Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: Nick's Picks on February 24, 2013, 10:06:30 AM
-
Hey all....
I'm thinking out-loud....bear w/me.
For the last ...oh, 4 years or so I have come out of the taping quagmire of "bigger and better...gimmie more" in terms of gear.
I've run it all...or nearly all of it. All the big mic brands, all the Oade modded decks, Gracie preamps and other gear....you name it, I either owned it for a while or had access to it to play with.
Don't get me wrong...a passion for the sport we all share and love.
But then change hit me....
I no longer have thousands and thousands of dollars in recording gear. Nor do I have the up-most in hi-rez stereo playback gear (*its still good, but not like it used to be).
I don't get out and record bands much..., but I do record my own playing regularly...and sometimes it's in venues that we've all taped in before.
My current setup consists of a newly acquired Zoom Q2HD video/audio recorder. It's got a Mid-Side array for mics, variable gain and 5 or so settings for the mics ranging from "mono" to varying degrees of "width" to adjust with the figure of 8 (or two cards, whatever they use in there to make that side channel, Zoom says its a real f-o'-8).
I had been using the "better" ($100 more expensive) Q3HD for the last year or so. It had fixed XY mics at 120deg. Same mics as on their H4n, only in a fixed and wider pattern. I pulled some absolutely excellent recordings with it....esp. the audio. Sure, it wasn't perfect. The high-end was harsh and scratchy...but over-all it produced very listenable recordings with good stable imaging and a nice overall balance in its sound.
My first outing with the Q2 was for Kimock the other night at Tupelos. So here is a venue with excellent sound, a quiet audience and a nice centered location to tape from (maybe 40' back).
The recording just plain SMOKES. It even sounds nice...the high-end has been much improved in this deck...it sounds real, not like a cheap reproduction.
I ran on a stand w/the usual suspects of New England rigs..., AKGs, Schoepps, DPA's..etc etc. Big rigs, all of them. And I'm certain that everyone there pulled a sick recording. There was just no way not to given the environment and quality sound booming at us.
My point..., I spent $160 on this deck. I pulled sweet audio that I can listen to w/o being annoyed by poor / brittle sound. I also have a nice 1080p vid to go with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzF9xflN1u4
I'll put the audio up on Archive so you guys can do some listening between the various sources.
I can only wonder how things will be in a few more years....but I like this whole "tiny point and shoot" deck action. Two AA NiMH batteries (it probably could have run the whole night on just two, but I swapped out between sets to ensure success). No wires, no cables, no nothin'. Put it in my pocket and walk out the door.....,
And the results are always pleasing.
Anyone else out there having exceptional performance with their decks ?
I would guess that the Sony PCM-50 and their high end PCM1 (or whatever its called) must have the best mics in the stable of portable recorders. The newest Nagra portables are cheap...and interesting.
I see where this is going. Flying a pair of mics w/outboard gear will be considered "old school"...., and quickly.
-
I see where this is going. Flying a pair of mics w/outboard gear will be considered "old school"...., and quickly.
Na, forgetaboutit :zoomie1:
-
https://archive.org/details/skb2013-02-21.nickspicks
spin through some of the sources..., certainly not the best ....
but you gatta respect this from $160 rig.
-
I watched a bit of the vid, thanks for sharing. Very acceptable video and audio quality. However, in this situation, as far as the music goes you're recording the essentially mono sound of the PA system, (of course there are audience noises from all around as well) and you are totally at the mercy of the quality of the PA and the expertise of whoever set it up and balanced it. Whether it's worth investing a great deal of money to faithfully record the possibly dodgy sound of a PA I'm not sure. (Not saying there's anything wrong with this one in particular, apart from the usual flat mono sound - I can't believe it's not possible for sound systems to be set up more imaginatively than that).
If recording unamplified acoustic music, then you might be justified in going to greater lengths. But indeed, what you get from these tiny inexpensive devices these days is remarkable.
