Hello,
I apologise in advance if there is a specific thread that consider this question.
I am looking for a very portable, very simple, and very cheap recording system. I've always been curious by sounds and would like to have a situation where I could start collecting my own instead of only being reliant on stock CDs or SoundBanks. If nothing else, it might prove particularly useful in the long run for scoring for film soundtracks.
Now I've been told one can usually only get two out of three of something (à la Meatloaf) so here's my priroities.
- very cheap - max 300 bucks?
- very portable (ideally I'm thinking to the outside viewer that it could appear like a walkman where the microphones look like walkman earbuds (that's why I was thinking binaural, but I don't know how transferable binaural is to regular sound compositions)
- very simple - I'll take 24 bits over 16, and 96 khz over something less, but these things matter very little to how simple the device to use is. If I'm constantly fiddling with levels to make sure I'm not getting any overs, then the device is of limited use to me. Often one has less than 30 seconds from the moment one finds the sound, to recording it and moving on. In this case, I would even take mono recording over stereo if it meant easy usability.

I'll be transferring the sounds afterwards digitally to my DAW (which is in the process of being worked on)

I can add details wherever needed. Any ideas?
Thanks in advance,
Jon

I just purchased a zoom H4 for the reasons you stated above...

I have seen microphones for binaural recording like you were talking about - these were in-ear mics that looked basically like a walkman's earbuds. I saw some at AES last year that sounded really nice, but I don't know the price point. Check out the forums at www.taperssection.com and look for threads on "stealth recording" - a lot of people over there do exactly what you are talking about.

Cheers,
-Mike

Not everything may apply, but I do have some advice pages that treat similar desires. They're mostly up-to-date with the exception that I haven't added the most recent information about the Edirol R-09 and Zoom.

http://www.quietamerican.org/links.html

My feelings about HiMD in particular may not apply if you will for the forseeable future be recording out of a home base, rather than in the bush/on the road... but nonetheless it is a great match for most binaural-style mics.

Fwiw I just an hour ago read that Rip Lyttle has been having good results with his R-09 using the same Sonic Studios (binaural-like) mics/pre that I use, so it might be a good match. I may well get one though I've heard several first-hand accounts now of build quality problems (in particular the mic input failing within the first few months of use).

best regards,
aaron

quietamerican.org
oneminutevacation.org

I often serve as the middleman for some american expats living iN Europe who do not have the benefit of USPS shipping, and of course I always check everything out extensively before I Send it on to my friends..I had the extreme pleasure of using the R-09 back in May, and was really impressed with how simple it was to handle ,sound quality, and ergonomics. That is a very wise choice...One thing...I suggest using www.soundprofessionals.com instead of sonic studios.They have a number of lav mic and portable solutions designed solely for the purpose that you are describing.....SP are real pros in the business and always look after customers like nobodys business. Talk to Chris..hell hook you right up.

WADR, I would personally only go with the SP gear if price is a strong factor.

Sonic Studios gear is definitely more expensive piece for piece but I must say the build and sonic quality exceed all other options I've tried. I currently own, oh, ten different lav/binaural style microphones ranging from $20 Radioshack stereo lavs (no longer available) to DPA 4061-based Core Sound HEBs; I always choose my DSM-6S/EH's in a WHB (better with the matched $1k preamp) for ease of use and overall quality.

Caveat: their noise floor cannot compare to non-electret "real" mics, but in all other respects they're my favorites for ultraportable recording. The DPAs are somewhat quieter (indeed as are Shure WL183 home-brews which you might consider, at $170 a pair they're a steal for the quality) but Leonard does something when he modifies or rehouses the Panasonic capsules in the DSMs that stands them out.

YMMV of course. For sample recordings made with the DSMs and consumer MD poke around my site. Eg this hidden page:

http://quietamerican.org/surf.html

aaron

quietamerican.org
oneminutevacation.org

Well, I must admit too that part of my disdain for SS is due to the fact that Leonard makes a habit of pushing his products on TS.com to the point of near nausea, and often offending many members in the process.

Heh!

You know I've never frequented any forums where he's active, I'll have to check that out!

aaron

quietamerican.org
oneminutevacation.org

Thanks for the feedback so far. The quote underneath contained some terms that are unfamiliar to me.
- lav
- stereo lavs
- DPA
- WHB
- YMMV
- DSMs and consumer MD - (minidisc?)

Maybe my question has already been answered and I don't realise it, but is there something like the size of an iPod which could record very good quality with earbud type microphones? I checked out the ZOOM, and my only hesitation was that the recorder looked fairly chunky. I could be wrong about that. I've read a little on the tapers site, but need to read some more.

I listened to those recordings of the surf on quietamerican and that was easily excellent sound quality in my books! Could you explain a little better how that was done?

Here's the quote "All of the following were made with Sonic Studios DSM-6/EH quasi-binaural microphones, mounted in a windscreen headband, to consumer MD recorders. The Lake Michigan recording was made using a Sonic Studios miniature outboard preamp as well."

