Advice need on a good mic for stereo ambient recording
Old 1st March 2012
  #1
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Advice needed on a good mic for stereo ambient recording

Hi all!

I'm not a professional recordist (mainly dealing with audio gear sales now, after a few years working in post-production). So although I'm not a fan of spending money in cheap crappy gear that ends up turning into a false investment, I also can't afford to buy the best of the best.

I'm interested in recording nature/ambient/street sounds, and am looking for a good quality stereo microphone.

Not a fan of the idea of carrying a pair of mics. I want a stereo self-contained mic that's quick to take out of a bag in my trunk, pop onto a mic stand and start recording.

My setup will be as follows:

- Sound Devices USB Pre2 interface powered by an USB battery
- Digital recorder receiving the digital out of the SD USBPre2 (still not sure if I'll buy the Tascam Dr100-mkII or the Marantz PMD661)

I have acess to all Røde microphones in my company (we're the distributors of Røde mics in my country), so naturally I was looking at the NT4, as I can get it for around half market price.

But I'd also like to explore other possibilities.

Do you also do these kind or recordings?
Can I get your opinion on this?

I'm looking at the Audio Technica BP4029. It's not only a stereo mic, it also has its own M-S matrix, although is a bit more expensive...

Do you have a preferred stereo mic?
What would you use with a setup like this to keep it clean (ie. nice signal-to-noise level, and without going into Schoeps or Neumann... my wallet doesn't reach that far).


Thanks!
Toscano

Last edited by Andre Toscano; 1st March 2012 at 11:25 PM.. Reason: typo
Old 2nd March 2012
  #2
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Anyone?

Hmmm... I guess a stereo mic is not such a hot topic these days...



Toscano
Old 2nd March 2012
  #3
Lives for gear
 
pkautzsch's Avatar
 

Well, there's a fundamental difference between NT-4 and BP 4029: one has two cardioid capsules, the other is a short shotgun M with a fig-8 S.
Both have their advantages and disadvantages.
For FX recording one might prefer a MS setup that gives you a very focussed and rather dry mono recording as well. XY setups are not aimed to the center of the sound source and therefore might yield a more colored and less focussed mono signal. Remember: Mono-ing XY is just summing L and R; mono-ing MS results in the S part cancelling out leaving a clean mono signal.
For broader ambiences or "backgrounds" a focussed center might be exactly what you don't want.
Isn't there an XY mic from AudioTechnica as well? Might be worth looking into.
The NT-4 is quite heavy and bulky.
Many film sound guys tend to leave their boom and ambience mics in their windshield/suspension combos, that way saving lots of setup time. Just screw the basket onto the boom, connect cable, ready to roll. And what could protect mics better from shocks than a shock mount? That should work with a pair of, say, NT-6 as well. Lightweight setup, with the bodies in the recorder bag.
Old 2nd March 2012
  #4
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
Sorry, I don't have a solution, I would try the Audio-technica though...

I'd just like to add that I fail to understand why Rode keeps posting promotional videos that exhibit the most annoying characteristics of some of their mics - "edgy, sibilant, shrill" - like the (I'm sure very practical by design and in theory) NT6: RØDE University - Indoor Location Sound Recording - YouTube!

Do I want such location dialogue sound? NO WAY!!

They should have chosen a presenter with a less sibilant and edgy voice and mix it better, it sounds awful. Maybe it's not even the mics fault...

I saw some nice sounding NTG-3 videos, but the official one sounds also rather bad with this guy in action. What are they thinking (listening) over at Rode?

