Re: [microsound] field recording equipment

[Aaron Ximm <ghede@xxxxxxxx>]

> > small setup for around $100-$300, and perhaps more if microphones could
> > serve in-studio purposes as well.  i think a quick rundown and comparison

That's quite a tight budget, in particular you may find it hard to find a
mic that satisfies you if you also must buy a recorder for that much.

If I was in similar straights I would buy a pair of Shure WL183 lav mics
and make my own binaural/spaced omni pair from them ($170) and shop for a
used Sony MZR50 or MZR35 minidisc ($50-75) on eBay. While those modles are
*ancient* gear at this point they were built like tanks and are only now
starting to die off. They are the highest build quality portable consumer
recorders I've ever seen, including micro DATs.

If you can swing more $ you can get a contemporary HiMD that will record
uncompressed for < $200. Sony's about-to-be-released MZ-RH1 has been
tweaked by them for recordists in the field and eliminates of nagging old
issues with Sony recorders; it looks like a real winner -- so long as the
preamps are equal to the remarkably good/quiet ones in the current
generation of MD.

While some of the compact flash/portable HD recorders in the low end
record at higher resolution than HiMD, the preamp quality in all of them
effectively renders those impressive-sounding numbers immaterial. The
yet-to-be released (AFAIK) Edirol R09 looks good though if they have
improved that angle. While they have some conveniences for sure, these
options are all more expensive than you can afford.

Preamp quality and related analog signal path concerns will become
important if you ever want to record quiet ambiance. Most portable
recorders have been designed with concert taping and band rehearsals in
mind. In those applications noise is not an issue.

But in the short term almost any mic you can afford will be louder than
any recorder you can afford anyway. :)  Louder meaning its own noise --
not a good thing. You will hear it hissing in your recordings when you
turn the gain up.

Tape and DAT are effectively dying niche technologies and should be
avoided when you have much better alternatives in your price range.

Fwiw I appreciate greatly that MD is a physical removable medium. I have
archives now of eight years of recordings on a medium that has proven very
robust (never had an old disc fail me); and having been robbed traveling I
appreciate even more that my recordings do not have a single point of
failure.

I second the idea of going binaural-like for several reasons, but one is
that you have no room in your budget for boom/mount/windscreen gear which
you would want to use with most other options.

Another is that the binaural-like options in your price range will all be
powered directly by the prosumer/consumer recorders you can afford without
phantom powering.

Personally I'm a big fan of the intimate results with headphones, and I
also like the stealth and portability for my own recordings.

There is a lot more information on this topic in the Naturerecordists and
Phonography news groups at Yahoo Groups. This question comes up every week
from a new member.

 best regards,
  aaron

  ghede@xxxxxxxx
  http://www.quietamerican.org

  |  quod omne animal post   |
  |  cogitum est triste...   |


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org