Thank heavens a hand held recordist was there today

[Ozpeter]

I was asked to record a local string orchestra the other day, and took along an AKG C426B (newly restored to original spec by the manufacturer) with my trusty Nagra.

While setting up I was annoyed when the orchestra manager asked me to add her $199 'shaver' recorder on my stand so they could get an immediate recording to take home. Time did not allow for an argument so I agreed. Fortunately I had a suitable bracket.

Unfortunately... my trusty Nagra dropped out of record with disk errors twice in the space of about three minutes. A whole work lost and major embarrassment. Well, sometimes one has to swallow one's pride and I gritted my teeth and asked for a copy of the shaver recording, pretending that I was interested in how it sounded. I didn't really expect that such a cheap recorder would help me out of the situation but there was nothing to lose.

Back at base, with a little tweaking in post production, I inserted two sections from the shaver into my pro rig recording, matched to the original sound as best I could. It didn't take much time in fact.

Each of the two shaver sections inserted in the attached three minute sample is longer than 30" and shorter than 50". To my surprise, I can't hear where they are. I don't think the client will spot the cheat.

Can you? Anyone care to say at what two points (times from and to) the shaver is used in the sample?

----------------------------------------------

OK... the scenario is made up, but the attached sample is a genuine compilation of backup shaver vs pro rig as specified above (recording kindly made available to me by a fellow forum member). Apparently the recording level of the shaver was set somewhat low (about 10dB below the main pair) but once normalised in the DAW that doesn't seem to be an issue.

Although no backup was actually required on this occasion, to my mind this sample shows that it's possible to use one of these recorders to back up even a high quality main pair with very little trouble and expense. It backs up the mic, the cables, the recorder, everything. Unless the mic stand falls over, you've got at least something which with a little post-pro will satisfy most of the people most of the time in the event of a disaster.

Assuming you've done your best to ensure that your main rig doesn't fail, isn't having such a backup a professional approach these days?

[bass man]

I heard something on 39th second, little something at 2:40-41 which could be something in the bass section and change of the sound at 2:48 .... But I am on my PC with headphones and mp3 ...

[tourtelot]

As much as we pride ourselves on showing up at the job with the best gear we can afford, and agree that great gear helps great engineers make great recordings, your demo goes to show that given the option of "something that works" over nothing, most sane folks would pick the former.

This reminder that a little humility can serve us well is appreciated by me, a certified Gear Slut.

Thanks.

D.

[Plush]

What is the dynamic range capability of the shaver? Is it greater than 16 bit capability?

No, the shaver is certainly not a credible back up.

[Ozpeter]

What is the dynamic range capability of the shaver? Is it greater than 16 bit capability?

Never mind the numbers, is the self noise of the device below the noise level of the locations where it is being used? If so, there's no problem. Of course your locations may differ from mine.

[SonicAlchemist]

I think I hear an edit at 0:25 with slightly differing room tones being cross-faded. From then on the lower strings seem to not have the body and presence they did before. And this cannot be because they are playing too softly, the sound of them digging into their strings indicates they are just not getting picked up as sensitively. I think we go back to the higher-end set up sometime before 1:40, during the transition between movements. Bass Man picked up on how the lower strings seem full again by 2:40. I think we are back to the high end mics at 1:40, and hear body in the violas and celli, but they are playing softer.

So to be clear - expensive mics to start, out at 0:25, where we get the cheapos, and the back to the good stuff at 1:39, or sometime in the transition of movements.

Curious to find out how close I am.

[king2070lplaya]

Aw snap! Have you figured out what caused the Nagra to error?

[Ozpeter]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Aw snap! Have you figured out what caused the Nagra to error?

OK... the scenario is made up, but the attached sample is a genuine compilation of backup shaver vs pro rig as specified above (recording kindly made available to me by a fellow forum member).

Like I said, the story is fictional (a parable if you like) but it's a valid example of the kind of thing that can happen - I know of a Nagra which has had that kind of problem - in other words, stuff can happen even to the most exotic gear. And of course to cheap gear. When backing up one with the other, you have to hope that Murphy's law will not apply and they both die together. But when one entire system is 100% independent of the other, that lessens the chances.

