[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[microsound] Aevox in ear vs. not . . .
- To: microsound <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [microsound] Aevox in ear vs. not . . .
- From: Steven Ricks <stevericksmusic@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 08:54:11 -0600
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=4W2E6yiAQwecxo18dyZwVI7K600H8sSogX7Woy4PLjQ=; b=XPzuwE/XSaA7NUlypQAdXOLqz67qzPL1ls399ZbF1UuCi4efbxKXs37NU1XgDfJsvP Xj9FEeM6KMIYOjvBKllPft2UKIz8BYmHsbIpk57T87si5TBQEVj7tqqLVz1Fz3bL2Xop y45ta7njwvMuExydFwueiuRgLgBcxszBs5eaE=
I'm looking to get a nice, portable field recording setup, and have
appreciated the recent posts/tips re. the Olympus LS-10 and the Aevox mics.
I'm leaning towards getting the Olympus, and am trying to decide between the
classic MKII stereo and the in ear MKII. I like the stealth and binaural
setup of the in ear, but also imagine I will want to do some more
conventional field recording and wonder if I'll get more bang for my buck
out of the classics--wondering if I'm going to lose some quality or
frequency depth by going with the in ears. I would appreciate any input.
Also, if there are other hand held recorders and/or mics people want to
recommend, I'm all ears (ha ha).