups. com

for less serious every day recordings, check out a pair of binaural microphones and a recorder with a good pre-amp.

Javier Cinakowski · « **Reply #10 on:** September 02, 2009, 08:36:27 PM »

not to mention the Rode NT4 can use the Studio Projects C4 hyper capsule for even more of a wider directional pattern...... The companies both trace their origins to the same Chinese manufacture, having identical threads and compatability.... :-)

digifish_music · « **Reply #11 on:** September 02, 2009, 09:57:38 PM »

Quote from: rastasean on September 02, 2009, 06:08:32 PM

Its like clockwork with inquiries about sound/nature recordings. There are many posts on the NT4 for this purpose and the discontinued at3031/3020 and how they have been replaced by the at4041 & 4042.

If you're serious about sound/nature, join naturerecordists @ yahoogroups. com

for less serious every day recordings, check out a pair of binaural microphones and a recorder with a good pre-amp.

Yahoo newsgroups make you jump through too many hoops to join

digifish

perik · « **Reply #12 on:** September 03, 2009, 09:13:05 AM »

I have now fixed with phantompower so no need for batterypowered mic anymore. any more suggestions for a good stereomic for max 600 dollars.

digifish_music · « **Reply #13 on:** September 03, 2009, 09:17:11 AM »

Quote from: perik on September 03, 2009, 09:13:05 AM

I have now fixed with phantompower so no need for batterypowered mic anymore. any more suggestions for a good stereomic for max 600 dollars.

...my answer is still a MixPre.

perik · « **Reply #14 on:** September 03, 2009, 09:33:50 AM »

Quote

...my answer is still a MixPre.

well got that as well

with phantom.

CX231 for my fieldrecordings:
http://www.juicedlink.com/index_files/CX_camcorder_XLR_microphone_adapter_audio_mixers.htm

and 2mp one for studio recordings:
http://www.lineaudio.se/linepre.htm

page · « **Reply #15 on:** September 03, 2009, 09:36:48 AM »

Quote from: perik on September 03, 2009, 09:13:05 AM

I have now fixed with phantompower so no need for batterypowered mic anymore. any more suggestions for a good stereomic for max 600 dollars.

Studio Projects LSD2
Busman BSCS-L

You'll need gain though. They pick up all sorts of stuff, but their output sensitivity is only -40db. (you should pull the specs on both, I'm primarily referencing the BSCS-L with my comments though).

notlance · « **Reply #16 on:** September 03, 2009, 10:19:26 AM »

I own a Studio Projects LSD2 and it's a fine mic, but I don't know if I'd use it for nature/soundscape recordings. First of all, it's not super quiet, especially for a LDC. Secondly, it's a BIG mic and I would not want to be lugging it around outdoors.

You might want to consider the Audio Technica BP4025. It's phantom power only, a little quieter than a 825 or a 4022, with higher output.

If you want to take a chance, the MXL V67Q is about $200 street. It appears to be a couple of 603/991/generic Chinese SDC capsules mounted in an XY configuration in a V67 body. On paper it looks good, and perhaps with a mod from Busman or Michael Joly it could be a real sleeper. Like I say, it's a gamble.

Or save your pennies and get something out of the Sennheiser MKH line: very quiet, very high output, very smooth, very expensive.

perik · « **Reply #17 on:** September 03, 2009, 01:33:40 PM »

anyone who got any experience with these michropones:
http://telinga.thestrandbergs.com/

digifish_music · « **Reply #18 on:** September 04, 2009, 03:34:14 AM »

Quote from: perik on September 03, 2009, 09:33:50 AM

CX231 for my fieldrecordings:
http://www.juicedlink.com/index_files/CX_camcorder_XLR_microphone_adapter_audio_mixers.htm

I have been waiting for someone to buy one of these...interested in your thoughts (do you have it or thinking of it?).

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,105636.0.html

digifish

Roger Gustavsson · « **Reply #19 on:** September 04, 2009, 05:23:43 AM »

Quote from: perik on September 03, 2009, 01:33:40 PM

anyone who got any experience with these michropones:
http://telinga.thestrandbergs.com/

Which ones? The non-parabolic EM23-PIP? They have the same capsules as the Nakamichi CM-100 and CM-300, the ones from Primo. Clas Strandberg/Telinga uses a different impedance converter giving a hotter output. These are not intended for very high-SPL. EM-23 is omni. Primo also have EM-21 which are cardioid.

Roger

perik · « **Reply #20 on:** September 04, 2009, 05:48:08 AM »

Quote

Which ones?

