[bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts

  • From: "Lynnette" <superlynne@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 21:04:28 -0500

Here's the link.
http://www.soundprofessionals.com/cgi-bin/gold/item/SP-TFB-2

Lynnette
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Guerra" <sguerra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 8:26 PM
Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts


> Can anyone provide the binorral mics model number from sound professionals
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamie Pauls
> Sent: November 15, 2005 5:51 PM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
> I'd love that recording.
> jamiepauls@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Thanks.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 10:30 AM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
> Jamie, Michael Karino did an excerpt on one of Larry's podcasts using an
> Altech Lansing headset microphone combination model 302.  I liked them
> enough to go buy one.  It is a headphone that fits over the back of your
> head rather than over the top.  I frankly don't like the way it sits on my
> head, but the sound is about as good as you can get for such a price.  It
is
> surprisingly reasonably quiet, and because the microphone will be close to
> your mouth, you will be causing the actual noticeable noise of the mike to
> be a good deal less than the specs suggest.  I believe it was around $39
or
> even less at best buy.
>
> I believe I still have the recording of the 3 or 4 minute insert that he
did
> on the podcast.  I could send it to you if you like.  One thing to know if
> you want the file.  He refers to it as model 302I, but the I is normally
not
> listed in search engines and the one he and I both have we bought by
simply
> asking for the 302 model.
>
> Neal
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamie Pauls
> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 9:01 AM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
>
> If you listen to my DS-2 review, you will hear the hum that plagues me
using
> the free mic that came with an old computer. I recorded in Studio Recorder
> and normalized with Sound Forge. I think that may have been a bad
decision.
> I used to own a $16 headset mic from Wal-Mart that cut down on the hum
some.
> What would be a good, low-budget mic that could move me into some quieter
> recordings. I am plugging directly into the mic jack of my computer, not
> using a mixer. Thanks for all recommendations. BTW, I am needing this
> exclusively for speech.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 8:21 PM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
> Hello Bill, you said, "I don't mean to but in where I haven't been asked."
> Well, consider yourself asked.  After all, we're all friends here.
>
> My answer to you is that you use whatever mike or mikes you are happy
with.
> There are at least two things to consider.
>
> 1.  The sound quality of a mike is a very personal thing, just like the
> sound of speakers.  No two people may like the same speakers or mikes, but
> they are both right because what they want them for is for themselves and
> they are the only judge.  So if you have a noisy mike whose sound you
really
> like, you will find some situations to make it work.
>
> 2.  How much noise they are willing to tolerate is also important.
> Again, that is a personal thing and a budget consideration also.  The more
> noise you add to the signal, the less you will hear the inherent noise of
> the mike.  So, if you speak really loudly and are very close to the mike,
> you can get by with a rather noisy mike.  If you speak very softly as some
> of the narrators I record and if they are not right up on the mike, the
> signal relative to the noise of the mike will be much lower and the mike
> noise will be more audible.  Close miking a guitar would perhaps allow you
> to use a more noisy mike because again you are probably quite close to the
> sound source.  In any case, it's simply how much noise you want to hear.
I
> happen to prefer as quiet a mike as I can get.  That is, however, only one
> person's opinion and nothing anyone else has to strive for.  Just consider
> me a bit whacky when it comes to recording.  OK, just how whacky am I.  I
> have mikes that sell for well over $3000, but these are used to record
> professional CDs for symphony orchestras, choirs, and chamber groups in
very
> very quiet halls.  Now, you know just how whacky I am.  So, feel free to
> take what I say with a grain of salt.
>
> Neal
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Belew
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 6:43 PM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
>
> Hi Neal and Dan,
>
> I don't mean to but in where I haven't been asked, but it seems to me that
> you're both talking overkill for what is essentially voice quality
recording
> situations.  Do you really think that someone needs to spend $400 or $800
to
> get decent high quality voice recordings?
> I've got two Sony condenser mics that I've seen credited as being used
> extensively in recording studios for acoustic guitar and they cost $120 a
> piece.  I also have a single-point stereo mic that cost $85 that is a
little
> noisy, but more than adequate for very good voice recording.  I bought
both
> the lapel and binaural mics from Sound Professionals for $69 for each pair
> and they make very quiet clear recordings.
>
> Bill Belew
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neal Ewers
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 2:33 PM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Re: Microphones for podcasts
>
>
> Dan, comments in your message below marked with ***
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of The Scarlet
Wombat
> Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 3:50 PM
> To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bct] Microphones for podcasts
>
>
> Thanks Neal, that was informative.  I heard a very nice sounding Heil pr
>
> 40, but the s/n ratio is only 55 db, insufficient.  I know one can get
away
> with a minimal setup for podcasting, but I am working to make a living
from
> being a financial planner and I want my casts to be of as fine a quality
as
> I can produce without going to a studio.  The sd 722 may be overkill, but
> there does not seem to be much inbetween the Iriver kind of device and the
> 722.
>
> *** You're right about there not being much that is good in between.
> Of course, this will change, but if the new recorders are anything like
the
> Microtrack and all it's problems, well, we don't need to go there.
>
> As for microphones, I like the idea of the figure eight, though a cardioid
> might be fine as I do not need to hear myself, just the client responses.
> "They need to be clear, because some people mutter and I must hear numbers
> clearly enough to transcribe them later, so what might be thought of as
> transcription quality is insufficient.  I thought of the lapel mics, but
> that might intimidate people.  Is the quality of the boundary microphones
> good?  I've never heard one used, so have no comparison experience.
> *** The quality of boundary mikes can be good , but their signal to noise
is
> often not as good as other mikes.
>
> A microphone that could switch between a cardioid and figure 8 would meet
a
> couple of purposes, wonder if anything is available that I can afford.
> *** My guess is here that you're talking at least $800 for a multi
position
> mike.  AKG makes one in around that price range.  Actually, it is much
more,
> but I have a few good sources for getting deals.
> However, there is one scenario I left out.  One can get some rather nice
> single point stereo mikes for about $400  The Rode nt4 is one of the
better
> ones for that price and it is very quiet relative to its competition. Then
> there is also an Audio Technica AT-822 which is quite good.  Not quite as
> quiet as the Rode but its capsules are angled at 110 degrees instead of 90
> degrees giving one a bit more stereo separation. With either of these
mikes,
> you could either face the microphone toward your clients and pick them all
> up while still being able to hear yourself well enough even though you are
> behind the microphone. Or, you could face the mike so that one channel is
> picking you up while the other is picking up the clients.
>
>  I do not need the head mounted mic as my plans don't include discussing
>
> finance while dodging 18 wheelers.
> Larry has my admiration for being able to walk and dictate coherently at
>
> the same time. [grin]
> *** I agree about Larry, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear that he is
> driving the 18 wheeler.  but I wasn't suggesting you were going to be
> walking around.  I do know that some people who stand in front of a
> microphone and speak are surprised to find that the next time they come
back
> to the same position to continue the recording, they are just a little
> closer or further away.  Of course, there is more than one way to deal
with
> this, but I only mentioned the head worn mikes as one possible way.  One
can
> always set up the mike and make sure one is the same distance from it as
one
> was before.  It is simply something to be aware of when recording separate
> segments of a longer recording.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.0/167 - Release Date:
> 11/11/2005
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Other related posts: