Author Topic: Stereo recorders and binaural (Read 9231 times)

Leon · « **on:** June 15, 2013, 05:09:58 PM »

Hello folks!

Great knowledge in here...I love reading this forum, and now I am a part of it also.

I have not much experience in recording but I want to and I will be purchasing some gear this summer. I want to record nature ambient sounds...like birds and surroundings etc, and also to record some nature and urban action with binaural mics. I've been searching the web here and there and been listening to some samples...So I finally decided to get a Sony PCM M10 for ambience and for binaural I like Roland CS-10EM.
Since I am on a budget this is the best quality vs price I could find so far.

For example I didn't quite like how H4n internal mics sound in the high mids...but for a second budget recorder what I need is it to have low self noise and good sounding preamps for the CS-10EM.
I also didn't really like how OKM II sound...I did like Shure 183 but they are much pricier and they are clips so I don't know how to mount them to my ears to make binaural...(?)

Now, sometimes I would like to record both at the same time, so, what would you recommend for another recorder? I'm seeing Soundman offers its DR 2 for 35e...which is really cheap comparing to all the other recorders...so I was wondering if anyone has some new insights on the sound quality of DR 2? Couldn't find this info in the old topic about DR2. Its got just 2GB internal memory, I wonder how much recorded minutes is that if recording WAV at 24/48...

Any advice is most wellcome

Regards...Leon

rocksuitcase · « **Reply #1 on:** June 15, 2013, 07:46:27 PM »

Welcome Leon. There are some mic manufacturers/retrofitters that frequent this forum who have much more knowledge of the cost of mics these days than I do. As for a budget recorder, My friend owns an Olympus LS 10. I have a link which lists it at $199.00, maybe not too budget!

http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/audio/pcm-recorders.html?utm_source=web&utm_medium=redirect&utm_campaign=redirect_pcm_recorders

the main reason I replied is that I have some experience with binaural recording back in the early-mid eighties. The experience is mainly music recording, we did do some ambient and nature recording with the Sennheiser MKE 2002 which featured a nice dummy head and a pocket sized pre-amp.
http://www.tgos.fr/page14/files/a8ada6746b53102a60f637247b72d970-15.html
these are antiques and no longer made. we made some decent recordings of concerts with them, mostly Grateful Dead shows from that timeframe. You have to be very close to the sound source/stage to make good High Sound Pressure recordings with those mics (and binuaral in general). Of course, you also need to realize that listening back over headphones is the only TRUE way to recreate the experience. Loudspeakers are close, especially some current surround systems.
I know some on TS speak of the Core Sound Binaurals: http://www.core-sound.com/mics/1.php
These may be a good tool for the types of nature and ambient recordings you are doing.

Marshall7 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 16, 2013, 01:57:29 AM »

At 24/48 2 GB is almost exactly 2 hours.

Leon · « **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM »

Thank you very much for the answers.

As for the Sennheiser MKE 2002...unfortunately the price is a bit too over my head, but I will definately remember them for the future to come because I also want to record concerts as well.

2hours...that really isn't much. And with internal memory no option to change cards. Does anyone know the battery life (if recorded mp3) ...how long Soundman DR2 can last? And the sound quality and self noise of DR 2 anyone?

Thanks!

John Willett · « **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2013, 06:14:26 AM »

Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM

As for the Sennheiser MKE 2002...unfortunately the price is a bit too over my head, but I will definitely remember them for the future to come because I also want to record concerts as well.

The MKE 2002 was discontinued about 20 years ago !

Personally I would consider a Schneider or Jecklin disk and a pair of good omnis for this sort of work nowadays.

rocksuitcase · « **Reply #5 on:** June 18, 2013, 12:27:45 PM »

Quote from: John Willett on June 17, 2013, 06:14:26 AM

Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM
As for the Sennheiser MKE 2002...unfortunately the price is a bit too over my head, but I will definitely remember them for the future to come because I also want to record concerts as well.

The MKE 2002 was discontinued about 20 years ago !

Personally I would consider a Schneider or Jecklin disk and a pair of good omnis for this sort of work nowadays.

