Topic: Stealth: Mono/Stereo? Does It matter?+Upgrade from Core Sound Cards...What Mics?

[tardis71]

Hey guys! long time stealth taper here, looking for some help in deciding what mics to upgrade to.
Basically I've been using Core Sound Cards with the BB for 10+ years. Finally at the point I have some extra money to upgrade.
My question is, when taping stealth does it really matter if you have a mono mic or stereo?
Normally I'll tape with the CSC clipped to the left and right of my collar.
But in the last 5+ years I've been slack and just have both mics taped together and have them coming out of a hole in my breast pocket.
Mostly because when I compared shows, I couldn't really tell the difference between having the mics separated or together.

I'm at the point where I still want to tape the shows I go to. But I want a super easy, small and hassle free setup.
I just ordered a new Sony M10 so I'll be downsizing from my D8. So what to do with the mics?
Any other mics I should look at? Can Church Audio build me a really good Single small stealth mic??
Thanks for any thoughts in advance! Happy T-day!


I've been considering this Mic and BB combo from MM Audio

MM-MBM Miniature "Mint Box" Battery / Filter Module with 7 position bass roll off!
US$79.00
http://www.microphonemadness.com/products/mmmimbobafim.htm


and MM-HLSC-LAPEL ( Cardioid ) "Sennheiser Driven"
US$159.95
http://microphonemadness.com/products/mmhigcarlaps.htm


Any thoughts on this combo?

Also considering stereo mics that I would just keep together..Like I have been doing with the CSC's....

MM-FGNC-1 Flexible "Gooseneck" (Cardioid) Stereo Microphones (20-20,000 Hz.)
US$ 129.95
http://microphonemadness.com/products/mmflexgoosca.htm


or
SOUND PROFESSIONALS - PREMIUM AUDIO TECHNICA SLIMLINE STEREO MICROPHONES - COMPARE WITH DPA 4060 AND 4061
$259.00
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/SP-CMC-8


Any other mics I should look at? Can Church Audio build me a really good Single small stealth mic??

[fmaderjr]

Any other mics I should look at? Can Church Audio build me a really good Single small stealth mic??

What's the fixation on a mono mic? Even when recording near the stacks where the music would be basically mono, recordings sound much better when they are in stereo. At the least, you get room ambiance and crowd noise in stereo.

It would be insane to buy a $160 mono mic when you can get CA-14 cards shipped for less than that. Also, most of us don't use a bass roll off. I would get Chris Church's tiny $30 battery box. Send him an e-mail on a combo price for both (at the least you'd save on shipping).

You won't be getting a budget quality mic either:

I didn't make much w/my 9100 when I had it.  a good willie nelson / ray price / merle haggard show.  I'll have to dig that up.  I remember it sounding exceptionally good.
but, I"ve heard countless recordings on this board with CA mics > preamp > deck that either smoke, or are every bit as pleasing to listen to...even on a full range reference grade stereo..., than the rig I was running right next to the CA rig...., and my investment was nearly 10x, running the same methods as always..and knowing what I'm doing.
then these tiny little home made Frankenstein mics from some geek in Canada come along...., and the whole ball game really gets turned upside down.
folks who love your schoeps and other high end gear...
DO NOT use a pair of these church cards, his preamp...and run it into your 744t on a couple channels and your big mics on the other.
it'll make you go "hmmmmmm"....

unless you have really good ears and a resolving stereo...both of which I sort of have...and its difficult to justify why I have invested what I do in my recording equipment.).
But on the other hand...., you can settle for the excellent performance of the Church Audio rig, sell the "big guns" and buy a nice muscle car.  that's what I did.   Great move.  tapes still sound excellent, and I look cool getting to/from the show all summer was a blast.

[tardis71]

Right...well I'm not fixated on it! Thanks for the thoughts! I checked at http://stores.ebay.com/CHURCH-AUDIO for CA-14 mics..but don't see any listed. Is there a website for Church Audio? Also I didn't see a $30 battery box either?

