What Mic On The New Mz-rh10 ?

[superiorinferior]

Hi Minidiscers!

This is my first post here, and have been drawing much useful information from it.

One of the first pieces of info I have gleaned from here is all the hype about the new MZ-RH10 coming out.

I have never owned a MiniDisc, but feel that this model will be the one that pushes me to do it.

I am a musician/podcaster/talker and will be using my new MD accordingly... I will probably be recording most gigs via a mixing console... so that is not relevant to this question.

What I would like to know is what is a good all-round (stereo) mic for MD "field recording" (i.e.: soundscapes, sound effects like city streets, nature etc) of natural sounds and then also good to use as a vocal mic for talking/ audio journal for my podcasts?

Also, as I have been looking thru the HUGE PILE of stereo mics out there, some manufacturers recommend battery powered mics for MDs that don't have "mic power" fed to the microphones...

Do I need to have a powered mic for the MZ-RH10 ? I have been interested in the stereo lavalier mics featured on these pages: Reactive Sounds.

Argh.

So much information!

I have perused these pages for hours now, but cannot find a good FAQ on mics for the newer models.. apologies if I have missed them somehow.

Thanks!

SI

[A440]

Since the newest models aren't out yet, no one has been able to try them.

But unless they have radically improved the mic pre-amp, the older advice holds.

The mic jacks all have plug-in power so you don't need a battery module unless you are recording such loud sounds--Slipknot from the front row, jet takeoffs--that you're worried about the mic overloading. That doesn't seem to apply to you.

If you're recording quiet sounds and want the lowest possible background noise, get a separate pre-amp (different and more expensive than a battery module, though most pre-amps now throw in a battery module as well) and run through line-in. But try the mics by themselves before you make the investment. Even the current built-in pre-amps are pretty decent for anything but loud, bassy music. It would be fantastic if the newer preamps were better, but I'm not holding my breath.

Just about any mic is good for talking, since your voice has a much narrower frequency spectrum than music or real-world sounds.

For ambient field recordings, you want omnidirectional or binaural mics (the terms are used interchangeably) picking up 20-20,000 Hz like your ears to record sounds from all around you in the most natural-sounding way. (Cardioids, the other choice, are directional and sometimes sound like it, a sort of "backless" effect.) Look at S/N (signal to noise) ratio specs for the highest negative number if you want the quietest mics, but the standard ones are -58 to -62 and they are just fine.

Don't know which mic you mean by lavalier mic on the Reactive website.

How enveloping do you want your ambient recordings to be? If you get a pair of stereo mics (like Reactive's Auris or similar binaural mics from Sound Professionals, Microphone Madness, Core-Sound, etc.) and separate them like your ears, rather than a one-point stereo mic, you will get a much more realistic sense of space in the recording. You can always clip them together if you want to talk into them.

Don't get one of those mics without a cord that sits on the recorder--it will pick up the machine noise.

[superiorinferior]

Don't know which mic you mean by lavalier mic on the Reactive website.

WOW!

Fast and lengthy reply!

Sorry, I meant this one by Reactive. And by using it I thought that one of the mics could take care of the ambient (while talking) and the other could be for my voice... so no "backless" sound... Their demo sounds quite ok!

At one time I borrowed a friend's 1st gen MD and tried recording (speech and ambient train sounds from inside a train) with a Shure SM58 and had a hard time getting good levels.... Now that I am getting the new model, I want to get the right mic for it.

Thanks a load!

Edited March 5, 2005 by superiorinferior

[dex Otaku]

I'll counterpoint to A440's recommendation on this one in, sticking with my usual:

For general-purpose recording in both stereo and mono, I find a decent M/S stereo or single-point stereo [whether M/S or coincident-Y] mic to be more versatile and generally tougher than omnis [or badly misnamed 'binaurals'].

I find that mics with switchable patterns or that are made with cardioid elements tend to be better in situations where ambience can quickly get out of control with omnidirectional mics - i.e. street recordings, in aircraft, buses, trains, and anywhere that the background/ambient level is fairly loud and continuous [anywhere outdoors fits this bill], or at least loud enough to compete with the actual desired source.

M/S stereo mics are also more useful for close-mic'ing sources for things like sound effects, or even just capturing a single voice, as the independent M mic element [you get stereo from an M/S mic using matrixing techniques much like how Dolby Surround works] means you have a dedicated "forward-looking" mono signal with no worries of phasing or cancellation if you do a mono mixdown.

Single-point stereo mics are also more consistent in their sound [as the pattern is generally fixed or with a switchable 'width' angle], not to mention being made to record for speaker playback. True binaural mics [which face outward from each other to the each side, rather than forward in-phase at the source] provide an end-signal which is not truly suited for speaker playback, since they are actually intended for headphone listening.

That said, split omnis are also very versatile, but less forgiving [soundwise] under certain circumstances. Omnis like the Auris series are no different than the majority of decent lapel mics except in their cabling. Used intelligently, clip-on omnis can be called to duty for everything from stealth stereo recordings to sound effects/foley recording, interviewing [with a mic for the 'viewer and 'viewee] and so on.

Depending on how you view things, the ability to arrange split omnis separately may be an advantage or disadvantage. For example, if you're wanting to balance ambience with speech, such a dual-mono [i.e. mic'ing two distinct sources as L and R channels, not one stereo source] setup with mics like the Auris should work well.

If you need stereo ambience -and- intelligible speech, do what filmies do - record your ambience in stereo, separate from the speech, -then- record your dialogue/interview/whatever. And, of course, mix them later with your editing software.

I'm split with many things on whether paired omnis or a single-point mic is better, to be honest. I find it depends on what you're using it for - and fairly often, the final determining factor for MD recordists tends to be stealth; if stealth will most likely be your concern, stereo omnis are definitely the better choice.

For overall versatility, especially if you're to be recording tracks such as dialogue or sound effects that will be mixed in editing later, I'd suggest a single point stereo mic with preferences going to the M/S variety. [The Sony ECM-MS907 is one such mic, though I do not recommend it heartily as better mics can be found for less money.] Unfortunately I can't recommend any specific models as M/S mics seem to be becoming harder and harder to find as inexpensive stealth omnis become more popular.

See: Single point stereo mics [on soundprofessionals.com]

See also: MS stereo basics [from Sound Devices]

[Christopher]

I would definitely go with Reactive..the delta mic they make is really stunning at times. I was asked once why I don't advertise Sound Professionals, as it'd be seemingly a more logical choice then some little company in Canada. The reason is because their mics are really great in construction, presentation, quality and so forth. I look forward to buying the aforementioned Auri very soon as well.