Just to be clear, I didn't recommend he use the MKE 2002, I was showing Leon my experience with binaural.
Also, a jecklin disk is not binaural. to actuallly achieve binaural pickup you need to position two back pressure (pressure zone) microphones around a real or simulated head. Those types of mics (what a PZM is, in fact) captures first reflections (reflections off of a surface, such as the pinnae of the outer ear) rather than the initial sound source.
Check out this post which the users go back and forth discussing this same issue:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-acoustic-music-location-recording/143551-please-recommend-good-binaural-mic-set.html
check out post 7, 26, and 33.

Len Moskowitz (Core Sound) · « **Reply #6 on:** June 18, 2013, 06:15:42 PM »

Quote from: Leon on June 15, 2013, 05:09:58 PM

Now, sometimes I would like to record both at the same time, so, what would you recommend for another recorder?

You might consider the Zoom H2n.

And for binaural mics please have a look at what we offer, from $75 per pair for the Low Cost Binaurals to the High End Binaurals using DPA capsules for a hair under $1000.

Marshall7 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 19, 2013, 12:05:07 AM »

Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM

2hours...that really isn't much. And with internal memory no option to change cards.

Thanks!

Surely the recorder accepts removable cards with larger capacity than 2 GB?

trustthex · « **Reply #8 on:** June 19, 2013, 01:00:34 AM »

Quote from: Marshall7 on June 19, 2013, 12:05:07 AM

Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM

2hours...that really isn't much. And with internal memory no option to change cards.

Thanks!

Surely the recorder accepts removable cards with larger capacity than 2 GB?

Nope, and appears to only support MP3 & 16bit wave. I'd say run in the other direction, but that's just me.

John Willett · « **Reply #9 on:** June 19, 2013, 09:08:25 AM »

Quote from: rocksuitcase on June 18, 2013, 12:27:45 PM

Quote from: John Willett on June 17, 2013, 06:14:26 AM
Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM
As for the Sennheiser MKE 2002...unfortunately the price is a bit too over my head, but I will definitely remember them for the future to come because I also want to record concerts as well.

The MKE 2002 was discontinued about 20 years ago !

Personally I would consider a Schneider or Jecklin disk and a pair of good omnis for this sort of work nowadays.

Just to be clear, I didn't recommend he use the MKE 2002, I was showing Leon my experience with binaural.
Also, a jecklin disk is not binaural. to actuallly achieve binaural pickup you need to position two back pressure (pressure zone) microphones around a real or simulated head. Those types of mics (what a PZM is, in fact) captures first reflections (reflections off of a surface, such as the pinnae of the outer ear) rather than the initial sound source.
Check out this post which the users go back and forth discussing this same issue:
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/remote-possibilities-acoustic-music-location-recording/143551-please-recommend-good-binaural-mic-set.html
check out post 7, 26, and 33.

I know a Jecklin disk isn't "binaural" as it does not have artificial ears - though it *does* work and also is fine on loudspeakers.

But, unless you use ear canal headphones a dummy head recording will go through the pinnae twice - first the dummy head and then the ones on your own head.

Personally I prefer a Schneider disk as it more closely resembles a human head (though still without ears), but at least it only goes through pinnae once (your own).

Gutbucket · « **Reply #10 on:** June 19, 2013, 09:59:37 AM »

Definitions change.

What Alan Blumelin referred to as 'binaural' in his 1930s Columbia/EMI research eventually became known commercially as 'stereo' in the late 1950s. These days most take 'binaural' to mean recordings made specifically for headphone playback, usually made by placing small microphones in one's ears or alternately by using an anatomical dummy head such as the Neumann.

Put on some headphones and listen to some of the ZBS radio programs made with the Neumann 25 years ago, they're fantastic.

Len Moskowitz (Core Sound) · « **Reply #11 on:** June 19, 2013, 10:24:33 AM »

Quote from: John Willett on June 19, 2013, 09:08:25 AM

But, unless you use ear canal headphones a dummy head recording will go through the pinnae twice - first the dummy head and then the ones on your own head.

One can make excellent binaural recordings by placing the microphones near the entrance of the ear canal, but not in it. Recordings made in that way include the influence of the pinna, head and shoulders, and are not degraded by having to go through the ear canal twice. They also don't require in-ear 'phones for listening.