At one point, before I bought the CoreSounds I was running a single point sony stereo mic (pc-62) that only had one cord and it was just so easy to deal with. Believe it or not..but that little sony PC-62 mic made some great recordings, almost soundboard like, when up against a stack. It would not distort even at the loudest shows. Plus it was just one cord and I would plug it into the d-8 mic in, so easy. Sadly a friend got it confiscated (if anyone has a sony pc-62 they would like to sell, let me know!)
So anyway, I've been taping with the core sound cards but taping both L and R mics together and not separating them...so I was wondering if it made much difference if I got something like the single MM-HLSC-LAPEL ( Cardioid ) "Sennheiser Driven" mic.
Because with the L and R CSCs taped together and pointing basically in the same direction, towards the stacks...seems like a mono mic or a one point stereo would sound the same. no?
I like the idea of one mic+cord...not a tangled mess that sometimes the core sounds are...
I also want to get the smallest B-Box I can..and velcro it to the back of the recorder with a very short cable going to the m-10 input.

I still very open to either getting another set of Stereo cardioid mics and using them the way I've been using the CSCs. But also open to hearing if there was a single stereo or mono mic that might be easier to deal with.
I've taped almost every show I've been to since 1986...but I'm pretty over it all by now!!
I'm hoping to come up with a super easy small rig that I can run with little hassle and easy setup.
Thanks for any thoughts!!

[fmaderjr]

Chris doesn't list all his mics on E-Bay and usually doesn't list the best stuff. Check out his posts at the Retail Section and e-mail for prices & to set up a purchase. Also you can ask him questions and he could recommend what you should buy. Never buy from him on E-Bay-he gives a discount to people buying from him off E-Bay and mentioning taperssection.

If you tape right next to the stacks, maybe you won't notice much of a difference recording in mono, but I think stereo is best. Also most here think that stack taping is best only in a room with terrible acoustics, tons of crowd chatter, etc. I much prefer the sound of taping from the audience if you can get a good location. Try to do some reseach here and learn about other methods of taping and listening to recordings made with those methods. Limiting yourself to stack taping is giving up a lot.

Don't use one of the cheap Sony mics (very poor bass response).

[stantheman1976]

I think no matter where you're taping from stereo will still offer a better record of what the music actually sounded as you were there hearing it.  You have two ears that can hear individual sounds and if you have two mics you will capture that better.

[tardis71]

Thanks for the thoughts guys! Just to be clear...I've be stealth taping shows for 20+ years, since I was 16, probably recorded over 600 shows. I'm fully aware of location and different ways to record a show. I used all sorts of mics through the years...way before all these small miniature mics came along. I've been very happy with my Cord Sound Cards for many years. They still work. But they are getting a bit of wear on them and the connections are coming loose a bit. The battery box is  large and it's got super long cords. So I would like to find a BB+mic rig that is a lot smaller/simple and easy to set up and manage...than a big BB or Preamp plus 6 foot of cords... I just want to have like 2 foot of cord...
Probably I'll stick with a stereo set of mics taped together in a V ... Always handy to have a second track being recorded, in case of wind or movement noise...you can always cut and paste from the unaffected/cleaner side.

I checked the out Church Audio 14 and 11s ummm both look a bit large for stealthing...
They look about the size of the MM-HLSC which I also thought might be a too large for stealth.
Definitely think I want to stick with the size of the CSC if I'm going to stay with Stereo. I could deal with just one mono MM-HLSC or CA-14 size mic but not two. I know they might be stealthable for most shows...but every once in a while you really do need them to be stealthy and small.  I'm not totally ruling them out..But they do look big.
Again thanks for any thoughts!
 

[fmaderjr]

When I need to be inconspicuous, I hide my CA-14's inside band of a baseball hat. No audible difference in sound quality and there is no chance of anybody noticing them.

Chris Church can make the cords to his mics as short as you like, although if you wanted to try the hat method, I don't think 2 feet is long enough (if you want the cord to go down the back of your neck & into your shirt).

Also, if your Sonic Studios mics are in fairly good shape, guysonic can recondition them for you for a reasonable price. He could probably even shorten the cord, but you'd still be stuck with the big battery box. However, it's possible that your M10 would power Sonic Studios perfectly without a battery box. It's big brother, the D50, will do so (one of the very few recorders that can) but guysonic hasn't tested the M10 yet. If they both have the same plug in power voltage it would work fine without a box, assuming the mics terminate in a mini plug and not some proprietary connector designed to connect to the battery box.