Curious to find out how close I am.

I will reveal the exact points in due course but be assured the sample is made up as I described. I'm not going to say something dumb like "actually it's all from a shaver".

I'd be curious as to whether anyone actually does back up their entire main mic chain and if so, how. Apart from the 'shaver' method, you'd have to deploy a second set of mics, cables, and recorder. Apart perhaps from major broadcasters, I've not seen that done. We all live in hope (and check our gear) and most of the time, stuff doesn't happen. But it's not a nice feeling to totally lose part of a recording.

[panatrope]

Originally Posted by Plush

What is the dynamic range capability of the shaver? Is it greater than 16 bit capability?

I haven't measured the H2n (24bit conversion included) but the H2 ADCs were capable in excess of -100dBfs(A). Of course, without the benefit of low-noise measuring chamber, I can't precisely say what the self noise of the mics are. In that recording environment (air-conditioning plant on the roof outside the windows above the stage) I doubt that the self noise of most hand-held devices (including a Nagra SD) would exceed the ambient in the hall. Perhaps you would be interested in an extract from later in the performance documenting the flyby of the helicopter on approach to the nearby emergency hospital. (A suitable case for RXII?)

Continuing intellectual curiousity will always dictate investigating what can be done with minimal means. Something like the H2n will have an operational fit in what I do. If as apparently demonstrated in this example, the quality is fit for purpose, and if one can set the unit, turn it on, set the hold switch and come back and collect it at the end of the night with the equivalent of the session tapes in studio practice, then it is a useful device. In the land where anyone can become President (and that can be a worry), and where pedigree is supposed to be not important compared to performance, openness in embracing the possibilities of such devices should be part of that mindset.

And in terms of backup, to give an old maxim a touch of the Chicago "Half a love is better than no broad!"

[boojum]

I am curious who could have or would have picked up the patch without the heads-up? Maybe many of the GS community would have but the average folks, how would they have done? OP's point is a good one. Better that so-so fill than none at all. And, a better backup recorder would be in order. ;o)

[tenkas]

First edit is at 0:46, it is on the second C major chord (when the same voicing is repeated 2 times) (we can hear the top end is more pronounced)

The second edit is at 2:01 when the violins are reaching for that high G.

But I have to admit, I might be wrong, and this is a serious backup solution, you have proven your point. Thanks!

PM the answer if possible, I won't tell... e.

[chris319]

What kind of shaver was it? I've gotten OK recordings with a Sony PCM-D50.

My disappointment with many of these portable recorders is that, even though they advertise 24-bit sampling, they only capture 16 bits and pad the least significant byte with zeroes. I have written a program which detects audio files such as these.

[king2070lplaya]

Few questions:

1) I'm assuming the akg was in XY?

2) does anyone know for sure which units actually record at 24 bits?

[Ozpeter]

1) I'm assuming the akg was in XY?

Good question - I'd assumed it was in MS, but I could very well be wrong. I'll enquire.

What kind of shaver was it? I've gotten OK recordings with a Sony PCM-D50.

H2N. About as lowly as they come in theory, but unlike most such devices, its primary design intent is to be 'a mic that records', and once black-taped to cover its white lettering (and the display is easy to cover too) it can look not unlike a normal mic that you somehow forgot to connect to, if in view of an audience. Very easy to use if your mind is on the main rig.

And, a better backup recorder would be in order.

Of course, better is always best, but if statistically the recording is unlikely ever to be heard, some balance between cost and risk might be struck by those with limited budgets.

Concerning bits - the AKG/Nagra was 24 bit and the H2N 16 bits - some of which were in theory 'lost' due to the low recording level. So in a way this can be regarded as the worst scenario for the shaver - not so many bits in the first place, and not all used. I'm not unaware of the argument that such a device set to 24 bits doesn't actually result in a better recording anyway, but it might help avoid digital clipping (by encouraging you to set the level conservatively) though there's a whole lot of previous discussion around that concept in this forum anyway.