Quote

Personally I prefer a Schneider disk as it more closely resembles a human head (though still without ears), but at least it only goes through pinnae once (your own).

We recommend Jecklin Disks for recording wide angle sound sources, such as large choirs and orchestras recorded at close range. We recommend Schneider Disks for recording smaller ensembles that present over a narrower angle (e.g., string quartets, small choirs). In my opinion, the Schneider Disks preserve location cues a bit better.

Jecklin Disks do a fine job of creating clear frequency differences between the two channels related to the flat baffle's dimensions, that our brain interprets as directional cues. The Schneider Disk's has those and adds diffraction/absorbtion cues related to the embedded sphere's effects.

Core Sound stocks and sells both Disks.

Gutbucket · « **Reply #12 on:** June 19, 2013, 10:34:27 AM »

Interesting. Never having used the Schneider, I've always been currious about how significant the auditory diffrences are to using a Jecklin.

Marshall7 · « **Reply #13 on:** June 19, 2013, 03:48:37 PM »

Quote from: trustthex on June 19, 2013, 01:00:34 AM

Quote from: Marshall7 on June 19, 2013, 12:05:07 AM
Quote from: Leon on June 17, 2013, 03:46:42 AM

2hours...that really isn't much. And with internal memory no option to change cards.

Thanks!

Surely the recorder accepts removable cards with larger capacity than 2 GB?

Nope, and appears to only support MP3 & 16bit wave. I'd say run in the other direction, but that's just me.

Although, if it only accepts 16 bit then he'll get longer than 2 hours recording time, as that was based on his (and my) assumption of 24/48.

rocksuitcase · « **Reply #14 on:** June 20, 2013, 10:41:39 AM »

Quote from: Len Moskowitz (Core Sound) on June 19, 2013, 10:24:33 AM

Quote from: John Willett on June 19, 2013, 09:08:25 AM
But, unless you use ear canal headphones a dummy head recording will go through the pinnae twice - first the dummy head and then the ones on your own head.

One can make excellent binaural recordings by placing the microphones near the entrance of the ear canal, but not in it. Recordings made in that way include the influence of the pinna, head and shoulders, and are not degraded by having to go through the ear canal twice. They also don't require in-ear 'phones for listening.

Quote
Personally I prefer a Schneider disk as it more closely resembles a human head (though still without ears), but at least it only goes through pinnae once (your own).

We recommend Jecklin Disks for recording wide angle sound sources, such as large choirs and orchestras recorded at close range. We recommend Schneider Disks for recording smaller ensembles that present over a narrower angle (e.g., string quartets, small choirs). In my opinion, the Schneider Disks preserve location cues a bit better.

Jecklin Disks do a fine job of creating clear frequency differences between the two channels related to the flat baffle's dimensions, that our brain interprets as directional cues. The Schneider Disk's has those and adds diffraction/absorbtion cues related to the embedded sphere's effects.

Core Sound stocks and sells both Disks.

I'm going to say from both an acoustics and psychoacoustics pov, Len has it broken down very well. I can tell you with 100% certainty that our binaural recordings (sennheieser MKE 2002) using the dummy head playback more "accurately" using headphones and it really doesn't matter whether they are in ear or over ear.
One reason we moved away from the dummy head for concert recordings was the fact of the sound quality being more diffuse when played back via loudspeakers and we realized most people would rather listen via loudspeakers than headphones. (caveat that this was the mid 1980's and there really weren't in-ear earphones like there is now-not to mention ipods or digi bit buckets which certainly weren't around then)

Dave_Scream · « **Reply #15 on:** July 07, 2013, 02:50:02 PM »

Im newbie too. So many binaural mics now. I dont know what Mic+Recorder(+Preamp?) to select.

