Decent portable recorder for nature sounds and quieter ambiences

[Amatsubu]

Ok, appologies for overly wording up here.  Those things are often not obvious for those just getting started with this stuff, yet you seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0

That one crossed my mind when XLR input was mentioned early on.  I didn't realize it had both omnis and cardioids built-in, which may be an advantage here if they sound decent (and the cardboard baffle-improvement thing still applies to these built-in omnis).  Not sure of the noise specs or cost but worth taking a look at this one as well.

No, there's no need to apologise:) I really appreciate your help and I certainly don't know everything I should. I've just done a bit of research beforehand just to have at least a rudimentary understanding of how these things work in terms of available connections etc.;p  Knowing that the M10 doesn't have XLR inputs, I wanted to find some sort of a workaround;p

I've been eyeballing the Tascam for quite some time but heard mixed opinions about the quality of its internals. Some people said that the performance of the built-in mics is rather underwhelming. They also had some reservations concerning the preams of the unit. I'll try to read about it a bit more. It seems like a nice machine. Metal chassis, XLR inputs, a neat set of bundled accessories and not overly expensive. If its noise floor and preamps are better than some people claim they are, then it's a no-brainer. Thanks for the suggestion, dallman.

Here is a recording with the Roland R26 internal cardioid mic's.

https://soundcloud.com/user203526/david-byrne-and-st-vincent

Thanks! Unfortunately, with this kind of a recording it's quite hard to properly assess the self-noise of the R-26. Sounds nice but it might not work so well for ambiences. Thanks for the effort nonetheless;)

[Amatsubu]

If found a sample of a nature recording on Tascam's site. They claim it's been recorded by Robert Rich;p http://tascam.com/product/dr-100/downloads/

Doesn't sound half bad but the source is loud enough to mask the self-noise of the Tascam. I wonder what it would sound like when recording smaller streams, crickets or shimmering leaves. I'm also interested in recording louder sources and for these I think even a Zoom H1 would do.

[Chimney Top]

Ok, appologies for overly wording up here.  Those things are often not obvious for those just getting started with this stuff, yet you seem to have a pretty good handle on things.

It seems like the Tascam DR 100mkII would be a good fit. It has omni and cardioid mics built in, has XLR inputs and takes a digi in. There is a great deal of information here about the deck much of it is here: http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=152321.0

That one crossed my mind when XLR input was mentioned early on.  I didn't realize it had both omnis and cardioids built-in, which may be an advantage here if they sound decent (and the cardboard baffle-improvement thing still applies to these built-in omnis).  Not sure of the noise specs or cost but worth taking a look at this one as well.

No, there's no need to apologise:) I really appreciate your help and I certainly don't know everything I should. I've just done a bit of research beforehand just to have at least a rudimentary understanding of how these things work in terms of available connections etc.;p  Knowing that the M10 doesn't have XLR inputs, I wanted to find some sort of a workaround;p

I've been eyeballing the Tascam for quite some time but heard mixed opinions about the quality of its internals. Some people said that the performance of the built-in mics is rather underwhelming. They also had some reservations concerning the preams of the unit. I'll try to read about it a bit more. It seems like a nice machine. Metal chassis, XLR inputs, a neat set of bundled accessories and not overly expensive. If its noise floor and preamps are better than some people claim they are, then it's a no-brainer. Thanks for the suggestion, dallman.

Here is a recording with the Roland R26 internal cardioid mic's.

https://soundcloud.com/user203526/david-byrne-and-st-vincent

Thanks! Unfortunately, with this kind of a recording it's quite hard to properly assess the self-noise of the R-26. Sounds nice but it might not work so well for ambiences. Thanks for the effort nonetheless;)

I could post a sample of the track recorded with a Neumann KM184 > Roland R26.  Noise floor is higher with the internals, but still good.

[Gutbucket]

Hah, I occurs to me that this thread may set a new record around here for highest ratio of 'quoted' to 'new post' text. 

[Amatsubu]

http://transom.org/?p=31508

"It sounds as clean as a Sony PCM-D-50, and offers XLR inputs (and phantom power). The DR-100′s built-in directional mics don't sound quite as good as the Sony's, nor are their pickup patterns adjustable, but they're capable mics that do a decent job of recording ambience and other stereo events. There is also a pair of omnidirectional mics flush-mounted to the face of the DR-100mkII, but they sound pretty bad – though they might be effective for recording voices for transcription, the pair of unidirectional mics has a much richer sound."

A nice piece of info, I wonder if it's trustworthy. Apparently, the omnis are rubbish but the unis are nice.