P.S. Personally, for your application, I would install a pair of small Sennheiser MKH8040 in a basket and call it "stereo mic". Or try the very cheap and good Line Audio CM3, but I don't know about the self noise for more silent sound fx. I used a pair of Shure SM81 and KSM141 for a lot of nature/city soundscapes and they worked well, but are rather clumsy - too big and long bodies...
Old 2nd March 2012
  #5
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Hi Pkautzsch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkautzsch View Post
Well, there's a fundamental difference between NT-4 and BP 4029: one has two cardioid capsules, the other is a short shotgun M with a fig-8 S.
Actually, the NT4 can also use the omni capsules (NT45-O) available for the NT5. Not that it matters much having two omnis in an x-y configuration, I guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkautzsch View Post
For FX recording one might prefer a MS setup that gives you a very focussed and rather dry mono recording as well. XY setups are not aimed to the center of the sound source and therefore might yield a more colored and less focussed mono signal. Remember: Mono-ing XY is just summing L and R; mono-ing MS results in the S part cancelling out leaving a clean mono signal.
For broader ambiences or "backgrounds" a focussed center might be exactly what you don't want.
Isn't there an XY mic from AudioTechnica as well? Might be worth looking into.
Ok, so I made a mistake. I was under the impression that the BP4029 had both selectable M/S *and* X-Y stereo capturing modes. That's what happens when you read websites at 2 AM... As is mentioned in AT's website, the BP4029 can output a matrixed, ready-to-go, M/S signal through both cables; or the discrete components in the individual cables (M on channel 1, S on channel 2).
For some reason, my brain thought they were talking about "different kinds of stereo", hence the confusion.
I get it now. The BP4029 is only an M/S mic, so probably not the first choice for a more diffuse and relaxed ambient nature recording (although I'll still want to hear it...).

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkautzsch View Post
The NT-4 is quite heavy and bulky.
Many film sound guys tend to leave their boom and ambience mics in their windshield/suspension combos, that way saving lots of setup time. Just screw the basket onto the boom, connect cable, ready to roll. And what could protect mics better from shocks than a shock mount?
Couldn't agree more. The NT4 is heavy indeed, even without the battery.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pkautzsch View Post
That should work with a pair of, say, NT-6 as well. Lightweight setup, with the bodies in the recorder bag.
That is a great idea!
You see, that's the problem with working in front of the forest: occasionally you don't see the trees.
I've been selling NT6 all this time, and never thought of arranging a setup like that. But I'll definitely look into it.
Thanks.

Toscano
Old 2nd March 2012
  #6
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Listener View Post
Sorry, I don't have a solution, I would try the Audio-technica though...

I'd just like to add that I fail to understand why Rode keeps posting promotional videos that exhibit the most annoying characteristics of some of their mics - "edgy, sibilant, shrill" - like the (I'm sure very practical by design and in theory) NT6: RØDE University - Indoor Location Sound Recording - YouTube!

Do I want such location dialogue sound? NO WAY!!
Maybe it's because I'm listening through my laptop and not a proper monitoring system at the moment, but the excessive high-end and edgyness you mentioned didn't affect me that much.
Again, that's probably due to the fact these videos were made to be listened in laptops and phones where you want to cut through and be understood. A muffled top end usually transmits a subjective less professional idea of the mic quality.
Customers coming from the video/image trades that buy us these mics seem to be especially obsessed with "top end" glither.


Quote:
P.S. Personally, for your application, I would install a pair of small Sennheiser MKH8040 in a basket and call it "stereo mic". Or try the very cheap and good Line Audio CM3, but I don't know about the self noise for more silent sound fx. I used a pair of Shure SM81 and KSM141 for a lot of nature/city soundscapes and they worked well, but are rather clumsy - too big and long bodies...
The clumsyness you mention is exactly what I want to avoid. I want a good stereo mic that I can just take out of my bag and record on the spot. The mic pre and bit bucket recorder can stay inside the bag, so no problem there.
I'm just very lazy with that stuff. If I hear a good ambience in a coffee shop or by the beach and have to take several mics out (or a basket of mics), properly mount them and align them, the thrill is gone...