DATmic Stereo
PRO7 or Pro5

- How are their signal to noise?
- model with batterypower and balanced xlr output?
- how do they sound? I mainly gonna use them for fieldrecording and ambience, foley for sounddesign for film. So im not gonna use it for recording concerts or any of these kind of "loud sounds".
- also need high sensitivity (have just got +45dB in gain of my preamp for fieldrecording so good if it´s have low sensitivity)

are there any specs somewhere?

Quote

interested in your thoughts (do you have it or thinking of it?).

so far so good. just bought it so havnt tried it so much yet but Im going to do a small test next week I think. I can share my thoughts when its done. if you wont hear from me in a couple of weeks just post and give me a reminder.

Roger Gustavsson · « **Reply #21 on:** September 04, 2009, 07:15:39 AM »

Are they not for use with parabolics? The only non-parabolic used to be the EM-23.

My own Nakamichi microphones have a lower output than the Telinga EM-23. I use to have peaks at 108dB while recording acoustic music, giving an output of 25mV. With my equipment 40dB of gain is needed to get 0dBFS. That is 2450mV or +10dBu. Nominal output is 5.1mV/Pa. I have tried to record some outdoor ambiance with 30dB of gain. The Telinga EM-23 is a lot hotter. Clas Strandberg was not able to give me exact technical information. Here are some links:

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

http://www.uwm.edu/%7Etype/audio-reports/MicSpecCharts/Mics_16dBA.htm

Roger Gustavsson, Huskvarna, Sweden

Bri · « **Reply #22 on:** September 05, 2009, 11:28:41 PM »

RE Talinga, are you referring to the "Big Ears" like on the side of the football field, but the smaller ones you roll up? I don't think they would be any good for music...

Roger Gustavsson · « **Reply #23 on:** September 06, 2009, 03:43:15 AM »

Quote from: Bri on September 05, 2009, 11:28:41 PM

RE Talinga, are you referring to the "Big Ears" like on the side of the football field, but the smaller ones you roll up? I don't think they would be any good for music...

It seems that he is not going to use them for recording music....

Quote from: perik on September 04, 2009, 05:48:08 AM

I mainly gonna use them for fieldrecording and ambience, foley for sounddesign for film. So im not gonna use it for recording concerts or any of these kind of "loud sounds".

perik · « **Reply #24 on:** September 06, 2009, 04:52:40 PM »

no exactly. mainly for fieldrecording thats going to be used for sounddesign.

illconditioned · « **Reply #25 on:** September 06, 2009, 05:01:42 PM »

Quote from: Roger Gustavsson on September 04, 2009, 07:15:39 AM

Are they not for use with parabolics? The only non-parabolic used to be the EM-23.

My own Nakamichi microphones have a lower output than the Telinga EM-23. I use to have peaks at 108dB while recording acoustic music, giving an output of 25mV. With my equipment 40dB of gain is needed to get 0dBFS. That is 2450mV or +10dBu. Nominal output is 5.1mV/Pa. I have tried to record some outdoor ambiance with 30dB of gain. The Telinga EM-23 is a lot hotter. Clas Strandberg was not able to give me exact technical information. Here are some links:

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

http://www.uwm.edu/%7Etype/audio-reports/MicSpecCharts/Mics_16dBA.htm

Roger Gustavsson, Huskvarna, Sweden

The Telinga website compares their mic to Sennheiser KE6. I'm guessing the Sennheiser sounds better. Hard to tell from the single clip posted, but the EM23 capsules are not that great, at least as far as modern mics are concerned.

Richard

Roger Gustavsson · « **Reply #26 on:** September 07, 2009, 04:47:19 AM »

But I think this is the microphone that is the subject not the parabolic ones.

Roger Gustavsson · « **Reply #27 on:** September 07, 2009, 12:56:58 PM »

Yes, they are omnis...

But are the other from Telinga really stereo mics?

choros · « **Reply #28 on:** May 23, 2011, 07:19:57 AM »

Quote from: Javier Cinakowski on September 02, 2009, 08:36:27 PM

not to mention the Rode NT4 can use the Studio Projects C4 hyper capsule for even more of a wider directional pattern...... The companies both trace their origins to the same Chinese manufacture, having identical threads and compatability.... :-)

Again - just for future reference - this is wrong. ASFAIK the NT4 capsules are permanently attached to the body and can NOT be changed out with others like the NT5's can.
I'm doing stereo mic research and would be bummed if I bought the NT4 expecting to be able to interchange the capsules only to find that I can't.

FrozenSounds · « **Reply #29 on:** May 23, 2011, 09:53:57 AM »

Quote from: choros on May 23, 2011, 07:19:57 AM

Agan - just for future reference - this is wrong. ASFAIK the NT4 capsules are permanently attached to the body and can NOT be changed out with others like the NT5's can.
I'm doing stereo mic research and would be bummed if I bought the NT4 expecting to be able to interchange the capsules only to find that I can't.

http://www.rodemic.com/accessory.php?product=NT45-C
NT45-Cardioid : Compatible microphones : NT4, NT5, NT55, NT6
The NT45-C is a replacement cardioid capsule for the NT4, NT5, NT55 or NT6 microphones.