So what's the windscreen headband? Quasi-binaural? The Lake michigan sounded the best so how big was this outboard preamp?

Final question for now - QuietAmerican, have you ever read R. Murray Schafer's The Soundscape? You might like it.

Jon

[stereo] lav: lavalier microphone, a small element/body microphone typically attached to talent or an interviewee. As these are often small omnis they are commonly repurposed to make binaural and binaural-like stereo pairs.

DPA: Respected microphone manufacturer, cf http://www.dpamicrophones.com/

WHB: Sonic Studios product name for their proprietary mounting "Windscreen/Headband." I *always* use their mics in one. Looks like old-school headphones, very compact and discrete.

YMMV: common online slang, Your Mileage May Vary. I.e. I recognize that this isa subjective area and your experience may be different depending on your needs/tastes/etc.

DSMs: Sonic Studios product name for their mics.

consumer MD: consumer minidisc as opposed to the HHb professional deck.

There are many such options, the ZOOM is relatively new and untried. Competitors in the same size/price/quality range to consider are Sony HiMD decks, the Microtrack 2496, and the Edirol R-09. In addition to the Zoom, Korg is now pre-advertising a DSD-based portable.

Personally I remain an advocate of HiMD, for reasons you can read in my links/resources section.

For instant ease-of-use you may find the R-09 (say) to be a very good bet.

Those recordings were made the same way the other recordings on my site (see the field recordings pages for example), using DSM mics and consumer minidisc recorders -- not even using HiMD, which has additional benefits such as uncompressed PCM recording and very quiet preamps: with HiMD the quality would be yet better.

The mics are worn in the WHB headband on my head -- see sonicstudios.com for pictures, if you can find them. They are also shown on my site in my links/resources pages on mic selection.

The beauty of this recording technique (binaural or near-) is that it's quite idiot proof. If you set your levels correctly to avoid clipping and to get enough signal, what you hear is what you get, to the limits of your equipment. I don't even monitor (listen with headphones as I record).

There are many limitations to such recording (the kind of questions that are commonly debated in this forum are evidence of I would say two exponential degrees more care and concern for the nuances that make and break professional recordings) but for my purposes I find them mostly acceptable.

For one thing, to record the surf as you hear it I had to get myself (my head and mics) into some potentially uncomfortable positions and then be quiet and motionless. I actively enjoy -- love -- such challenges but they are not for everyone. One alternative is to use an artificial head (Sonic Studios sells one for example) that can be boom/tripod mounted and to have tea at a warm distance while a recording is made.

The preamp is probably not the determining factor if you like that recording better -- its benefits are quite subtle -- but it is very small, about as big as two or three stacked minidiscs, or big enough to hold say four AA batteries in a flat bunch.

For comparison see:

http://www.quietamerican.org/related_annapurna.html

All of the location recordings made in this piece were made with the DSM mics into consumer MD (not HiMD, predates it) without the preamp. The opening montage I think gives you a sense of the range of the mics [not to mention the limits of that kind of recording... ].

Naturally.

See my links/resources pages, I have a section on acoustic ecology and its relatives (and I'm a member of the WFAE)

best regards,
and good luck,

aaron

quietamerican.org
oneminutevacation.org

I feel like I've learned a lot in the last 48 hours on this subject - thanks a lot.

I looked at the R-09 and I don't think it's my bag.

I checked out this page

http://www.sonicstudios.com/access.htm

which appears to have a picture of the windscreen headphones. Below it are some earbuds that function as microphones, but they say they're not effective in windy conditions. That's a real shame, because boy that windscreen sure looks conspicuous.

I'm gonna read some more of the links on your site, as the one on the minidiscs was very helpful. (recorders, or why to use minidisc)

I gotta say that 16 bit or 24 bit is probably much less a concern than
- guaranteed no distortion (or virtually)
- no wind noise
- extremely easy to record without a lot of setup
- I prefer the earbuds to the microphone in a recorder because it would be less conspicuous, I wouldn't have to point the recorder at things on the street, for example. I could also imagine being able to just press record within my jacket while walking to capture a fire truck or cars passing, without having to pull out a recorder, point, etc. In those cases, one can see that the apparent extra "depth" of 24 bit is virtually meaningless compared to a nice tight recording without wind or distortion.

I'll do some more reading and listening on your site.

Jon

After doing some more reading on your site, I'm starting to think that a simple mono mic, or a mid-side mic which would go down to mono if need be, might be the simplest bet with a minidisc or flash recorder. (I haven't got to the point where I know the difference between the old school minidisc and the new HD) I say this because I don't have any experience with recording "on the field" and it might be easier to start off by limiting myself to inside sounds which I can focus on quite clearly.
- flicking a lighter
- door closing
- opening a window
etc, etc. Having said that, I might be wrong, and the stereo mics as inner ear buds might work just fine as well. The only hiccup with a mic is that I would probably have to hold it with one hand, which could be a real pain. I'll try and read the rest of your writings on quietamerican.
Jon