The MKH8040 pair is definitely out of my reach (for that kind of price, I'd rather go for an ORTF Schoeps system).
But I'll study all the models you mentioned. If the sound convinces me, I'll try to be a little less lazy...
Thanks!
Old 2nd March 2012
  #7
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
Well, since you sell them you can test them properly for a period of time and hear for youself... the NT6 look like a superbly practical solution - if something else, not the mic, is guilty for the annoying audio quality of those Rode presentation videos (even in HD resolution), that looks like the most practical and affordable solution. I don't know of any similar solution in the same price range.

If you will record some ambience with this set up try to post it here - I would be glad to find a usable pair for FX recording, instead of bringing the clumsy and heavy Shures... when I was recording two hours of different river sounds with KSM141 on a hand-held pole my hand and arm hurt and I had sore muscles the next day.

The Line Audio CM3 are great (and light and small) mics, but they are quite sensitive for vibrations and pick up a lot of low end, so maybe that is not so useful in the field for ALL the applications, but if you record some subway, trucks passing by, etc. this could be just the thing you need. And they are the antidote to "edgy" as someone said it around here in slightly different words.
Old 2nd March 2012
  #8
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
If you will record some ambience with this set up try to post it here - I would be glad to find a usable pair for FX recording, instead of bringing the clumsy and heavy Shures... when I was recording two hours of different river sounds with KSM141 on a hand-held pole my hand and arm hurt and I had sore muscles the next day.
I surely will!
Just need to choose what recorder I'm buying. Either the Tascam DR-100mkII or the Marantz PMD661 (something with a digital input).
But that's a different thread topic...

Quote:
The Line Audio CM3 are great (and light and small) mics, but they are quite sensitive for vibrations and pick up a lot of low end, so maybe that is not so useful in the field for ALL the applications, but if you record some subway, trucks passing by, etc. this could be just the thing you need. And they are the antidote to "edgy" as someone said it around here in slightly different words.
I didn't know about the Line Audio mics. Just browsed the website now.
For what they cost, I might as well buy a pair and check them out.
In a few weeks, when I have my system sorted, I will try to do some interesting tests, splitting the signal to both pairs of mics and recording the results for comparison.
I will post the files when I have something available.

Thanks!
Old 2nd March 2012
  #9
Gear addict
 
johnsound's Avatar
 

I've used a variety of mics for effects gathering and my current preferred methods (Shoeps & Sennheiser M/S set-ups and Soundfield mics) are outside your price range, but there are a couple of 'vintage' stereo mics that you might want to try outside the excellent suggestions already made. Sony's ECM-MS5 can be phantom powered, or powered via a single AA cell in the supplied power-pack. It's reasonably quiet, reasonably light and, used, reasonably priced. It lacks extreme low-end, but this can be an advantage in some circumstances. As the name suggests, it's a Mid-Side mic, with variable width, but only outputs in L/R stereo.

Shure's VP88 is bigger, heavier and polarises opinions amongst users: It's also a Mid-Side mic, can be battery or phantom powered and can output either L/R or separate M/S signals. It can also be used as a handy club to ward off marauding wildlife.

Both these mics pop up on used lists or on ebay from time to time at sensible prices.

In any event, for recording outdoors, you'll need a decent windshield, so be prepared for the extra expense.

I'm not a huge AT fan, having owned two (short M/S shotgun and the mid-price XY model) and sold them on quite quickly.

And I should add that aside from the Soundfields, I've yet to find a single mic that covers all types of effects recording and even the Soundfield's not good for some things.

In any even, let us know how the Rode works out.

Regards,

John
Old 2nd March 2012
  #10
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Hi John.

Thanks for your reply.

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsound View Post
Shure's VP88 is bigger, heavier and polarises opinions amongst users: It's also a Mid-Side mic, can be battery or phantom powered and can output either L/R or separate M/S signals. It can also be used as a handy club to ward off marauding wildlife.