For the sake of the present discussion, I think the chief point is "does this, in a practical situation, provide something useful or not", never mind the theory.

[Ozpeter]

(PMs with the answer have been sent to those who have posted possible times of edits.)

[marvin100]

Originally Posted by tenkas

First edit is at 0:46, it is on the second C major chord (when the same voicing is repeated 2 times) (we can hear the top end is more pronounced)

The second edit is at 2:01 when the violins are reaching for that high G.

I agree with this and would like a PM

[Don S]

I'll take a guess using my ATH-M50's in a MBP at 1AM! 0:26 shaver in - 1:42 out. Maybe you're quicker, but the last time I had to "master" an H4 recording it took a half hour to EQ in order to sound half way decent.

[Douglas Whates]

Originally Posted by Ozpeter

Like I said, the story is fictional (a parable if you like) but it's a valid example of the kind of thing that can happen - I know of a Nagra which has had that kind of problem - in other words, stuff can happen even to the most exotic gear.

I haven't listened to your audio clips (I'm not particularly interested), but I do completely agree that any piece of equipment can fail. The Nagra VI failed on me twice. I would never trust any single recorder (even Nagra) for an important live concert -- it is absolutely necessary to have a backup. Professionals ought to have a professional backup.

[panatrope]

Originally Posted by Douglas Whates

Professionals ought to have a professional backup.

Acceptance within a profession is based both on theory and practice. Objectively you can measure the performance of the subject. Practice is evaluated by experience over time. If objectively the device measures to meet the required performance standards - fine. Likewise, over time, if the practical experience demonstrates that a certain confidence level is consistently reached in application, then that device is worthy of use in a 'professional' environment. It depends on what it is and how it is used.

I'm an engineer by profession (over 40 years practice). One of my undergraduate colleagues to my knowledge answered the 'religion' question in a contemporary census as 'engineering'. Professionalism is a state of mind ...

[Douglas Whates]

Originally Posted by panatrope

Acceptance within a profession is based both on theory and practice. Objectively you can measure the performance of the subject. Practice is evaluated by experience over time. If objectively the device measures to meet the required performance standards - fine. Likewise, over time, if the practical experience demonstrates that a certain confidence level is consistently reached in application, then that device is worthy of use in a 'professional' environment. It depends on what it is and how it is used.

I'm an engineer by profession (over 40 years practice). One of my undergraduate colleagues to my knowledge answered the 'religion' question in a contemporary census as 'engineering'. Professionalism is a state of mind ...

The paragraph you wrote is so loaded full of nonsense. "Objectively you can measure the performance of subject" - what!? "Practise is evaluated by experience over time" - eh!? The words make sense, but the sentence doesn't add up.

This is not rocket science and I'm not making any bold claims or dissing the handheld recorder per se. All I was suggesting (as I'm sure you know) is that a professional--I mean somebody making their living from location recording--ought to invest in two professional devices, rather than one professional device and one device that may get you out of trouble if you're lucky. This is not a discussion of language or semantics or the meaning of life. I'm sure 99.999% of people understood what I was saying and didn't need your mumbo-jumbo confusing the issue.

Originally Posted by panatrope

Professionalism is a state of mind ...

Ha ha! I'll use a dictaphone to record my next gig quote that to the paying client. "Professionalism is a state of mind..."? Ridiculous but intelligent sounding until you actually stop and think of the meaning.

[John Willett]

Originally Posted by king2070lplaya

Aw snap! Have you figured out what caused the Nagra to error?

It didn't - it was fictional.

He should have just said "main recorder", rather than naming a well-known brand (this would apply to any brand as a casual reader would assume a real problem).

Please can you edit the OP to say "main recorder" or the like, rather than a real model as it's all fictional.

Great test, by the way.

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by SonicAlchemist

So to be clear - expensive mics to start, out at 0:25, where we get the cheapos, and the back to the good stuff at 1:39, or sometime in the transition of movements.

Curious to find out how close I am.