Chris Church offers a tiny omni mic, the CAFS-OMNI pictured here:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=107672.msg1692026#msg1692026
I like cards better for general use, but omnis are better for stack taping which you seem to want to do. Check out this review:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=100201.msg1706716#msg1706716

[stevetoney]

If you only plan on running both mics from a single point (two mics twisty-tied together and run through a shirt buttonhole, for example), then it doesn't make any difference at all whether you're running a mono mic into two channels or a  stereo mic into two channels because the exact same information is being recorded onto both channels in both cases. 

The stereo effect people are referring to occurs in situations when you record from one stack but you still run the mics with some separation.  This provides an accurate simulation of how you hear the show since obviously there's some space between your two ears, thus some delay between the time sound reaches each ear from all sound sources in the room.  That's what people are referring to about 'even stereo on a mono stack sounds better'. 

Believe it or not, only 6 inches of separation makes a difference!  If you don't believe it, you should understand that it's the same thing that allows our brains to localize where sound is coming from in a room when it's made.  The sound difference between when the sound hits each ear is what allows the brain to figure out and localize exactly where that sound came from.  So even though when recording a show from a mono stack, we still hear this localizing effect on our stereo recordings, which makes everything sound more natural and pleasing when compared to a mono recording.

I'd add that even if you record from a mono mic and send the exact same signal to both channels, you can add some pleasing effect to your recordings in post by separating the two channels by a couple of miliseconds and adding a touch of reverb to the channels.  That provides a simulation of the stereo effect I refer to above.

Finally, in terms of the specific question being asked about mics, my thoughts are to go ahead buy the stereo mics and run the mics anyway you want...at least this way you have the capability to do stereo in case you do ever find the need.  Flexibility is good and you're probably not gonna get better sound out of the mono mic that you've linked above than the CA-14 (which sound FAR better than any mic in that category IMHO) anyway.

PS:  Next show you record, try running the first set in stereo with six inches separation and the second set with no separation.  I think that you'll convince yourself that the quality of the sound is so much better than you'll realize that the small effort to get the stereo recording (no matter how lazy you claim to be LOL) is worth the effort.  (My suggestion for simulating stereo is only a band-aid and doesn't stand toe-to-toe with the real thing.)

[darktrain]

I have used the hlsc-1 for a couple years now and really really like them, they seem to "catch" more of the mids than a lot of the other small mics out there and i have tried nearly all of them(at853, at831, ca-14, ca-11, core sound binaurel, dpa 4060, dpa 4061), my personal opinion is they were the mosty versatile mic in the most situations getting very nice results for me.

[su6oxone]

Believe it or not, only 6 inches of separation makes a difference!

Agree... you're best off using a pair of mics even if you have them A-B with minimal separation, because you will get some stereo image in your recording that will set it apart from a mono recording which is difficult to enjoy IMO.

[tardis71]

Thanks! Duly noted guys! I guess I was mostly wondering if there was a nice single point "stereo" mic out there... I've looked around and don't really see anything that fits the bill.
Probably just get the mint battery box (I like that you don't really have to hide it+it's really small and has the dip switches for bass roll off or not) Along with some sort of mini cardioids again...
Wondering what's the best I can get for under $300 that are the size of the cord sounds? Church audios look way cool..but too large for me. Might just get another set of CSC? I was hoping that there
would be something else better to have come out in the last 13 years? What are my options?
I do like the thought of those "flex gooseneck" mics....
Thanks in advance!
 

[Church-Audio]

Thanks! Duly noted guys! I guess I was mostly wondering if there was a nice single point "stereo" mic out there... I've looked around and don't really see anything that fits the bill.
Probably just get the mint battery box (I like that you don't really have to hide it+it's really small and has the dip switches for bass roll off or not) Along with some sort of mini cardioids again...
Wondering what's the best I can get for under $300 that are the size of the cord sounds? Church audios look way cool..but too large for me. Might just get another set of CSC? I was hoping that there
would be something else better to have come out in the last 13 years? What are my options?
I do like the thought of those "flex gooseneck" mics....
Thanks in advance!
 

Food for thought... I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached. There actually is no difference between the mics your looking at and my ca-14 they are the same size when you are using windscreens.. And you SHOULD always use windscreens with these mics.

Chris

[Belexes]

I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached.

Chris, could we see some comparison photos between the original and more compact?