"At the time of this review, the DR-100mkII is the best-sounding recorder in its price range, and rivals the quality of many recorders that cost a good deal more. The Tascam DR-40 is less expensive and offers many more recording options, but it's quite hissy with low-output external mics. If you're looking for an affordable audio recorder with XLR inputs that can sound good with a wide variety of microphones, including dynamic omnis, the DR-100mkII might just be the one."   

Well, I find that hard to believe;p People commenting on the review claim that the M10 is a better choice and that the Tascam's mics sound terrible;p

[2manyrocks]

Please also consider the intended use.  The DR100 is physically larger and doesn't have the battery life of the M10.  The size and battery life of the M10 solves a lot of problems for taping. 

Your decision needs to factor in your intended overall package of recorder, microphones, and power (battery box/preamp)needed to drive it all. 

There are pretty extensive threads on the DR100 MKII and the M10 on TS.   

[fguidry]

... If its self-noise would be as low as the M10's I'd buy it in an instant, the XLR inputs would really come in handy somewhere down the road. Maybe you could make a short nature recording with its internal mics? I'd really appreciate that:)
...

How could my "nature" recording tell you anything at all? If I take my recorder out and crank it up I hear motorcycles on the freeway 2 miles away long before I hear preamp or mic noise. But I can still hear the local insects at work over the freeway. How loud are your bugs compared to mine?

Since this is a music oriented comparison it's probably of no interest, but it includes clips comparing a D50 and H6 on the same source. Poorly level matched, I'm afraid. http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2013/08/15/zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout/

*** Edit *** A couple of additional thoughts.

The most important factor in any outdoor recordings I've done has been wind protection. A Tascam DR-05 with a good wind sock will pull better recordings than an SD702 and Sennheiser rig without one, 90% of the time.

Experience counts a lot in getting a good capture. It's a constant problem solving process. Get started on the learning curve with a sub-$100 dollar device and figure out what you'll record, where, why, and what issues actually arise. You've set out to solve the problem of preamp and mic self-noise without any evidence that these will be the main problem preventing successful recordings.

I can give such advice with authority, having spent thousands on gear only to learn that experience is the real key to good recordings.

Fran

[Ozpeter]

Kind of following from what Fran posted - heh, look, no quotes! - here's a sample which I've probably posted before - I hope this link works -

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByTVNpxnwA3DdHI0UGpkUEVCZW8/edit?usp=sharing

This is an urban recording, but after the urban bit there follows some "silence" recorded in a room with a quietly ticking clock, recorded at exactly the same level settings as the urban bit.  In the room at the time of recording, it was just possible to hear the clock ticking.  This recording gives you an idea of the dynamic range recordable with the system used, and some feel for real-world noise performance.

The system used was a humble Sony ICD-SX750 and the mics were the Roland in-ears. 

In my view noise is not a problem with this system unless you are recording something very quiet and want to crank up the gain so that, on replay, the sound heard is louder than you would have heard it if you were just using your ears.  With an M10 as the recorder I would expect noise to be lower though to be honest, I haven't verified that.

With this example I think you would find that if you first played the quiet bit, and set playback so you can just hear the clock (like in real life) you will then find the urban stuff will play back very loud.  It's remarkable how large a dynamic range you can record these days without paying a fortune.

[Amatsubu]

... If its self-noise would be as low as the M10's I'd buy it in an instant, the XLR inputs would really come in handy somewhere down the road. Maybe you could make a short nature recording with its internal mics? I'd really appreciate that:)
...

How could my "nature" recording tell you anything at all? If I take my recorder out and crank it up I hear motorcycles on the freeway 2 miles away long before I hear preamp or mic noise. But I can still hear the local insects at work over the freeway. How loud are your bugs compared to mine?

Since this is a music oriented comparison it's probably of no interest, but it includes clips comparing a D50 and H6 on the same source. Poorly level matched, I'm afraid. http://www.homebrewedmusic.com/2013/08/15/zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout/

***zoom-h6-acoustic-guitar-shootout thoughts.

The most important factor in any outdoor recordings I've done has been wind protection. A Tascam DR-05 with a good wind sock will pull better recordings than an SD702 and Sennheiser rig without one, 90% of the time.

Experience counts a lot in getting a good capture. It's a constant problem solving process. Get started on the learning curve with a sub-$100 dollar device and figure out what you'll record, where, why, and what issues actually arise. You've set out to solve the problem of preamp and mic self-noise without any evidence that these will be the main problem preventing successful recordings.

I can give such advice with authority, having spent thousands on gear only to learn that experience is the real key to good recordings.

