Affordable digital recorder advice
phil cash cash
cashcash at EMAIL.ARIZONA.EDU
Tue Jan 31 23:22:30 UTC 2006
Hi Naomi, everybody,
I am glad you brought this up as I have been experminenting with recording
directly to a laptop (PC & Mac). I have not worked out all the kinks but it
seems to work fine as much as I can do in setting up in 5 minutes. I
am using
AudioBuddy (dual mini mic preamp), a Shure SM63L mic, and a mini table mic
mount. Both the Shure mic and preamp use XLR connections. At the moment, I
am not too concerned about the audio capture and have been using Audacity
(freeware), SoundForge 6.0 (PC), and Soundtrack Pro (Mac) with varying results
recording .wav and .aiff files at 44.1 hertz & 16 bit. I think I tried using
GarageBand at one point but don't remember the results. Otherwise, I have
also been using a Plantronics DSP400 (several yrs old, probably outmoded by
now) USB microphone headset for single speaker voice recording and
recording my
own voice. The only drawback so far has been my PC laptop which has a very
noisy fan so when I am recording the sensitive mic picks it up quite
clear.
I have been thinking about burying it inside a foamed lined box!
Live recordings of activities (people doing things) I am putting onto film,
otherwise laptop recording can mostly happen on a table where you are
recording
speakers or things that are immobile.
Although this may not be directly related to recording but one other
recommendation I can swear by is to get the best possible monitoring speakers
and headphones you can buy. It makes the world of difference! Little
sounds coming from your digitial hand held recorder, laptop speakers, or 20$
computer speakers will not do... ;-o
I just picked up a pair of M-Audio BX5a monitoring speakers and wow...I am
hearing sweet sounds from my language recordings that I have never heard
before!
Anyway, just a few comments and marvels to add here.
Phil Cash Cash
Nez Perce Reservation
UofA
Quoting Naomi Fox :
> I may not have read all the messages in this thread, so I'm not sure
> if someone
> has already brought this up, but you might consider recording directly to a
> laptop. For some circumstances, this is ideal--cuts out the download time and
> gives the opportunity to make a copy of the recording for immediate return to
> the speaker. If you have a decent sound card and an iMic (about $35)
> hooked to
> a microphone to clean up the signal the quality can be quite good.
> You can also
> carry this equipment for use as a backup in the event of equipment
> malfunction
> if you use another device as your primary. The Vermont Folklife Center has a
> good description of the process at
> http://www.vermontfolklifecenter.org/res_audioequip.htm#v.
>
> Best,
> Naomi
>
>
> --
> Naomi Fox
> Center for American Indian Languages
> University of Utah
>
> Quoting Mia Kalish :
>
> I guess the upshot of all this is that I don't think people should be made
> to feel bad because they can't afford high-end equipment.
>
>
>
> I loved Keola's musician's analysis. He's right about the Dolby hiss :-)
>
>
>
> And I agree that there are lots of recording options. But I think also what
> has come out of this discussion is that there are lots of considerations,
> lots of available technology, lots of things you can do with the recordings,
> and lots of people who will use the technology and the recordings.
>
>
>
> Keola mentioned sampling frequencies: # of bits is related to sampling size;
> it is also related to how fast materials will download. I've noticed that a
> lot of the sites I see don't seem to worry about how long it takes a sound
> to make it down to the listener. People also use Windows Media format which
> is InCreDibly SLOW. . . . (aaargh). Every time to open a sound, it has to
> open that high-graph interface. . . . Recently, I couldn't download the new
> Windows Media Player because there was something wrong with the signing in
> the internal configuration. So I could hear the Welsh on the BBS site. . . .
>
>
>
> Mia
>
>
>
> _____
>
> From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Susan Penfield
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 11:42 AM
> To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice
>
>
>
> Mia,
>
> I couldn't agree more, because we have found all of the same
> conditions/recommendations. But the use of high quality equipment, in the
> field, still yields much better and much longer lasting recordings and
> should be considered. We had some problems just this weekend with a high end
> recorder, just because it was not initially easy to use. That led us to
> rethink what equipment is best and/or how much more training is needed.
> Guess all I'm saying is that there are lots of options now (I have also used
> your same recorder) and that making more of an investment in high quality is
> worth it in the long run. We are also in the business of creating tons of
> stuff for the community and are putting that responsibility into the hands
> of community members -- so I really understand what you are saying.
> Nevertheless, that makes the quality of the recordings even more valuable
> and we should all be striving not just for lots of stuff but for the best
> possible stuff, given the recording conditions.
>
> Best,
>
> Susan
>
>
>
> On 1/31/06, Mia Kalish MiaKalish at learningforpeople.us> > wrote:
>
> Hi, Susan,
>
>
>
> I didn't read the whole main thread, but I thought I was perceiving a
> recommendation for "recording studio quality" for archival recording.