-
I feel ya nick. I run schoeps AND CA14 mics and I can honestly say, the schoeps DEF sound better, but not 3k better!!!
That said, I will NEVER sell my schoeps for just the cheaper mics ;)
-
I definitely agree with you, Nick. DEFINITELY. ANd I obviously know how good your Zoom recorder sounds since I've owned it. And I can only agree agree agree with everything you said. Of course a $5000-worth gear will [almost] always sound better than a $200 portable gizmo, BUT the thing is the compromise between $$$ spent, effort paid, time invested in gear care and post-producing, and the quality of the final product. And there, even if the $5000 gear is going to win the quality factor by far, I doubt it's worth losing by far in the other 3.
Of course a lot of experienced tapers will say this is all bullshit, but I speak from the perspective of the rather unexperienced taper who arrived here with no pre-concibed ideas (aka no "this will sound like crap because it's XXX brand" or "this will sound great because it's YYY" stuff, etc) and has learnt everything from reading everyone else and his own experience.
-
you got it!
I'm trusting my ears. If anything, i've gone backwards w/my rig over the last few years and am more pleased now than I ever have been.
my "big rig" ... ?
still team M-Audio. Pulsar IIs > firewire610 > MT
Modest....., well under a grand. The Q2 sounds 90% as good on its own compared.
-
I definitely agree with you, Nick. DEFINITELY. ANd I obviously know how good your Zoom recorder sounds since I've owned it. And I can only agree agree agree with everything you said. Of course a $5000-worth gear will [almost] always sound better than a $200 portable gizmo, BUT the thing is the compromise between $$$ spent, effort paid, time invested in gear care and post-producing, and the quality of the final product. And there, even if the $5000 gear is going to win the quality factor by far, I doubt it's worth losing by far in the other 3.
Of course a lot of experienced tapers will say this is all bullshit, but I speak from the perspective of the rather unexperienced taper who arrived here with no pre-concibed ideas (aka no "this will sound like crap because it's XXX brand" or "this will sound great because it's YYY" stuff, etc) and has learnt everything from reading everyone else and his own experience.
I think I come to the opposite conclusion to what I think you're getting at. I agree the quality of recordings from less expensive gear can be quite impressive, especially if you spend time with post-processing and get the most out of the sound of your gear. But to me, if I'm going to spend the time and effort getting out and recording the show, then getting home and working on post-processing and mastering and final tracking and distribution, I'd prefer starting with the best sound from my recording. Subject to how much I'm willing to put towards gear, my own trade-offs with quality and size/convenience, my motivation to get into the best spot to record, etc.
I've compared my Audix m1290 > Naiant LB > Sony M10 rig (that put together used is like $800) vs my DPA 4022 > Aerco MP2 SD USBPre2 > Sony D50 (which is like 5x the price) and it sounds very (very) good to my ears. But the DPA rig sounds better, and if I'm going to go to all the effort with everything, to me I feel better that I'm less likely to be wishing 10 years down the road that I started off with better gear (which to some extent I am going through now as I transfer 10-12 year old DATs). I'm fortunate though to be at a point in my life that I'm able to put the amount of money I do towards my gear. If I wasn't, I'd have no problem at all with my $800 rig, since it sounds quite good to me.
Nick -- not to say I don't agree with where you're coming from, as the quality of sound you can get these days out of inexpensive gear is impressive. But I won't agree that flying mics with outboard gear will become old school anytime soon. If only because for what we do, it really helps to have your mics flying 10' in the air, and that is a difficult place to run a recorder with built-in mics from.
-
I assume that being an actual taper, Nick, you probably mounted the Q2 competently/correctly and with the proper settings. The one time I used onboard mics on a deck like this, it turned out "fine" - not as good as that recording, but fine. But like you, I mounted it properly. I recorded recently with a guy who put his D50 up on my stand. I bet his recording is also pretty good. But right there, that makes these recordings fairly unusual compared to most people who want to just "point and shoot" these devices from a table, a shirt pocket, etc. with no thought or care into what they're doing.