 

[acidjack]

Thanks! Duly noted guys! I guess I was mostly wondering if there was a nice single point "stereo" mic out there... I've looked around and don't really see anything that fits the bill.
Probably just get the mint battery box (I like that you don't really have to hide it+it's really small and has the dip switches for bass roll off or not) Along with some sort of mini cardioids again...
Wondering what's the best I can get for under $300 that are the size of the cord sounds? Church audios look way cool..but too large for me. Might just get another set of CSC? I was hoping that there
would be something else better to have come out in the last 13 years? What are my options?
I do like the thought of those "flex gooseneck" mics....
Thanks in advance!
 

Whatever you decide, I would advise you against gonig with the CSC. I don't have any beef with Coresound or most of their products and was very happy with the CSBs and like my DPA 4061 HEBs, but I found the CSCs to be hands down the worst mics in terms of sound quality that I have owned or used (there are worse, to be sure, but they're the worst I've used).  The build quality is good, but to me, the performance is just not acceptable - way too thin on the bass.  The Church CA-11 are smaller and are significantly better based on the recordings I've heard.  So are the SP-CMC-8 aka AT933.  So are the new SP-CMC-25 hypers.

Personally, I think if you get the right kind of hat mount (which you really should be doing anyway - I used to use the method you are talking about, and while it worked, it was really not as good) the slightly larger size of CA-14 or AT U853 (aka SP-CMC-4) will not trouble you, and your recordings will be a lot better. I think there is a pretty big quality jump between the CA-11 to CA-14, and similarly from AT933 to AT 853.

[Church-Audio]

I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached.

Chris, could we see some comparison photos between the original and more compact?

 

I have not built on yet. But I know I can because I designed it

[pafnuzzi]

Since I asked Chris not long ago I know he offers also a single point stereo mic version built of his CA14 omni mic capsules so this would be a very simple but high quality setup but stereo and not mono

Regards

[tardis71]

Thanks! Duly noted guys! I guess I was mostly wondering if there was a nice single point "stereo" mic out there... I've looked around and don't really see anything that fits the bill.
Probably just get the mint battery box (I like that you don't really have to hide it+it's really small and has the dip switches for bass roll off or not) Along with some sort of mini cardioids again...
Wondering what's the best I can get for under $300 that are the size of the cord sounds? Church audios look way cool..but too large for me. Might just get another set of CSC? I was hoping that there
would be something else better to have come out in the last 13 years? What are my options?
I do like the thought of those "flex gooseneck" mics....
Thanks in advance!
 

Food for thought... I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached. There actually is no difference between the mics your looking at and my ca-14 they are the same size when you are using windscreens.. And you SHOULD always use windscreens with these mics.

Chris

Chris, Just checking in to see if I could get some more info on these compact version of the CA-14?
I've been checking out some posts and I'm pretty sure I would like to get a CA ugly and maybe these compact CA-14...or maybe the audix caps with your cords...Not sure. Any more info on these? I know time is widing down on the sale for the ugly....thanks for your time!!
 

[fmaderjr]

I don't think there's a compact version of the CA-14.

If you get an UGLY you have to know where to set your levels before you enter the venue, since levels must be changed with a mini-screwdriver. I love the ST-9100 and hate the UGLY. Everybody seems to want everything just a little smaller and I don't really get it. The ST-9100 is plenty small enough for me and lets you change levels on the fly.

[tardis71]

Thanks for any thoughts!! I appreciate them!
I don't mind presetting the ugly. I figure you could probably just leave it 3/4 of the way up and then adjust from your recorder right?
As for the compact version of the CA-14s...just check my quote above..that Chris made himself, a few posts back. "I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached"

I want a rig that I can put in my front pockets. M10 on one side and ugly and mics on the other.  I'm mostly thinking summer time when I'm wearing just shorts and a shirt to a show. I want everything as small as I can get. I'll probably pick up one of chris's small Battery Boxes too (for extra small stealth)...but I figure the ugly would be a upgrade from that. The extra size of the 9100 is just another thing to have to get into the venue...many heavy metal shows have wands/search and the ugly is just more stealth...simple as that.

I'm pretty much at the point that I think I'll go with the Audix 1200 cardioid caps with Chris's plug in power cables. Or the maybe the compact CA-14 if they are available. 

