King Ghidora

The Rode Video Mic mentioned has an excellent reputation and is a shotgun mic. If it's actual sounds from a particular source a shotgun can be a good choice. If it's true ambience that you want then your recordings will include all those things in the area (A440 you really need to get out of town some : ). The Rode VM can be bought for $119 from Jack's music factory but it is made to be mounted to a camera. It can be mounted to a mic stand also but it's a rather odd shape. Still for the money it's a hard mic to beat. I'd also suggest the Nady CM-2S. It's a single point stereo cardoid condensor. It also sells for $119 though I've heard of people getting it much cheaper on eBay recently. It's a bigger mic than the Sony ECM-MS907 but it isn't huge or anything. It's a very sensitive mic and it is full range. It's similar in design to the AT822. In fact many people thought it was an AT822 clone when it first came out. It is a decent mic at a decent price. If you want to get very cheap you might go with a Giant Squid omni. It's a lavalier mic but for $25 it's an excellent deal on a good sounding mic. If you want a small lavalier that is super sensitive and also is priced under $30 you might look for an Aiwa CM-S20. They're getting very hard to find now but they are super sensitive and fairly accurate. I knew where to find them up until I checked today but I can't seem to find anywhere to order one riht now. You really should give us a price range to go by. There are many mics available and the prices range a great deal.

I remember reading some stuff from the board before I joined about 4 years ago. I didn't even know it had been around so long when I joined. I was one of the first 800 to join with my current name but I had another before that which I don't even remember.

You didn't mention a price range but I'll assume you're on a budget. You might try either a AT Pro24 or a Sony ECM-MS907. People say the AT is actually better but I know the stereo imaging is great on the Sony (I have one of them). Both are relatively small. Neither has great bass response but that usually isn't a big problem for recordings of the type you refer to. The Sony is particularly good with voice (which is not true of all single point stereo mics) because of the M/S design of the capsules. You would probably be happy with either mic. There are lots of other mics of course but these are popular choices for someone who doesn't want to spend a lot of money. The Sony is around $75 and the AT is slightly cheaper I think.

Looks genuinely awesome especially with the surround sound capability from a M/S mic setup. I'm a big fan of M/S setups anyway but to extend their ability to record 5.1 is almost miracle stuff. The only thing that puzzled me was the battery consumption. 2 AA's only last 4 hours on a machine with no moving parts??? That seems pretty strange. Maybe it's one of those gizmos that work much better with NIMH batteries. I freaked even more when I saw the price listed for this whizbang gizmo. $200 for this??? Wow! For a video oriented guy like me this thing is just begging to be scarfed up. Wow! You might be right about this being the MD killer Mr. Wizard. When battery life is the only thing that looks worrisome then they have done a lot of things right. Hang on to your MD's boys because Samson has come to town. Number one with a bullet if you ask me.

Recording to the line in jack is great if your signal is strong enough but if it isn't then you will need to record to the mic in jack or as A440 suggests perhaps a battery box does improve self powered mics enough so that you could use them with a line in jack. But if you're forced to go with the mic in jack and the signal is too strong for the pre-amps then you'll need to attenuate the signal somehow. There are of course cables designed for a specific amount of attenuation but an IVC can vary the strength of the signal. They come with problems of their own including the fact they usually aren't very durable and they pick up dirt in the pot all too easy resulting in noise. Plus there's the chance you'll accidentally make an adjustment without even knowing about it while recording. There are good and bad points for the IVC's and for attenuators.

I've only ever had one MD go bad and it was a cheap looking purple disc that I got when I bought my HIMD used. It caused some problems for me and the seller apparently. I haven't had a problem since I got rid of that one disc. I was so used to believing that MD's didn't quit that I didn't even try switching discs for a while. When I did switch the problem cleared up. Still I've had MD's a long time and I've only had one go bad and I have quite a few of the cheap ones that came with my HIMD too. None of them have gone bad yet that I know about. I've recorded on the same discs many times too. I just haven't had any problems at all in this area.