For most of what we do, besides that the outboard rigs have better sound quality, I think it's actually much more convenient to use a traditional rig than a device whose lights and meters and controls are up on a stand out of my reach for the whole show.
These devices certainly outperform cheaper options of yesteryear. I also think the overall trend toward downsizing will continue. For example, outboard pres, and even more so A/Ds, are headed the way of the dinosaur, at least around here (except for tinyboxes going into M10s..)
-
Diminishing returns...alive and well.
The Gizmo's get better and better....and stay cheap.
I'll never argue that a nice set of mics>pre>deck is less than these consumer devices.... But they (the devices) improve more rapidly than the rest of the market of traditional taper gear.
Here is a downside..., it does take the "art of taping" away. Fixed mics can't really F'up. As long as its pointed in the right direction, its going to work out. Having a well thought out mounting situation for the caps makes all the difference. There is the art part w/a pair of mics and various caps..etc. You dont get that w/a single piece...though you do get some tweaks.
For me, it's a logical step from my stereo-mic fixation that I spent bazillions on back when I had the bug.
-
I assume that being an actual taper, Nick, you probably mounted the Q2 competently/correctly and with the proper settings.
Actually...
I just tore it out of the box and threw it on the stand w/minimal tweaking. I didn't even know there was a variable gain dial on the side until I took it down and really inspected it between sets. The first set was very low gain, and I added in post. 2nd set is just straight raw.
Just like any rig, you set these up right and they'll do the best they can do.
-
However, in this situation, as far as the music goes you're recording the essentially mono sound of the PA system, (of course there are audience noises from all around as well) and you are totally at the mercy of the quality of the PA and the expertise of whoever set it up and balanced it.
Isn't this true - regardless of the rig you are running...?
-
90% of the time, yes. we spend big bucks to record mono PAs in shitty nightclubs.
:)
-
Do not, DO NOT, buy an Alesis VideoTrack. I got one for $20 and it was $15 overpriced. Horrible video. Mediocre sound at best.
-
I think when the room is great and the crowd is cooperative, getting a good pull is like shootin' fish in a barrel, and the point and shoot rig is great. If we were in the OTS at a boomy room, that's when the bigger, more directional gear will make a bigger difference. BUT, then again, when you have big gear you end up in the OTS. If you have something small, you can get out of the OTS. If you have a nice quiet sit-down show at a nice theatre, you might be able sit in the sweet spot with that thing in your shirt pocket and beat the rigs back in the OTS.
-
This discussion reminds me of similar ones related to photography where people argue that a $200 point and shoot can perform the same as a full SLR with different lenses, etc. Obviously in some situations the point and shoot will perform well enough for the majority of people who want it (snapshots, etc). Telephoto, zoom and macro photography is better served by a full SLR.
I think with audio, if you haven't heard anything other than an internal mic recording you will think it sounds great, but if you hear a great recording with great equipment it blows the internals away. That being said, I am not totally down on the internal mic recordings in some situations. I have heard some great recordings done with them, and I have also heard some horrible recordings with some very nice rigs.
I think it comes down to what you prefer. Lugging around an expensive and complex rig is a big pain most of the time, but usually pays off with a better recording. For simple convenience a small handheld is great. I only have a modest rig with my open taping being a set of Busman BSC1 which I think sound much better than what I pull with the Church Audio CA14s I have in most situations. The CA14 omnis seems to sound just as good as the BSC1 omnis to my ear though. The cards and hypers of the BSC set sound better than the CA14 cards. I couldn't see spending 2-3k more on open mics unless they could ensure me dramatically better sound than the Busmans or CA mics.
-
Telephoto, zoom and macro photography..