Audix 1200 series plug in power cable modification.
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=124072.0

I was also wondering if chirs might be able to do a mod to the ugly and put a little larger trim pots for level adjustments. Something like these?
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=779

or the small one of these?
http://www.potentiometers.com/SeriesP090.cfm?session_num=2009122401470094


Also why are there two separate levels for left and right on the ugly and just one on the 9100?
Could I get just one on the ugly?
Thanks in advance for your time and thoughts!

[fmaderjr]

I don't understand the quote from Chris about compact CA-14's. They all have permanent windscreens and he's never mentioned a more compact one in his retail space ads.

Chris will build anything to order if it is possible for him to do so, so ask him about the single gain knob and the larger knobs. I'm guessing larger ones may not be possible w/o increasing the size of the unit-otherwise everybody would want larger knobs.

I guess the only potential problem with setting the UGLY at 3/4 and adjusting with the recorder is that if the show is very loud the UGLY itself could clip ruining the recording (and your meters wouldn't know it was happening). I would certainly set it below 3/4 for heavy metal, etc.

By the way, if you want your recorder in one shirt pocket, and the UGLY in the other pocket, I really see no advantage to the UGLY over the ST-9100. The ST-9100 easily fits in a shirt pocket with the gain knob easily accessible for making adjustments. That's how I would do it except my ST-9100 and MZ-RH1 easily fit in the same shirt pocket.

[tardis71]

thanks for your thoughts fmaderjr...any way you can post a photo of the 9100 along side your rh1?
My rh1 took a dive this summer and I've got a m10 now. I wish there were more photos comparing the size of things... I'm sure I would have to get used to what the ugly can do and where it should be set for different shows..but I'm sure I wouldn't have a problem with that. It would be nice if the ugly could be made with the smaller trim pots like I posted...that would be sweet..no?
As for the compact ca-14s...I'm just going on what chris posted....he said he could make a more compact version on the ca-14s... I don't have any other info than that. But I'm looking at the Audix 1200 caps and his power cables if I can't get the smaller ca-14...I don't need or use windscreen unless I'm outside..never needed them for indoor shows. Thanks again for your thoughts!

[Church-Audio]

Thanks for any thoughts!! I appreciate them!
I don't mind presetting the ugly. I figure you could probably just leave it 3/4 of the way up and then adjust from your recorder right?
As for the compact version of the CA-14s...just check my quote above..that Chris made himself, a few posts back. "I now have a more compact version of the ca-14. Its the same size as the windscreen with a clip attached"

I want a rig that I can put in my front pockets. M10 on one side and ugly and mics on the other.  I'm mostly thinking summer time when I'm wearing just shorts and a shirt to a show. I want everything as small as I can get. I'll probably pick up one of chris's small Battery Boxes too (for extra small stealth)...but I figure the ugly would be a upgrade from that. The extra size of the 9100 is just another thing to have to get into the venue...many heavy metal shows have wands/search and the ugly is just more stealth...simple as that.

I'm pretty much at the point that I think I'll go with the Audix 1200 cardioid caps with Chris's plug in power cables. Or the maybe the compact CA-14 if they are available. 

Audix 1200 series plug in power cable modification.
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=124072.0

I was also wondering if chirs might be able to do a mod to the ugly and put a little larger trim pots for level adjustments. Something like these?
http://www.smallbearelec.com/Detail.bok?no=779

or the small one of these?
http://www.potentiometers.com/SeriesP090.cfm?session_num=2009122401470094


Also why are there two separate levels for left and right on the ugly and just one on the 9100?
Could I get just one on the ugly?
Thanks in advance for your time and thoughts!

I can build the preamp with a regular gain knob.. But then its not a small preamp anymore The trimers I am using are rated at 50,000 cycles they are the strongest ones I could find. I really dont think you should touch the gain in a live situation anyway adjust the levels on the recorder if you need to change levels run the preamp out full or 80-90% for loud shows. Thats why I made them trimmers in the first place you can easly match up your mics and set it and forget it.

[fmaderjr]

I really dont think you should touch the gain in a live situation anyway adjust the levels on the recorder if you need to change levels run the preamp out full or 80-90% for loud shows. Thats why I made them trimmers in the first place you can easly match up your mics and set it and forget it.

