Affordable digital recorder advice

Mon Jan 30 20:18:40 UTC 2006

I think there are a few steps missing here. 

First, and maybe this was discussed in the original thread, the sampling
rate is more critical than the format. High sampling rates record more data
and take up more space. Thus you can record less before you have to move the
recordings to a more dense medium. Low sampling rates record less data, and
take up less space. 

The recorder direction is also important, with unidirectional being more
forgiving for voice recordings than omnidirectional. A good omnidirectional
mike will pick up the elks outside in the field across the road (guess how I
know). 

Then, if you want archival storage, you need archival media. Because I move
my stuff around, from computer locations to website, I don't worry about
storing my stuff in an archive where only a few people will have access.
Because I move digitally, I don't have to worry about data loss due to
multiple analog copies. The error correction is good enough so that there is
no effective loss. 

Has there been any discussion about the frequency of the human voice (I
assume because Jan wrote the message we are talking voice & language
recording, not music)? Human speech ranges from a low of about 100 HZ to a
high of about 5000 Hz, with the most commonly cited range being 300-3000 Hz.
This isn't to say that sopranos can't make higher frequency sounds, nor bass
voices lower frequency sounds, it just means that most people speak in that
range, and so a recorder that is optimized for that range will be better for
voice recording, especially Elders speaking . . . which I assume is what we
are talking about here.  

I also haven't seen any discussion about sound editing. I always edit my
recordings; usually there is more dead space than makes the response nice
for people, sometimes not enough, so I add or subtract so the response feels
nice. Sometimes I have volume issues; some people record too loudly, in
which case I have usually lost the top end because of clipping, and
sometimes it is too soft, and I can correct by digitally enhancing. 

Finally, I haven't heard any digital recording that has the warmth of analog
recording, but small digital recorders are easy to carry around, and we
found them to be unobtrusive when working with people. People tend to forget
they are there (the little recorders) and so they are less stressed, and
when they relax is what is now a comfortable situation, there is less stress
and strain, and more richness in their speaking voices. 

I think this takes us to FinallyPartB: If your goal is merely to record the
spoken word and stash it somewhere, then probably you don't care much about
whether the speaker is stressed or not, because your goal is just to get THE
WORD. On the other hand, if your goal is to use the recordings for language
revitalization, like I do, and like Jan is working towards, then you care a
great deal about richness, inflection, rhythm, and comfort. 

Mia 

  _____  

From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Nicholas Thieberger
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 12:01 PM
To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
Subject: Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice

Just to add to this thread from an archival perspective. If you are
recording unique things that you want to be available to generations to come
then you need to think about the format of what you are recording and
whether it will endure. Olympus and other small (and cheap, unfortunately)
recorders do not record in archival formats.

For a summary of the issues around longterm storage of recorded material and
endangered languages you could look at http://emeld.org/school/index.html.

There was a discussion of recorders on the RNLD list and if you go to the
archive of the RNLD list, here:
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?S1=resource-network-linguistic-d
iversity and search for 'flash' and 'recorder' you will get some useful info

A summary item is here: http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2710.html

All the best,

Nick Thieberger

At 7:36 AM -0700 30/1/06, Mia Kalish wrote:

Jan & all,

I have been using Olympus digital recorders for years now. They have 3
quality settings (low, medium, & high) and 2 recording modes (one for
meetings, one for one-to-one). The ones I buy are about $99. I recently got
a Sony refurb unit for $32 at e-cost.com.

I didn't read the thread about recorders, because I'm really happy with
mine, and I had shared about it before.

Mia

-- 

Project Manager

PARADISEC

Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics

University of Melbourne, Vic 3010

Australia

nicholas.thieberger at paradisec.org.au

Ph 61 (0)3 8344 5185

PARADISEC

Pacific And Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures

http://paradisec.org.au

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20060130/feabb970/attachment.htm>