I'm not a huge AT fan, having owned two (short M/S shotgun and the mid-price XY model) and sold them on quite quickly.
Can you begin to explain what you didn't like about the AT's? I have no personal preference for either the VP88 or the BP4029 (which have similar specs and roughly the same price), as I've never used them. So my mind is open. Just want to hear your personal opinion.

And why do you say the VP88 polarises opinions amongst users? (I mean, beyond the usual polarisation that occurs with practically every piece of gear...)

Quote:
In any event, for recording outdoors, you'll need a decent windshield, so be prepared for the extra expense.
Having easy access to mostly all the Røde stuff, I was thinking of using something practical and lightweight like this. Or, if need be, something less practical but more effective like this.

Quote:
And I should add that aside from the Soundfields, I've yet to find a single mic that covers all types of effects recording and even the Soundfield's not good for some things.
The Swiss got close with their army knifes, but I see what you mean...
In my case, I'm only interested in recording ambient sounds, nature, gardens, some city sounds, ocean sounds (not to compete with your excellent "Voice of Poseidon", it just seems ungrateful on my behalf not to take advantage of a beach that's standing there, 5 minutes from the place where I work...). So I'm not into recording specific isolated sound effects and stuff like that. Just plain, set-up-shop-and-let-it-record diffuse ambient sounds as they are. Hence I'm looking for a good stereo mic that provides a nice "sonic picture" of what's happening, preferably with a low noise level.

I'm getting some good tips here, thanks!

Best regards.
Toscano
Old 2nd March 2012
  #11
Lives for gear
 

A pair of electret omnis separated by a disc, inside a Rycote ball gag and fluffy would be cheap and provide really effective wind rejection
I used DPA 4060s bought from West End Shows for this purpose
Omnis handle very well outdoors ,electrets are humidity proof, but a little noisy
Old 2nd March 2012
  #12
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
A pair of electret omnis separated by a disc, inside a Rycote ball gag and fluffy would be cheap and provide really effective wind rejection
I used DPA 4060s bought from West End Shows for this purpose
Omnis handle very well outdoors ,electrets are humidity proof, but a little noisy
Aren't the 4060's lavalier mics? Do you get good results with these kind of mics for ambient/nature recordings?

Thanks.
Old 2nd March 2012
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Toscano View Post
Aren't the 4060's lavalier mics? Do you get good results with these kind of mics for ambient/nature recordings?

Thanks.
They sound very detailed and realistic, especially good for recording something close to them, or a fairly loud ambience, and are very light for placing a spaced pair in a windscreen on a boompole. I've used them to record ducks and swans up close.
Old 2nd March 2012
  #14
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by aracu View Post
They sound very detailed and realistic, especially good for recording something close to them, or a fairly loud ambience, and are very light for placing a spaced pair in a windscreen on a boompole. I've used them to record ducks and swans up close.
That's very interesting to know.
Of course, I'll try the Røde Lavaliers first, as I can test them for free, and move on to the DPA's if I don't like the results.
But that's actually a very good idea... using lavaliers for ambient micing....
(That just goes to show that I'm really in the beginning when it comes to field recording...)

I'm wondering how small will I be able to build a killer miniature stand+windshield that could probably fit my pocket? Portability, portability, portability. Not getting any younger...

Thanks!
Toscano
Old 2nd March 2012
  #15
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
Rode "blimp" looks great and half the price of Rycote I think, it is on my "to buy" list...

The DPA4060 are definitely too noisy for nature recordings, might work for loud sources like traffic, but for ambient they are waaaay too noisy. But try for yourself. I did and only liked them for close recording of loud sources.
Old 2nd March 2012
  #16
Lives for gear
 

Most ambient sound is quite high level in temperate latitudes
Only deserts are really quiet
Ie the Poles and the great sandy/stony wastes
But why record silence ?
Its only electron noise
The Great Nullabor Plain is quiet but the wind in the wires and spinniflex is not.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #17
Lives for gear
 
John Willett's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Listener View Post
Rode "blimp" looks great and half the price of Rycote I think, it is on my "to buy" list...
The Rycote S-series is cheaper than the Røde blimp, is better made and has much better shockmounts.