This is an apt analogy. Regardless of the quality of any all-in-one-dohicky, it constrains the user to the configuration it comes with. It might be a fantastic Leica camera with a fixed 50mm lens, or a great all in one recorder with one, maybe two possible microphone configurations. Both devices can produce excellent results when that particular configuration is appropriate. Yet no all in one recorder can do configs with a spacing of more than a couple inches.
-
I think when the room is great and the crowd is cooperative, getting a good pull is like shootin' fish in a barrel, and the point and shoot rig is great. If we were in the OTS at a boomy room, that's when the bigger, more directional gear will make a bigger difference. BUT, then again, when you have big gear you end up in the OTS. If you have something small, you can get out of the OTS. If you have a nice quiet sit-down show at a nice theatre, you might be able sit in the sweet spot with that thing in your shirt pocket and beat the rigs back in the OTS.
Not all of the "big rigs" are back in the OTS... ;)
-
we spend big bucks to record mono PAs in shitty nightclubs.
This.
Now, there isn't anything wrong with doing that. Everyone has a hobby in which they sink money in. Some folks fish, some do rock climbing, but we do concert recordings. I think one difference is; some fish with a rod down by the pond and they like that. They don't have a reason to get a better rod, travel to more unique fishing holes, or go ocean fishing. That's fine, but some do, and they are perfectly willing to burn a ton of cash to do so.
Taping is a hobby like fishing. You can get 80% of the way there by showing up and puting stuff up in the right spot. But better bait will generally out-catch a hook a cheap pole. They both catch fish, but one's much more likely to get a bigger fish or more fish more often. I think taping is the same way; a more expensive rig will get you a better recording, but how much better is the question. It's a hobby that you can sink money into.
I've gotten into a lot of non-chatty-bar taping lately, and in those sort of environments, I find the more expensive rigs pays off in a series of ways (more professional appearance, maximized recordings to impress artists/venues with, etc). So there is still a reason for me to chase that sound (it's my personal money sink at any rate), but for standing in a room with a bar and drunken yahoos, I've started to question the rationale of me doing so...
That we have equipment that can be procured at a fraction of the price and get us the majority of the way to where we want to go is the real story here.
-
That.
-
[/quote]
That we have equipment that can be procured at a fraction of the price and get us the majority of the way to where we want to go is the real story here.
[/quote]
Bingo.
Even 5 years ago, you couldn't get a handheld deck that could do anything other than a small room / band rehearsal type of thing...and even that was "eh". I pulled some great little rehearsal recordings with my R09 back in the day, but as good as those were, this cheap ass Zoom shreds it.
As far as mic spacing..., that's not an issue for me. I'm a big coincident fan, so spacing is moot to me.
-
I've gotten into a lot of non-chatty-bar taping lately, and in those sort of environments, I find the more expensive rigs pays off in a series of ways (more professional appearance, maximized recordings to impress artists/venues with, etc). So there is still a reason for me to chase that sound (it's my personal money sink at any rate), but for standing in a room with a bar and drunken yahoos, I've started to question the rationale of me doing so...
I'm with you here page. I do alot of stage-lip/on-stage taping in quite clubs where I am using spot mics for stage presence. This is where the full rig is a must to create a sence of really being there and not jut recording a mono PA.
-
back to the point and shoot camera analogy... as Nikon now has the small Nikon 1 with changeable 'pancake' lenses, it makes me wonder if someone could create or mod some of these XY type SD recorders to instead of having fixed factory caps, have changeable caps from higher end manufacturers, say Neumann or even Nak caps could be attached to the top of these, keeping the super portability and easy setup, yet improving the sound quality dramatically. Probably not easily doable, but it would be pretty cool.
-
nice plan !