> Bringing people into a sound controlled studio is very different from
> working in communities where we create tons and tons of material for use by
> the community.
>
>
>
> When we were doing this initially 4-5 years ago now, Depree and I created a
> whole checklist of things we wanted to be able to do, with a focus of
> working in the community. For us, the considerations ranked approximately as
> follows:
>
> 1. Elder comfort
>
> 2. Affordable by community members
>
> 3. High quality recording
>
> 4. Convenience
>
> 5. High portability
>
> 6. Battery-powered
>
> 7. Ease of use, for us & for community members
>
>
>
> Our goal was to work with communities to show them how they could take a
> major hand in designing and developing their own resources. As such, many of
> our considerations incorporated the needs of the Community in our assessment
> of recorders. Sophisticated, expensive recorders wouldn't be appropriate;
> special recording rooms and devices would take us out of the community and
> would also be difficult to use in places where people live. We didn't want
> to use our hosts' electricity; for some people, this is a financial
> hardship, even for small requirements. We were also prepared for places
> where there is no electricity; or where the travel to and from the locale is
> challenging, as for example, the path down the Grand Canyon to the Havapai.
> So we included all these considerations in our analysis.
>
>
>
> Mia
>
> _____
>
> From: Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:
)'; return true;"
href="javascript:open_compose_win('to=%3E&thismailbox=INBOX');">>
ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] On Behalf Of Susan Penfield
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 7:59 AM
> To: ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
>
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice
>
>
>
> Mia, Jan and all,
> Just a thought here -- It seems to me that we might not want to distinguish
> between the uses for revitalization and documentation. Good quality is
> needed on both fronts since they really play into each other. I think that
> ease of use is important (for some of us less techie folks), and certainly
> cost is an issue for many, but getting good archival quality doesn't
> necessarily mean giving up all the other things Mia referred
> and,increasingly, those of us who do revitalization work need to be mindful
> that many of those recordings may end up as the only documentation of the
> language.
> Best,
> Susan
>
> On 1/31/06, Jan Tucker < jtucker at starband.net jtucker at starband.net>
> > wrote:
>
> Thank you all for the information you provided about affordable digital
> recorders. I'm looking at this one right now.
>
>
>
> Yes, I'm using it for language revitalization, and would like the best
> possible quality and least degredation. I have about 100 to spend on the
> devise and the accessories such as a microphone.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Olympus VN-960PC Digital Voice Recorder, with LCD Display - Built-in 128MB
> Flash Memory and PC Link
>
>
> Any further comments would be welcome. Here is a link with specifications.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> sku=389757&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation#Recording>
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&s
> ku=389757&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation#Recording
>
>
>
>
> In recording format they say ADPCM (Adaptive Differential Pulse code
> Modulation)(WAV on PC). Can I assume then this is a .wav format recorder?
>
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Jan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Nicholas Thieberger" < thien at UNIMELB.EDU.AU>
> thien at UNIMELB.EDU.AU >
>
> To: < ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU> ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU >
>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 2:30 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice
>
>
>
> > David,
> >
> > If it does not record in WAV format then it is not archival. |If it
> > records in a compressed form like WMA, mp3, or others, and then
> > converts to WAV it means the actual recording has already lost lots
> > of the signal. The m-audio microtrack records to WAV and is around
> > US$300 and is not too bad, it has some problem with preamps.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > At 11:17 AM -0800 30/1/06, David Lewis wrote:
> >>Hi Nicholas,
> >>I checked out the first website mentioned and they wrote this as to
> >>an archival quality format "For audio, use WAV
> >>< http://emeld.org/school/glossary.html#wav > format."
> >>Coincidentally, I was at Best Buy last night and looked over their
> >>selection and chose the lower end of the higher end devices, the
> >>WS-100. It is supposed to transfer directly into Microsoft WMA
> >>format to the computer. I'm pretty sure I can then convert it to WAV
> >>format either with Windows Media player or ITunes. Any advice here?
> >>the device cost $100. the next higher device was $149.00.
> >>David Lewis
> >>
> >>Nicholas Thieberger wrote:
> >>
> >>>-->
> >>>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
> diversity>
> >>>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
> 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 >
> >
> > --
> > Project Manager
> > PARADISEC
> > Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
> > University of Melbourne, Vic 3010
> > Australia
> >
> > nicholas.thieberger at paradisec.org.au>
> 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
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.
>
> Department of English
> Affiliate faculty: Department of Linguistics
> and the Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Program
> American Indian Language Development Institute
> Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836
>
>
>
>
> --
> Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.
>
> Department of English
> Affiliate faculty: Department of Linguistics
> and the Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Program
> American Indian Language Development Institute
> Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20060131/983e5f60/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ilat
mailing list