Im trying to structurize all binaural mics and select what to buy.
Here is the list.
Sensitivity - near to 0 better
Signal to noise ratio - bigger better

1. Roland CS-10EM + ears (~110$)
My comment: many good reviews, examples, comments. Have ears and no need to cap em.
Freq. response: 20-20000Hz
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -40dB 1V/Pa
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): >60dB
Impendance: 2.2 kOhm
Power: 2-10V
Examples:
http://hybridsoundworks.com/?p=1977
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8Vy9fYPHhs
http://www.rolandmusic.ru/products/productdetails.aspx?p=1081 (press Audio or Video)
http://www.roland.com/recorder/CS-10EM/ (scroll down)

2. SoundProfessionals MS-TFB-2 (150$)
My comment: have a very good specs. Easy to buy additional windscreen and it will look cool.Very good looking ear platform - no need to clip em outside ear, so no questions from another humans.
Freq.response: 20-20000Hz
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -32dB
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): 75dB
Power: 2-12V
Maximum input sound level: 115dB / 130dB (w.battery module)
Dynamic Range: 91dB / 106dB (w.battery module)
Examples:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1P-GbnYlpGI
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/MP3files/PRODUCTS/MS-TFB-2/MS-TFB-2.mp3
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/MP3files/PRODUCTS/MS-TFB-2/MS-TFB-2-FULL.mp3
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/MP3files/PRODUCTS/MS-TFB-2/wishing_guitar_mics_on_musician.mp3
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/MP3files/PRODUCTS/MS-TFB-2/wishing_guitar_audience_perspective.mp3
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/MP3files/PRODUCTS/MS-TFB-2/guitar_strumming_audience_perspective.mp3

4. ChurchAudio CA-10 (99$)
My comment: not inside ears - must be clipped outside
Another bad moment - very long hand-making after purchase (2-3 weeks).

Freq.response: 20-40000Hz !!!
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -no information-
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): -no information-
Power: 1.2 - 12V
Maximum input sound level: 100dB
Dynamic Range: -no information-
Examples: -no examples-

5. ChurchAudio CAFS (159$)
My comment: not inside ears - must be clipped outside
Another bad moment - very long hand-making after purchase (2-3 weeks).

Freq.response: -no information-
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -no information-
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): -no information-
Power: -no information-
Maximum input sound level: -no information-
Dynamic Range: -no information-
Examples: -no examples-

6. CoreSound Binaural LowCost (75$)
My comment: not inside ears - must be clipped outside

Freq.response: 100-20000Hz (build-in bass filter)
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -86dB - they say that low sensitivity (-20dB from normal version) is FEATURE
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): -no information-
Power: 1.5-10V
Maximum input sound level: -no information-
Dynamic Range: -no information-
Examples: -no examples-

7. CoreSound Binaural (230$) (battery box included to improve dynamic range and optional bass filter)
My comment: not inside ears - must be clipped outside

Freq.response: 20-20000Hz (build-in bass filter)
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): -66dB
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): 30dB
Power: 9v
Maximum input sound level: -no information-
Dynamic Range: 90dB
Impendance: 10kOhm
Examples: -no examples-

8. CoreSound Binaural High End (990$) (battery box included to improve dynamic range and optional bass filter)
My comment: not inside ears - must be clipped outside

Freq.response: 20-20000Hz (build-in bass filter)
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): 6 mV/Pa or 20 mV/Pa (how much dB it is??)
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): 28dB or 23dB
Power: 9v
Maximum input sound level: 144 dB or 134 dB
Dynamic Range: 115dB
Impendance: -no information-
Examples: -no examples-

9. SoundMan OKM II (~180$)
Freq.response: 20-20000Hz (build-in bass filter)
Sensitivity (near to 0 better): 300 mV/Pa (how much dB?)
Signal to noise ratio (bigger better): >61dB
Power: 1.5 - 10v
Maximum input sound level: 108dB
Dynamic Range: -no informaion-
Impendance: -no information-
Examples: -no examples-

10. AudioReality (138$)
no technical information
Examples:
http://www.archive.org/details/jj2008-04-20.aud.flac16
http://www.audioreality.com/mp3cuts/Track06.mp3
http://www.audioreality.com/mp3cuts/Track10.mp3

what to select lol? I think SoundProfessionals master series are the best - so many examples, so good specs. But Roland CS-10EM are very good to. Dont know what to buy.
Core Sound mics are big cost and not so good specs. Their low cost model is really bad. Their middle-cost in challenge with SoundProfessionals model have a bigger cost and not so good specs, so sound professionals I think better.

So need to compare Roland CS-10EM and SoundProfessionals MS-TFB-2 what better?