I've thought similar things in the past....
a deck like the Tascam D100, re-route the phantom from the XLRs to the mics up top (or where they would have been)..., gut the top mics and replace a mini 5pin XLR that branches to 2x XLR females
-
I too have gone backwards in price and size of gear. I dont even have a gear bag any more. I clamp my m10 to my stand and carry the rig into the show and out already hooked up... My at853s perform just about as well as anything I have used before. Sure i sometimes miss the fat sound of my at4050s/V2 rig, but for most pa recordings my 853 actually sound better. It would be a different story if i were recording acoustic music.
I guess my point is my 853->m10 rig gives me almost the convenience of an all-in-one, but with the ability to run high on a stand, multiple configs/patterns(omni through shotgun) and stealth ability if needed. Also with my rycote lyre mounts a very professional appearance...
If zooms next gen of audio/video recorder has improved battery life and pip mic input that compares well to the m10, im in....
-
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=160937.msg2024815#new
-
back to the point and shoot camera analogy... as Nikon now has the small Nikon 1 with changeable 'pancake' lenses, it makes me wonder if someone could create or mod some of these XY type SD recorders to instead of having fixed factory caps, have changeable caps from higher end manufacturers, say Neumann or even Nak caps could be attached to the top of these, keeping the super portability and easy setup, yet improving the sound quality dramatically. Probably not easily doable, but it would be pretty cool.
There is much more than just the caps. The electronics behind them (especially in the case of condensers) are critical as well.
By the way, Nagra follows an approach similar to what you suggest. They have a small hand-held recorder, the http://www.nagraaudio.com/pro/index.php (http://www.nagraaudio.com/pro/index.php), Nagra SD, that accepts different microphone attachments. And I guess it wouldn't be that hard to design third party microphone modules.
This discussion reminds me of similar ones related to photography where people argue that a $200 point and shoot can perform the same as a full SLR with different lenses, etc. Obviously in some situations the point and shoot will perform well enough for the majority of people who want it (snapshots, etc). Telephoto, zoom and macro photography is better served by a full SLR.
I think with audio, if you haven't heard anything other than an internal mic recording you will think it sounds great, but if you hear a great recording with great equipment it blows the internals away. That being said, I am not totally down on the internal mic recordings in some situations. I have heard some great recordings done with them, and I have also heard some horrible recordings with some very nice rigs.
Regarding the "quality" of equipment there are two different variables you need to consider. One is, of course, actual quality. For a photo camera it's the optical quality of the lenses, reliability of the shutter and other mechanisms, the sensor in the case of a digital camera...
The other important attribute is flexibility. A reflex camera (or one of the so-called EVILs) certainly gives you the flexibility of using many different lenses and other accesories impractical with more compact cameras.
That said, depending on the situation, a compact camera with great lenses (my beloved Minox 35 comes to mind) can give you amazing results in the right situation, provided you know how to work out its limitations and apply its strengths in your favor.
The same happens with recording gear. In my case, for example, my main photo camera now is a Lumix LX2. Small enough to fit in a large pocket, it has excellent optics, and I don't feel like I'm losing much compared to a reflex. I've shot all kind of difficult photos with it in low light, without flash, and the thing works. Regarding audio, well, I know I can carry just the PMD661 and some mikes, or, in case I want outstanding preamps, carry the ULN-2 and hook it with S/PDIF.
So, know your tools and experiment a lot :) Sometimes you can be blown away by the results you can achieve!
-
location, location, location. i'd rather record with "average" equipment in a superb location than record with top of the line equipment in a bad location.
i really appreciate better equipment and am willing to plop down the coin for really good stuff, but means and methods (in my opinion) are much more important than the gear in your bag.
-
location, location, location. i'd rather record with "average" equipment in a superb location than record with top of the line equipment in a bad location.
i really appreciate better equipment and am willing to plop down the coin for really good stuff, but means and methods (in my opinion) are much more important than the gear in your bag.
100% agreed!
Check this mk41 vs. ca14 compo as a great example. both mics were same height same stand, with the ca14s being around 6" behind the mk41 on a vark bar ;)
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=160937.msg2024815#new