The CM-2S is a very sensitive mic too. It has a high spl rating meaning it is capable of recording really loud stuff but a lot of recorders can't handle a signal that loud. Are you sure that a self powered mic like the Nady will benefit from a battery box A440? I was under the impression it was only "plug in" powered mics that benefit from a battery box. I thought self powered mics already had a strong enough current to power them for loud sources. I have used my Nady plugged into the line in jack on my NHF800. It seems to have enough of an output to run that way. I'm sure a 9 volt power supply would be better than the volts the Nady gets from the AA battery that it uses but I believe there is circuitry to prevent a self powered mic from using power that comes in through the cable. I think I heard this in reference to the AT822 but I would assume other self powered mics would operate the same way. I have always understood it to be the case that a battery box was mainly to power the mic so that it wouldn't brick wall when faced with a sound signal that it didn't have enough power to move the diaphragm enough to handle properly. To avoid overloading the pre-amp you need to reduce the signal between the mic and the recorder. That's how I understand things. You can use an inline volume control to reduce the signal between the mic and the recorder. It's a cheap fix to the problem of an overloaded pre-amp. In truth you are reducing your signal to noise ratio but with a concert level sound source no one will notice the s/n ratio is lower than it could be. There are other potential problems though like accidentally adjusting the ivc while you're recording resulting in either an overload and clipping or a signal that's too low. The good side is you can make adjustments while recording. But I wouldn't want to use an IVC while recording sounds that aren't so loud. The Nady is rated to handle around 130db I believe. That's very loud. It's the pre-amp that you need to worry about overloading and you can prevent that with an IVC.

Exactly right. IMO to get a better pre-amp than the ones in MD recorders you're going to end up spending almost as much as you paid for the MD itself. You'd be better off selling your MD and getting single device that had better pre's. You wouldn't be stuck with carrying 2 devices with you and worrying about power to them and you could likely get more features to go along with the better pre's. A pro level recorder comes to mind with multi-track recording and possibly sound effects (if you want such things). For a pocket size recorder it will be very hard to beat the quality of the pre's in MD. I'm sure they're some out there that will improve the quality of your MD recordings but they won't be pocket size and they won't be cheap. I still would like to have better pre's if I could get them but I have been looking for quite a while and nothing has popped up in my budget range so far. From what I understand the XLR-Pro mixer has good pre-amps but they probably aren't that much better than MD pre's and you're looking at $150 for a dual channel unit (for stereo) and not that much of an improvement. A single channel version is about $110 I think. It just doesn't seem worth it to me. I'm not even sure it would be an advantage. I'm just repeating stuff I've seen posted. I have read the Sound Devices MP-1 portable pre-amp is really good but it costs $300 and it sure won't fit in a pocket and it's a single channel deal (no stereo with this). I've read the Rane MS 1b is pretty good for $150 but it's XLR only so you would need an adapter to use it with a miniplug mic. Of course XLR mics are better and the Rane provides phantom power so you might go with a better mic. It's also a mono device though. There's likely a lot of stuff on this level available but to get stereo and actually be portable (pocket size is almost out of the question) and in the price range you mention is a tall order. I think greenmachine is right on track with his suggestion that mic placement means a LOT to good quality sound. But again if anyone can find a pre-amp in the range you mention I'd like one too. I can't seem to find one to fit the bill. One other thing. If you're looking for less noise in your recordings then likely as not your mic is creating more of it than your pre-amp. You might want to consider getting a high quality mic. You should be able to find a super low noise mic for under $150 and if you match it up with high quality cables you have half the battle against noise won. I also might suggest that you ask the same question on the Tapers Section board or on the Home Recording board. If they come up with anything even close to your price please let us know.

The whole point of getting a separate pre-amp is to improve the quality of your sound. I wouldn't try to go too cheap or you could end up with no much improvement at all over the pre-amps in the HIMD units. No doubt a real quality pre can make a world of difference and I've been thinking of getting one myself just for the music I record. But I wouldn't spend $100 to get a slight improvement when I could spend $150-$200 and get a big improvement.

If someone dug him up maybe. I don't think he can hear things in this world too well where he's at.