The Blimp is a pretty heavy unit compared to the Rycote - even the Rycote full windshield kit.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #18
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Hi John.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
The Rycote S-series is cheaper than the Røde blimp, is better made and has much better shockmounts.

The Blimp is a pretty heavy unit compared to the Rycote - even the Rycote full windshield kit.
I have to politely disagree with you.
It's not fair to compare the Rycote S-series with the Røde Blimp.
If you want to do a fair comparison of products, you should compare the Blimp with the Rycote's Full Windshield Kit, as that's the same kind of modular product that the Røde Blimp tries to be. And that one is double the price of the Blimp.
Even the S-series you mention is more expensive than the Blimp, at least in Europe.

Now, I'm not saying that the Røde products have the same quality of Rycote's. I'm aware Rycote is more respected, like most other focussed brands that dedicate themselves to what they do best.
But pricewise, it's difficult to beat Røde. And at 0.75kg net weight, you do have some Rycote Full Windshield Kits (models 5, 7 & 8) which are heavier than the Blimp.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #19
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
Most ambient sound is quite high level in temperate latitudes
Only deserts are really quiet
Ie the Poles and the great sandy/stony wastes
But why record silence ?
Its only electron noise
The Great Nullabor Plain is quiet but the wind in the wires and spinniflex is not.
Well, I tried a pair of DPA4060 and was bothered enough by their noise for distant micing applications.

The level of the direct sound of a close miced instrument (for which DPA4060 were intended and work well for) is much higher than most ambient sounds, apart from really loud environments like in the middle of traffic, construction sites, machinery, engines, etc. But nature - forests, meadows, rivers, even interiors of buildings - bars, hospitals, train stations, etc. when no loud source is near and you record just the distant ambient sound - are much quieter and the noise of the mic interferes with the noise of the world you want to catch.

The self noise is quite evident in those examples: Nagra LB - DPA 4060 - Sound Sample of a Forest

The noise in that forest recording is also the noise of the mic, not just of the ambient - you can also hear it in the distant recording of the guitar in a Church. To me this is not usable in such applications.

They work directly on the body of the instrument or close from the source and for really loud sources, but to capture a nice atmosphere of a (not too noisy) bar or something like that it could already be a too noisy mic.
But everyone should try, if they are bothered by that self noise or not. I am.

They worked for traffic, etc.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #20
Lives for gear
 
The Listener's Avatar
But maybe my experience was for those particular situations - I was doing a project where I wanted to catch the distant sound of the city and sought out quiet places from which the surrounding city could be heard in the distance - to catch that distant "rumble of the world" and the self noise for that was too much, but I checked my favorite sound FX community site "free sound project" to check some recordings others did with DPA4060 and there are a lot of well done things without much noise... so... try...

Some examples:

Freesound.org - "Bumblebees.wav" by pcaeldries

Freesound.org - "cycling_dyke_marken.mp3" by klankschap

Freesound.org - "waves_hitting_dyke_marken.mp3" by klankschap
Old 3rd March 2012
  #21
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Listener View Post
Well, I tried a pair of DPA4060 and was bothered enough by their noise for distant micing applications.

The level of the direct sound of a close miced instrument (for which DPA4060 were intended and work well for) is much higher than most ambient sounds, apart from really loud environments like in the middle of traffic, construction sites, machinery, engines, etc. But nature - forests, meadows, rivers, even interiors of buildings - bars, hospitals, train stations, etc. when no loud source is near and you record just the distant ambient sound - are much quieter and the noise of the mic interferes with the noise of the world you want to catch.

The self noise is quite evident in those examples: Nagra LB - DPA 4060 - Sound Sample of a Forest

The noise in that forest recording is also the noise of the mic, not just of the ambient - you can also hear it in the distant recording of the guitar in a Church. To me this is not usable in such applications.