Fran

Well, unless the SNR of a given recorder miraculously changes itself from recording to recording, I can't see why a short sample of a relatively quiet source wouldn't give me even a vague idea of the H6's self-noise. You're the expert here and maybe I'm jest stupid but I don't think it matters all that much whether my "bugs" are louder or quieter than yours. I know that experience, mic placement, proper "environmental awareness" (if I may call it that) and the environment itself are the key to making good recordings. I didn't bring up the importance of using a windsock because it's obvious. However, no matter how great of an expert you are (and I believe you are an expert in this field, no irony here), self-noise is self-noise and it won't miraculously go away (unless you're quite adept at post-processing). You can be the best driver in the world but if your car's suspension is all shot to hell you'll still go through the pearly gates in a big ball of fire;p Recording and playing back sounds as we hear them is not a problem. It becomes a problem when you want to get them a bit louder. That's why I'm asking about such things. I'm not talking SD/Schoeps noise floor but something decent or good or whatever you want to call it. I've been pondering upon the problem of recording in environments I'll most probably record in myself and inferred that if a significant issue arises, it'll most likely be the noise floor. Maybe I should've factored in the possibility of being attacked by a polar bear but somehow the noise-floor of my equipment had sprung to mind first;p Just taking the Mickey, sorry;p In all seriousness, I agree with you on the experience part, after all I'm here to learn. Sorry for being a nuisance.

On a side note: as you can probably tell, I'm not a native user of English so if I write some utter cobblers in terms od grammar, semantics and whatnot, please bear with me. Also, I wrote this post on my phone which acts up quite a bit and often throws in random words as I'm typing, even when I turn off next-word suggestions;p

Thanks for the sample, ozpeter! I hope I'm not pissing you off that much with my pointless amateur twaddle;p

[Ozpeter]

Thanks for the sample, ozpeter! I hope I'm not pissing you off that much with my pointless amateur twaddle;p

I just wish I had your ability to think about and evaluate purchases, rather than just rushing out and buying the first thing that comes to hand! 

But I think Fran is right in pointing out that without some basis of comparison it's tricky to really evaluate self noise from a single subjective sample.  And at the same time I agree with you that such a sample might still provide enough audible clues to give some impression of what is natural - the ambience - vs what is not (a continuous self noise hiss which would seem out of place against the ambience), though provision of a parallel recording made using a more state of the art system would help.  But that's surprising time consuming to set up correctly.

How's that for seeing both sides?!

[stancourtney]

I'm currently using 8 Sony M-10's for nature recording.  Great quality, long battery life, sturdy build.  Great recorder.

Stan Courtney

www.stancourtney.com

[Amatsubu]

Yeah, Fran definitely has a point. There are just too many variables to be taken into account. However, a basic evaluation of self-noise level should be possible.

All the recorders within such price bracket seem to have their own share of annoying quirks but the M10 appears to be the most solid choice among the lot, all things considered. I only wish external preamps were a bit cheaper. I like the Tascam and the H6 but I still have to read about them some more. Surprisingly, a recent review of the D100 claims that the Tascam is close in terms of recording quality;p

[2manyrocks]

That presupposes one has the recorders on hand to comparatively test. 

[Amatsubu]

I've stumbled upon a comparison between D50's internal microphones and the Roland CS-10 binaurals which Ozpeter suggested. The jump in quality was simply gobsmacking, not only in terms of stereo field but also the overall level of detail. Judging by the looks of things, the M10 + a pair of binaurals might be the only equipment I'll ever need for my purposes, considering that I probably won't be able to shell out for an external preamp. I'm only worried about microphonics and wind noise, as I've heard that CS-10's are really sensitive. Are there any decent DIY windscreen solutions for such mics?  There's also a nice package from Chris Church http://www.church-audio.com/viewitem.php?productid=21 but I'm not entirely sure about this one.

[earmonger]

Church Audio mics are designed for the needs of what most of us do here--recording live music. To protect the recording from overload in loud situations, they deliberately have a lower sensitivity than many other mics. For nature recording you would want higher sensitivity.

Since Chris builds his mics by hand, you should contact him, tell him your recording needs and see if he can make you a high-sensitivity version. He'll probably have other sensible advice, too. Also look at his CA-10, for non-amplified sounds.   

Note that the Rolands go in your ears, which places them in position for HRTF: Head Related Transfer Function, which is a fancy way of saying that because your head is between the mics,  you get that spatial separation you heard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-related_transfer_function

That's true binaural recording, which the audio purists will tell you is different from simply setting up two omni mics.

Have you looked into that Nature Recordists group at Yahoo?