My first impression was the same. I particularly find the forte ending at 1:22 annoying, crowded and harsh... also I don't hear that much of "space" and body of the instruments - especially listening to the right channel - there's not so much nice bass and low mids as in other sections - so that middle part could be the "shaver"... But still - good enough to save the recording which is probably meant just for some archive purposes - I suppose this is not some CD release recording anyway...

edit: than again - my ears are offended around 2:10 - maybe it's just that I don't particularly like loud and screeching violins in that particular range.

[Ozpeter]

Please can you edit the OP to say "main recorder" or the like, rather than a real model as it's all fictional.

I was perhaps unwise to mix fact and fiction. The samples do come from the 'fictional' equipment described. But in reality there was no failure, the "shaver" belonged to the recording engineer and was deployed as much as an experiment as anything, and there was no actual need to intercut the material.

[Ozpeter]

a professional--I mean somebody making their living from location recording--ought to invest in two professional devices, rather than one professional device and one device that may get you out of trouble if you're lucky.

I think the problem lies in defining "professional device" - and the danger in overlooking devices which are perfectly servicable in the hands of a professional for certain tasks simply because they don't have a "professional" reputation.

You've said "two professional devices" but as I said in an earlier post, to achieve the level of backup which might be felt to be appropriate, you've got to duplicate your entire recording chain with a set of devices, or, use one backup device which covers the lot.

I'm not sure that I could point to a device which most would deem "professional" which can replicate the function in as many respects as the kind of device - if not the specific device - which we are discussing here.

[tourtelot]

Originally Posted by Douglas Whates

I haven't listened to your audio clips (I'm not particularly interested), but I do completely agree that any piece of equipment can fail. The Nagra VI failed on me twice. I would never trust any single recorder (even Nagra) for an important live concert -- it is absolutely necessary to have a backup. Professionals ought to have a professional backup.

Here's the thing about that, though. If you are like I am, I have a backup RECORDER. Sometimes it takes a simple analog mic split (the safest) but sometimes out of choice and convenience, it takes a digital split from my (insert "professional device" here.) The handheld recorder duplicates the whole chain so if, God forbids, the (insert "professional device" here) drops the 48P, the handheld recorder will still get the whole show.

Is anyone setting up two whole chains at their typical location gig? I'd bet not.

The point that is being made, and that some want to morph into talk about edits and bit rates, is that if the scenario described had actually happened, the OP would have had a disc to provide his client and that the client, almost certainly, would have been satisfied with the result.

That's it. No more, no less.

It just comes down to, whether any of us choose this as a day-to-day method, being open and not slavishly intolerant of problem solving ideas.
It's not a post about engineering, it's a parable.

D.

[The Listener]

Thanks for PM, I won't reveal the answer, but obviously only the most "offensive" things could be spotted more or less correctly, but the cuts are rather subtle and where the music is averagely dynamic and uniform it is hard to tell the difference.

btw - which "shaver" was that? The infamous Zoom H4n or something more quasi "high end"?

[renec]

I'll personally never call them "shavers," but that's because I think language matters.

[Rolo 46]

In all my pro life I never used a back up ,two machines only for record change overs,or playback and record.
In my amateur mode still no back up or loss
However I might consider 3-5 shavers on separate Mike Stands and shock mounts for future wireless gigs just for the fun of it.

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by Plush

What is the dynamic range capability of the shaver? Is it greater than 16 bit capability?

No, the shaver is certainly not a credible back up.

??? It SAVED the production. I would certainly call that credible, in your case it would be incredible.

[rumleymusic]

I have no problem using one of these devices as a line-in stereo backup. If the dynamic range is above 100dB, I would call that acceptable. The converters and analog section of the generally accepted Tascam DR680 is not that much different than the hand held DR100 for example.

Luckily I have never had a recording failure in the main setup because I maintain all my equipment and check everything before leaving for a job. (except for one time where a last minute driver update caused BSOD on startup, I'll never make that mistake again)

It is sticking it on a mic stand and calling that a recording rig that really screams amateur hour. And yes, anyone who is paid to record a concert and shows up with a Zoom should be immediately fired.