They work directly on the body of the instrument or close from the source and for really loud sources, but to capture a nice atmosphere of a (not too noisy) bar or something like that it could already be a too noisy mic.
But everyone should try, if they are bothered by that self noise or not. I am.

They worked for traffic, etc.
That forest recording is fine
Dont be obsessive about inherent noise
Most of that is distant traffic shash and hum
the vitality of the recording is paramount
Ambience tracks are well down in any final mix,its colour
If its too evident, get closer.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #22
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Listener View Post
Well, I tried a pair of DPA4060 and was bothered enough by their noise for distant micing applications.

The level of the direct sound of a close miced instrument (for which DPA4060 were intended and work well for) is much higher than most ambient sounds, apart from really loud environments like in the middle of traffic, construction sites, machinery, engines, etc. But nature - forests, meadows, rivers, even interiors of buildings - bars, hospitals, train stations, etc. when no loud source is near and you record just the distant ambient sound - are much quieter and the noise of the mic interferes with the noise of the world you want to catch.

The self noise is quite evident in those examples: Nagra LB - DPA 4060 - Sound Sample of a Forest

The noise in that forest recording is also the noise of the mic, not just of the ambient - you can also hear it in the distant recording of the guitar in a Church. To me this is not usable in such applications.
You're right.
It's really not an obsession with noise. Fact is the noise is quite evident, and that puts me off the 4060's for ambient recording.
If I can hear the noise, then I'm not there. I'm always being remembered that I'm listening to a recording.

This is not to say that the 4060's are not good mics. They probably are great for other applications.
But based on the few samples I heard of them working in quiet ambient recordings, I'm definitely not interested.
Old 3rd March 2012
  #23
Gear addict
 
johnsound's Avatar
 

Lots more interesting advice and comment:

Regarding the Rycote/Rode discussion - the great thing about the Rycote range is that there's a system to match almost any microphone or microphone combination, even things like my old Soundfield. Plus the service from Rycote is, in my 25 years of experience dealing with them, and especially in recent years, exemplary. I'm happy to pay for that kind of service and for that range of kit. In terms of performance, I've only used a Rode Blimp once, and it didn't cope with the extreme conditions I was experiencing.

I think there is an answer to a small, high quality stereo system, but it's not going to be inexpensive: I'm pretty much of the opinion that you can have small, cheap and noisy, or small, expensive and clean, (Schoeps CCM, DPA 4021, etc.) although I'd really like to hear how you get on with the NT6 combination. The DPA 4060/1 mics can work and I have a pair taped permanently to an outside window, with Rycote mini windscreens, for collection the odd local sound, and they work pretty well for that. EQ and Izoptope RX can sort out the worst of the noise problems for most sound effects scenarios.

With regard to the AT mics, I found them both to have a rather 'thin' sound; good clarity, but not a lot of body, which could be useful in some circumstances, but they just didn't do it for me. YMMV, obviously.

I've spent a long time getting my mic kit together, mostly buying second-hand, which means haunting the classifieds here, on the Taperssection site and a few other places where good gear gets sold, and I've built up a set of mics that I'm now almost happy with. I'm still looking for an MKH60 or 8060 to pair either with my Schoeps MK8 or my Sennheiser MKH30 for a long-reach M/S pair to replace my MKH418 and when I acquire that and can finally afford the ST450, I think I'll be a happy, if broke, person.

As far as the VP88 goes, I find that some people really, really don't like it, whereas a number of others think it's superb. For me, it has its place in my collection as a rugged point, shoot and sort out afterwards mic, for occasions when I'm not able to use any of the other options open to me.

Regards,

John

Last edited by johnsound; 3rd March 2012 at 07:28 PM.. Reason: Terrible typing...
Old 3rd March 2012
  #24
Lives for gear
 

Good quiet ambient recordings need top kit
MKH MS arrays are my commendation.