Yeah metal heads think their music takes talent to play and it does to do it really well. But a really good bluegrass picker is actually playing stuff that is much more complicated to play. It just doesn't have the bells and whistles. I like both if they're done well. Nickel Creek is really good. My brother's brother in law (Ned Crisp) has a band that ships a lot of bluegrass CD's to Japan believe it or not. Bluegrass has quite a following there. The name of his band is Bottom Line. That isn't the band I work with though I'm thinking about pitching a video project to them. The band I work with used to be called Kentucky Blue. Another band stole their name after they broke up back in the early 1980's obviously to capitalize on the success they had already achieved. The second band wasn't nearly as good as the original but they were more dedicated to actually producing albums and they had a few bluegrass hits. I sent their manager a news clipping of the original band dated before their band ever formed but of course he wouldn't acknowledge that he had ever heard of them. Yeah right. He wasn't listening to the biggest bluegrass show in 3 states hearing their stuff being played all the time. But we just do this for our own enjoyment really. I do play the guitar but not nearly as well as I play keyboards so I pretty much stick to recording. Keyboards and bluegrass don't mix so well. I've been listening to America's Bluegrass Band recently. I love the stuff they do. It's a band that was just put together for one CD. Don Rigsby, Melvin Goins and Ernie Thacker are in it. They play the songs I remember my dad singing when he was in a bluegrass gospel group about 45 years ago. I guess I live right in the middle of bluegrass country. I've loved it since I can remember even when almost everyone thought it was old hat including my parent's generation. They mostly listened to honky tonk country after the early 60's when they thought rock and roll became too out there. But there was a guy that played it extremely well that I knew and he would always play it at those beer bashes even though it seemed like I was the only one that really wanted to hear it. Later on people treated that guy like a legend. The local university made him a cultural icon for our region and for good reason IMO. I'm still good friends with his kids one of which played with Bobby Bare for many years. You can hear a couple of samples of the sessions I record here and here. You might want to keep in mind that these were practice sessions and I didn't try to push the signal as high as I could have because I wasn't after a perfect recording. I just wanted something they could use to practice with at home so I didn't want any distortion from recording too hot. We have been getting the signal hotter lately because they're starting to want something to keep. They play more of a new grass type music. They called it acid grass at one time (I know that's not an original term). I like the stuff they do and I like the traditional stuff too.

Thanks for the compliment Guitarfxr. I guess I've been around this sort of thing all my life. So I would have to be pretty stupid not to have learned something along the way. I was close to a lot of musicians playing everything from garage band rock to roadhouse rock to gospel to c&w to bluegrass to r&b to jazz and even some marching band stuff. It was important to the people I grew up with and their parents too. Some of the most talented musicians I've ever heard played at the 3 day beer bash and frog leg fry scene I went to about 500 times as a kid. Plus my mother ran a roadhouse where a lot of bands played at one time. And I was in a garage band or two for a while myself. But usually I was the sound guy for most of my friends. I still do it I guess. I even turned down an offer to run a recording studio for a promoter who was booking bands in Vegas and Atlantic City back in the early 80's. Those bands were the right on the verge of making it type bands. But I had other things I was doing so I turned it down. Plus I was involved in the sound setup for a local church that brought in some really good bands all the time. Some of those people went on to the big time in fact. Because it was a church they let me record their stuff because they thought they could trust me when I said I wouldn't try to profit from it in any way. It was all about making tapes for people who couldn't make it to church. So yeah I've been around it a lot in my life but I've never really done anything big. I did help record a bluegrass band that was being played a lot on the local radio station and could have went on tour if they had chosen to do it. I was their sound guy when they played live too. That's about as close as I got to getting to do something big I guess. I still work with that band in fact but they aren't nearly as serious about it now. None of this is a replacement for the kind of training and experience you've had though. I'm basically just a roadie type of a guy who learned by wiring things up myself. If I die my wife will never even be able to turn on the stereo in my house if you know what I mean.

An EQ for a home stereo or a car stereo is for correcting flaws in the speakers or speaker placement IMO. An EQ used in recording is very, very different. You're trying to capture the exact sound that you want even if it's from an acoustic instrument. It's been my experience that you cause a lot more problems than you solve by using EQ in the recording process. Mic placement is much more important IMO. It's a real challenge to make an acoustic instrument sound more realistic by using an electronic amplifier (which is essentially what an EQ does though it only amplifies at line level). It's very easy to introduce artifacts into your recording by doing this. I do occasionally try to use an EQ while working with stuff that I've recorded but it's almost always while mastering and not while recording. If you don't have the right equipment to get the correct sound when you record your chances of fixing it by using a EQ are almost nil. When I try to use EQ in mastering it's more about getting the right blend of sounds and it's practically always a cut of the signal instead of a boost and then it's always very small adjustments. If I did more multi-track recording I would consider using an EQ more in mastering but it would still be small adjustments. Mixing for a live band is of course a totally different thing and again this is more about getting a smooth and proper sound level for the different instruments, compensating for bad acoustics, speaker flaws, and at times to keep less talented band members from dominating the sound (oops I hope none of my friends read this ). You're sculpting the sound in this situation and you don't have a bunch of tries to get it right. It takes considerable practice to even come close to getting it right IMO. It takes a knowledge of what the music should sound like and how to get it to sound that way. It varies a lot from one type of music to another. In the end mixing a live setup will definitely affect the end product if you happen to be recording that event. But I consider that recording what the audience is supposed to hear. IMO that's what recording a live event should be about. I have heard recordings where talented people record tracks to add to a live recording that had flaws. Sometimes this works but usually it's very noticeable what was done. A very good example of this would be Badfinger's "Live -Day By Day" where a percussion track was added because it just didn't show up well on the original plus the bass was altered at times I believe and some background vocals were added. Someone knew what they were doing when they put all that together because they had to mask the original percussion and bass tracks to make it work. I'm not that talented personally so I would never even try something that ambitious but it certainly worked for them.