Love your equipment Chris, but it would be great if you could post mini-instruction manuals. I read and save all your posts on your equipment I can find, but I didn't know you thought 80% or even 100% gain wouldn't be in danger of clipping at a very loud show. As a set it forget it device, the small gain pots certainly make sense. I guess I'll have to break out my UGLY that's been sitting around unused and give it a shot.

It would have been nice to know this when the UGLY first came out

[Church-Audio]

I really dont think you should touch the gain in a live situation anyway adjust the levels on the recorder if you need to change levels run the preamp out full or 80-90% for loud shows. Thats why I made them trimmers in the first place you can easly match up your mics and set it and forget it.

Love your equipment Chris, but it would be great if you could post mini-instruction manuals. I read and save all your posts on your equipment I can find, but I didn't know you thought 80% or even 100% gain wouldn't be in danger of clipping at a very loud show. As a set it forget it device, the small gain pots certainly make sense. I guess I'll have to break out my UGLY that's been sitting around unused and give it a shot.

It would have been nice to know this when the UGLY first came out

Instructions would be good I guess.. I dont really want to get into stealth techniques but I can talk about my gear and recommend placements ect and settings.

[DSatz]

Please excuse my late arrival in the thread. If you can't tell the difference between a mono and a stereo recording of something, and the "something" took place in a space with a more or less normal amount of reverberation, then the stereo recording isn't optimal to my way of thinking.

I, too, have used one-point Sony stereo microphones in decades past (and also some Aiwas, which were less peaky in the treble), and even if that's not quite the ideal way to record stereo, it still can be better than mono. And the convenience factor sometimes means that a recording can be made under circumstances where no other form of recording is practical at all, so I don't knock that, either.

The thing is, many of those little stereo microphones were really designed for business applications, e.g. recording a meeting with ten or twenty people sitting around a table or a room, so they tend to have a very wide stereo pickup angle. And the way this was (and still is) often done is by arranging the two cardioid capsules with an angle of only 90º or so between their main axes. Cardioid isn't really all that "sharp" of a pickup pattern, so when you use the mike in other, less immersive situations such as concert recording, you find that there's a tremendous overlap between what the two channels are each picking up. In fact their signals turn out to be so nearly alike that the resulting two-channel recording is pretty nearly mono in effect.

And that, in turn, may well explain why a reasonable person who listens to the recording over loudspeakers might not feel that stereo has much to offer over mono. But a more appropriate recording method should show the advantages rather vividly, I think.

--best regards

[dgale]

Whatever you decide, I would advise you against gonig with the CSC. I don't have any beef with Coresound or most of their products and was very happy with the CSBs and like my DPA 4061 HEBs, but I found the CSCs to be hands down the worst mics in terms of sound quality that I have owned or used (there are worse, to be sure, but they're the worst I've used).  The build quality is good, but to me, the performance is just not acceptable - way too thin on the bass. 

I agree 100% - the CSCs were the worst mics I've ever owned...I tried and tried to make them work and the results were always horrible.  Complete waste of $$ IMO - run from these mics.  I have had fairly good results from the CSBs and HEBs but the CSCs were something I wish never darkened my doorstep.

[Gutbucket]

Please excuse my late arrival in the thread. If you can't tell the difference between a mono and a stereo recording of something, and the "something" took place in a space with a more or less normal amount of reverberation, then the stereo recording isn't optimal to my way of thinking..

I 2nd that thought. 

The quality of this type of recording is as good as the effort which you put into it, within the limits of your expertice and gear.  Since the choice of mic placement in the hall is my primary consideration, I often choose to record using these methods to make the very best recording I can, given the constraints.

[guysonic]

Also, if your Sonic Studios mics are in fairly good shape, guysonic can recondition them for you for a reasonable price. He could probably even shorten the cord, but you'd still be stuck with the big battery box. However, it's possible that your M10 would power Sonic Studios perfectly without a battery box. It's big brother, the D50, will do so (one of the very few recorders that can) but guysonic hasn't tested the M10 yet. If they both have the same plug in power voltage it would work fine without a box, assuming the mics terminate in a mini plug and not some proprietary connector designed to connect to the battery box.

Kind M10 loan from TS member allowed tech testing of this very well made deck.

Found M10 a very low noise deck actually does better than D50 in NOT having low level digital noise issues at all!

ALSO, M10 powers DSM mics perfectly so no need for external powering or external preamplifier