Len Moskowitz (Core Sound) · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2013, 01:43:18 PM »

Quote from: Dave_Scream on July 07, 2013, 02:50:02 PM

Im trying to structurize all binaural mics and select what to buy.
Here is the list.
Sensitivity - near to 0 better
Signal to noise ratio - bigger better

It's nice that you're trying to help, but it's not as simple as you've made it out to be.

For most of the lower cost products, the "specs" you're quoting are figments of someone's imagination. Any spec without a tolerance on it is not a spec, but rather a marketing tool (like a frequency response of 20-40,000 Hz). And even if it has a tolerance, that doesn't guarantee it isn't a total fabrication.

The sensitivity you want depends on what you're recording - higher is not necessarily better. If you're recording loud rock concerts you probably don't want a very sensitive set of mics - they'll just overload your mic pre-amps. And if you're recording nature sounds, while higher is good, at the same time you'd better look at the noise specification (if you can trust it), because with a miniature microphone, self-noise could easily swamp the sound you're trying to record.

For many folks, in-ear microphones are the wrong binaural solution because you'd have to listen to those over in-ear 'phones or you'll get twice the frequency response distortion effects of the ear canal. If you usuallu listen with on-ear 'phones and sometimes speakers, then you're much better off with near-ear binaural microphones, rather than in-ear. Note that our High End Binaurals can be used as both near-ear or in-ear binaural microphones.

And, finally, you have almost all of the specs wrong for our products . For S/N you're off more than 40 dB. For sensitivity you're similarly off. Please check our Web page for the real numbers.

F.O.Bean · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2013, 06:15:25 PM »

I have used an old pair of rat shack miniature omnis back in the early/mid 90s, and used to use them near ear. Those recordings, even tho they were very cheap mics, sounded fantastic. I wish I had saved them in some kind of format.

I also used ck62 omnis back in 2005 with a very nicely made jecklin disk, and those recordings, while VERY bass heavy, had a very nice stereo effect/separation! I wish I could've used them to record choirs or the like up real close, and hear what they could really do. Because running them recording loud rock concerts didn't really lend their true powers

acidjack · « **Reply #18 on:** July 15, 2013, 07:23:53 AM »

The DPA 4061/Coresound HEB are by far the best mic you listed there, it's not really even close. After that, especially if you're in Europe, look at those OKM-IIRs. I'd avoid all the others like the plague.

I'd also consider Nevaton MCE-400 (harder to get and less "stealthy" connectors) and Countryman B3. Both are cheaper than the 4061 and are more comparable in terms of sound.

Church-Audio · « **Reply #19 on:** July 15, 2013, 11:26:34 AM »

Quote from: Len Moskowitz (Core Sound) on July 10, 2013, 01:43:18 PM

Quote from: Dave_Scream on July 07, 2013, 02:50:02 PM
Im trying to structurize all binaural mics and select what to buy.
Here is the list.
Sensitivity - near to 0 better
Signal to noise ratio - bigger better

It's nice that you're trying to help, but it's not as simple as you've made it out to be.

For most of the lower cost products, the "specs" you're quoting are figments of someone's imagination. Any spec without a tolerance on it is not a spec, but rather a marketing tool (like a frequency response of 20-40,000 Hz). And even if it has a tolerance, that doesn't guarantee it isn't a total fabrication.

The sensitivity you want depends on what you're recording - higher is not necessarily better. If you're recording loud rock concerts you probably don't want a very sensitive set of mics - they'll just overload your mic pre-amps. And if you're recording nature sounds, while higher is good, at the same time you'd better look at the noise specification (if you can trust it), because with a miniature microphone, self-noise could easily swamp the sound you're trying to record.

For many folks, in-ear microphones are the wrong binaural solution because you'd have to listen to those over in-ear 'phones or you'll get twice the frequency response distortion effects of the ear canal. If you usuallu listen with on-ear 'phones and sometimes speakers, then you're much better off with near-ear binaural microphones, rather than in-ear. Note that our High End Binaurals can be used as both near-ear or in-ear binaural microphones.

And, finally, you have almost all of the specs wrong for our products . For S/N you're off more than 40 dB. For sensitivity you're similarly off. Please check our Web page for the real numbers.

Yeah I know what you mean.

The frequency plot of the omni mics I use in my b99 c10 mics