Yeah but actually I had a DirecPC dish that I used for about 8 years before this. I started out on AOL's satellite service but they sold out to DirecPC and they sold out to HughesNet. AOL service was great for about 3 years. No download restrictions of any kind and speeds between 2-3mbps. DirecPC or DirecWay as it became known was super for a while too. I got speeds between 5-6mbps which was awesome but there were some download restrictions. I could download about 150 meg in 10 minutes or so but then the speed dropped to dialup speed. It took about 8 hours to get completely back up to top speed gradually. Hughes took over and things were already headed downhill. By the time I dropped the service I couldn't get dialup speeds except late at night. I'm setting up a SkyFX system right now. It's been nothing but headaches so far. The old HughesNet software conflicted with it so I ended up reformating. And I still can't get the dish pointed. I've pointed a dish 25 times or more but I can't get this one. Something's wrong and the company won't even answer the phone right now. They rolled out a new setup and they've had a ton of problems with it. Maybe someday soon I'll get it up and running.

I'm glad to be back from computer banishment land. I've been trying to get a new satellite internet setup going and I ended up doing the whole reformat thing. So I'm way behind on everything right now. I hope to get to read this soon. Maybe I'll learn just how out of touch I really am. I downloaded a copy and am looking forward to checking it out. Thanks for posting it.

If you're using the battery module with that mic then it's rated at 120db SPL. Without the module it drops down to 105db. So either way the Nady exceeds the ratings on the SP-CMC-19. Ratings don't always tell the story because companies measure things differently but in this case I'd say you could record events at least as loud as those you could record with the SP-CMC-19.

I paid $115 US for a used NHF800 with a lot of discs a while back but since then the price has gone up on new and used HIMD models. Because they are becoming more scarce as old stock selling on eBay people are willing to pay more to make sure they get one before they're all gone. My guess is you should expect to pay $150 or more for a used first gen HIMD. But you might get lucky and find one cheaper. I believe the place in Londond that has been selling old stock first gen units is still selling a few . I think they go for around $160-$175 US but they only sell to verified eBay account holders. It's easy enough to get verified I suppose if you're willing to give access to your bank account to eBay. Personally I would never do that.

I believe he's on the Taper's Section board pretty much every day if you want to ask questions about his stuff. There are a lot of people that know his equipment there too and most of them have good things to say about what he sells. He doesn't do a tremendous amount of business but he is serious about pushing his products. My guess is that you would get quality stuff from him based on what I've read on that board and on others. I do remember some kind of running flame he had going with someone but that seems to be par for the course at that board. That's why you won't find me there any more. My suggestion would be to do a search of old posts there about his stuff. You would be more likely to get the whole picture doing it that way instead of just coming out and asking about it.

I haven't actually used mine to record anything really loud yet but they have a high SPL rating. It's not the 140dB rating of the Sennheiser mentioned (and believe it or not I've probably been to a few rock concerts that approached that level - not any more though - that's serious hearing loss level and no one goes there anymore). According to the manual the Nady is rated at 128db SPL which is still way louder than anything any of us should be listening to. We're talking an F-22 taking off with you standing right next to it at that level. Most rock concerts don't exceed 120db these days. It was back in the 1970's when sound levels were just stupidly high at times. I guarantee ZZ Top hit 140db when I saw them in Lexington, KY at the old Memorial Coliseum back in 1975. You feel actual pain at 140db. About the only thing that I know of that would hit 140db these days would be a gunshot and of course that just lasts a fraction of a second. Maybe there are still some home stereos and car stereos that reach that level because of being in an enclosed space I guess. But 128db should be plenty high enough for anything you want to record. 128db SPL is very, very loud.

It sounds like the board you're posting to is in CYA mode to the max. Maybe they have reason to worry. Maybe they've had problems before. I believe I would post my stuff somewhere else and post links to it on the board. They might be ok with that since they wouldn't be hosting it. I keep my own web page which I basically just use to post junk so others can have access to it. It doesn't cost that much to do and eventually you might decide to use the board for something more constructive. I actually plan on setting up my board to promote my business eventually but it's really not important to me at this point to do that. So I just pay a few bucks a month essentially so I can put up what I want without having to answer to anyone. I don't post copyrighted stuff of course. People who do that get caught anyway but I have no desire to do it. I'm basically posting my own recordings.