However
My 4060s were brilliant, I mounted them on my cans (Senny HD25s) and recorded to Sharp MD
This system never failed in any climate/humidity
Cheap as chips,bullet proof
But able to record Cannons, muskets,high velocity ballistics and Lightning strikes and wonderful atmos's.
The only prob with MD
Wind in trees
Ocean Surf, always sounded the same cos of ATRAC IV.
Old 4th March 2012
  #25
Lives for gear
 

The 4060 is economical and state-of-the-art... it uses a 5.5 mm capsule and has extremely low noise for a capsule that small. It is up to the recordist to
decide when, where and how to use it and to strategically control the ratio of source sound to microphone self noise and ambient noise. It's the opposite type of microphone for recording far away from the source or in mediocre acoustics.
Old 3rd November 2012
  #26
Gear interested
 

Hey Andre I have a USBPre2 and am considering buying a portable recorder (probably the Tascam dr-100) to begin using it as you've described (ie using the preamps and AD on the USBPre and then outputting via SPDIF to the DR-100)

I just wanted to ask about whether or not you've actually used this setup successfully and could offer any information about your experience. Ie Have you had any issues with this setup? Have the results been as expected and so on?

Thanks a lot!
Old 5th November 2012
  #27
Gear nut
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave.e.mooney View Post
Hey Andre I have a USBPre2 and am considering buying a portable recorder (probably the Tascam dr-100) to begin using it as you've described (ie using the preamps and AD on the USBPre and then outputting via SPDIF to the DR-100)

I just wanted to ask about whether or not you've actually used this setup successfully and could offer any information about your experience. Ie Have you had any issues with this setup? Have the results been as expected and so on?

Thanks a lot!
Hi Dave.

I ended up buying a Sony recorder (model PCM-D50) because I also wanted a recorder with good built-in stereo mics, and the D50's were the clearest and best I heard on a recorder so far. That way I have a good quality recorder with good built-in mics if I don't feel like taking my whole kit along with me that day.

The Tascam DR-100mkII is a cheaper option than the D50 and should work fine with this setup if you just want to use it as a bit bucket for your USBPre2. I tried it with a friend's DR100mkII and worked fine that way. Not a problem that I could spot.

Only drawback is that the DR100mkII shares the remote input with the S/PDIF input, i.e. you can only use one of them at a time.
For me that was a deal breaker. I want to be able to throw the recorder into my bag and activate the recording with the remote.

But if that's not a problem for you, the DR100 will be a cheap and very workable solution. Just get an USB battery for your USPre2 and you're good to go.

Cheers!

André Toscano
Old 7th November 2012
  #28
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Toscano View Post
Hi Dave.

I ended up buying a Sony recorder (model PCM-D50) because I also wanted a recorder with good built-in stereo mics, and the D50's were the clearest and best I heard on a recorder so far. That way I have a good quality recorder with good built-in mics if I don't feel like taking my whole kit along with me that day.

André Toscano
How good is the A/D converter on the PCM-D50 (compared to the SD)?
Old 7th November 2012
  #29
Gear interested
 

André that's brilliant thanks a mill. Gonna check out the PCM-D50 too!

All the best!
Dave
Old 7th November 2012
  #30
Gear Head
 

I have this Busman Audio stereo mic. It is great, and very versatile. the top capsule rotates, so a wide range of stereo techniques are possible Also the capsules can both be switched from cardoid, to figure eight to omni.

It sounds GREAT. I also have the Rode. It sounds good too. But not as good as the Busman. Of course, the Busman is much larger.

You can also find this same basic mic badged under a variety of manufactuers. But Busman does some mods that improve the thing.

Comes in a very nice case. And it is very versatile. If i could only have one mic, this might be it.

http://www.busmanaudio.com/bscs_l.html


And he has it on sale. . .
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
colinhart / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
7
Sticky Shed / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
23
sea-speak / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
0
drumzealot / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
11
caliban / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
8

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.