Gutbucket · « **Reply #30 on:** May 23, 2011, 11:02:52 AM »

Quote from: choros on May 23, 2011, 07:19:57 AM

Quote from: Javier Cinakowski on September 02, 2009, 08:36:27 PM
not to mention the Rode NT4 can use the Studio Projects C4 hyper capsule for even more of a ~~wider~~ narrower directional pattern...... The companies both trace their origins to the same Chinese manufacture, having identical threads and compatability.... :-)

Again - just for future reference - this is wrong. ASFAIK the NT4 capsules are permanently attached to the body and can NOT be changed out with others like the NT5's can.

I have no idea about which Rode microphones have interchangble capsules and which do not, but noticed a more general mis-statement in the post above. Hypercardioids arranged coincidentally with a 90 degree angle between them have a narrower stereo recording angle than cardioids in the same configuration.

choros · « **Reply #31 on:** May 23, 2011, 01:59:41 PM »

Quote from: FrozenSounds on May 23, 2011, 09:53:57 AM

http://www.rodemic.com/accessory.php?product=NT45-C
NT45-Cardioid : Compatible microphones : NT4, NT5, NT55, NT6
The NT45-C is a replacement cardioid capsule for the NT4, NT5, NT55 or NT6 microphones.

Man, I'm really sorry if I'm wrong. Now I've just confused things more.

Has anyone actually removed them? I had one and didn't think I could. I also was told (can't remember where or by who of course) that I could not. I'm not very tech savvy though so I very well could be wrong. I'd like to know for sure though by someone that has done it. Thanks.

choros · « **Reply #32 on:** May 23, 2011, 03:20:47 PM »

I just posted in the other old thread that I resuscitated to spew my misinformation on as well. I'm really sorry - I'm really an idiot.

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=116772.30

I think I'm an idiot. I'm sorry for bringing this up. I got some bad info apparently and I never really tried hard enough to unscrew them I guess. And now after looking at pics of the NT4 it looks like they can be unscrewed. Can I delete my posts and go home now? Again, I really apologize.

Jay

DSatz · « **Reply #33 on:** May 28, 2011, 06:09:53 PM »

Gutbucket, a late add-on: You're right, of course, but please keep in mind that a narrower stereophonic recording angle (to use Michael Williams' term) leads to greater discrimination between left and right channels and thus a wider-sounding stereo image in playback. I'm fairly certain that the previous post meant that.

To repeat, the fundamental problem with the NT4 is far too wide a stereophonic recording angle (180°!), which in turn leads to a near-mono pickup of centered, distant or semi-distant sound sources. Usually an SRA of distinctly less than 100° is preferred (YMMV of course).

--best regards

Gutbucket · « **Reply #34 on:** May 28, 2011, 11:53:49 PM »

Yes, exactly. I find it hard to word clearly, and somewhat of a mental paradox that wider angles between directional microphones produce a narrower 'window' that frames the sound sources which will be spread between the speakers when played back (William's Stereo Recording Angle), by increasing the difference between the two channels and therefore sounding 'wider' overall.

It's sort of like looking at the concept from two opposite perspectives. Which reference for wide? The location of things to be recorded as viewed from the microphone perspective, or the aural perspective on playback.

For most of the recording done around here the microphones are placed far enough away that a narrower perspective covering the sources as viewed from the microphones (provided by wider angle between them), is usually more useful by in effect spreading out the sounds within that recording 'window' to fill the playback 'window' between speakers.

Far easier for me to comprehend than write correctly.. whew.

Thanks for the clarification, and my best to you.

wbrock001 · « **Reply #35 on:** May 30, 2011, 04:49:24 PM »

I have a telinga pro6 handle and dual microphone. I have the twin science mic...which are two mono mics with one being omni facing out and one being cardioid facing in toward the dish. So the handle allows, if I remember correctly, use of a frequency filter to trim out wind and other low frequency noises. so it's not stereo. It just allows you to choose which mic is getting what you want better.

Are there any specific questions? I could take it out and do some recording if that would be useful. I originally got it because a past client gave me the impossible task of recording seminars of people all over the room and wanted me to be as passive as possible to not disrupt the flow...so without a big budget the dish allowed rapid transition to people in different places and the acquisition of intelligible if not tinny voices... So it seems to be very low self noise but definitely better for tiny sounds at high frequencies like birds. I haven't tried it without the dish but I'm sure it would sound more natural.