Yeah I like that there are no political battles on this board. Many of the audio boards are much more about politics than they are audio. It's hard to sift through the baloney to find anything useful. This board is MUCH better because that doesn't happen here.

I really want to check out the audio track you have linked but my life has been way too hectic lately. I just got a new satellite system so I should be back on broadband soon. It's been one giant headache getting it up and running so far though. The last time I did this (set up a satellite internet dish) it took about an hour. I'm well into my 2nd week this time. Hopefully I'll be able to download tracks in a hurry sometime soon. Your track is one of the things I look forward to hearig soon. But for now I'm having to work on getting this thing setup and working. I've always been partial to Yamaha stuff. Every one of my keyboards is a Yamaha plus my guitar is too I guess. It's not the best stuff in the world but it's solid quality and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg. One of my keyboards is at least 25 years old and it's just now starting to have some problems (plastic in the keys has deteriorated). IMO that's pretty good for what was a budget synthesiser and it has taken many years of abuse. I learned to play on that keyboard come to think of it I had not seen that Yamaha was even making such devices as the sound interface for a computer / mixing board. I'll be looking hard at this setup.

It is a much better way to go to use a USB interface for a computer to record multitracks instead of using a Poratstudio type device. Having everything in one box like you do with a Portastudio is just asking for it I guess. If one thing breaks you scrap the whole system. I have a decent laptop to take with me on the mobile jobs I do but my son has pretty much confiscated it for college. He just finished his last quarter though so maybe I can get it back soon. There are a couple of issues with using a laptop or even a desktop like fan noise but that shouldn't be a big problem with close micing. I've thought many times about going this route but I'd still like the opportunity to do some stealth recording at times so one of the flash based Portastudio type recorders has looked appealaing to me. But I suppose I have the HIMD for that. One thing I need to think about is whether the guys in the band can pick up on using whatever we get. You know how it is with people who are novices at using computer related stuff. But still overall the best way to go is what you described. I think I'll probably end up getting a good pre-amp for the near future anyway. We've aleady worked out most of the problems of using a single point stereo mic and it would be a big benefit for all the other recording I do. Thanks for the help.

The DP01 looks like it has a lot of features for the money but it only records 2 tracks at once. I really need at least 4 simultaneous tracks for the band I'm working with. Using a single point stereo mic is ok for practice sessions but there's some interest in doing some more serious stuff without spending a fortune on a home studio setup. These guys have been down the popular band road and they're past it I guess. They just like to make music now. About 25 years ago they were all over the radio and we're in huge demand to play live but they gave all that up long ago. Anyway now they just want to make some CD's to share with family and friends without spending a lot of cash on it. It could well be that no one will want to cough up the money to do better than what we're doing now. It just isn't a high priority for them or me I guess but a budget level multitrack recorder might be a possibility in the near future depending onw how things go with the band. A former member has recently rejoined the band and the level of interest has been picking up.

Mixers are great but multitracks are better IMO. You have to get the mix just right when you record with a mixer. There's no opportunity to fiddle with the knobs (digital tracks actually) when you get home and load it on the computer. Plus you can easily add more tracks later too. You can be a one man band if you want to. It's possible to do this with a computer but not nearly as easy as a multitrack field recorder. Balancing different instruments is hard enough when you can try it over and over until you get it right. Trying to do it on the fly and get it just right is much tougher. I'm not saying that mixers have no purpose. They surely do. but trying to essentially master music on the fly is tough to do unless you are familar with exactly what to expect from a band. If you're trying to record a band you aren't familar with on the fly you just aren't going to get the best results. You at least have a chance with a mulitple track recorder. I've always seen mixers as a device that has to be there for live music and a great asset if you only have a two track (stereo) recorder. But given my druthers I would take a multitrack setup 10 to 1 over a mixer. I actually use a stereo recorder to record live music quite often. A good HIMD has it's place in this world. But for serious recording there's nothing like a multi track. If it didn't mean investing in a whole new set of mics I'd be trying to go that direction My main concerns are recording audio for video and the occasionaly stealth recording and having a recorder decent enough to help out the band work on their material. We've been talking about getting a multi-track setup with close micing but we haven't made any moves in that direction yet. Besides it's possible to get a decent recording of a bluegrass band with a single point stereo mic. It just takes some work on instrument placement etc..