So while I was out recording footsteps on rubber tracks and revolving metal turnstile doors this past weekend I managed to catch a pretty solid distant train as I was walking from one place to the next. I had heard the train a few minutes before, so I kicked on the prerecord buffer in my D50 and started walking towards the track that was a few hundred yards away.
Sure enough that train got closer and started blowing its horn. Here's the raw audio I caught - notice that you can hear me stop walking, turn and click the record button since the prerecord buffer was on. Also note the amount of wind I had going on there.
when i got back to the studio I was pretty disappointed with the amount of noise in the file so after noodling a bit I chalked it up to a swing and a miss. Regular Izotope eq and noise reduction was just leaving too many artifacts. Right before I deleted the file I decided to try one more thing on a whim: sample the train and use the tonal noise reduction algorithm to listen to the noise only.
At this point I wasn't really trying to clean up the file anymore, I was just playing around with the tools. What I got was pretty remarkable in terms of clean audio though, so I'd like to detail what I ended up doing: The beautiful thing about the way that Izotope RX works is that it is very flexible and able to be tailored to any specific type of processing. Most other desnoising programs don't have separate controls for tonal noise vs broadband noise, and this feature really sets RX apart. I highlighted a clean section of the train whistle and used that as my noise print, then I clicked the "output noise only" box at the top right. At first I experimented a bit with bending the noise reduction curve to accentuate the train tonality and ignore the rest, but the result was a lot less natural than just the flat line there, so I left it at that.
I kicked the tonal reduction up to the max and the broadband reduction down to zero, but again that felt a little artificial so I dialed a touch of the broadband noise back in to smooth the edges out.
I actually went through this process twice, which yielded very good results.
The denoiser didn't do much for my wind and general city traffic tone though, so I ran a linear phase highpass just under the tonic note of the train whistle, and I ran it pretty steeply. That lopped off the bottom end and left me very clean.
What was left was peaking out around -30 or so, and I added about 12db of gain back into the file because I can. This is why we always record at 24 bits. :)
I went from having something completely unusable from an impromptu recording to having something that I could layer in with some traffic (to taste this time) and have it sell. The artifacts aren't the ugly glassy things you normally get with noise reduction software either. They sound much more like an expander working, which is something you can get away with much more easily. also, all of the reverb pretty much stayed intact, which would never happen if I hammered that with broadband reduction.
This kind of thing is pretty specialized though, as it probably won't ever work on things that aren't both harmonic and static. For things such as horns, alarms and sirens heard in noisy cities though, its pretty darn interesting.
One strange side effect came at the end, when my voice kind of vocoded against the reverberating distant tones of the train. I really didn't expect that, but I'm curious now about how to exploit it. I guess recording someone's voice while playing a static synth tone in the same room would do it, but it may also cost me friends. :)
While out exploring and looking for a rubber track to record some footsteps this week I came across a little elementary school in suburban Mesquite, TX that has the potential to really be a sonic gold mine.
It's several miles from any highway and surrounded by a sleepy neighborhood with decent building cover, so the traffic noise is pretty minimal as settled areas go. It also has a wealth of surfaces - thick wood, grass, dirt, a tennis court with basketball rims at either end, and of course my coveted rubber track.
I found this school the day after Christmas so it was pretty deserted at the time. (side note, Christmas day is an ideal recording day. Downtown Dallas looked like some post-apocalyptic movie with all of the empty stillness. I will be rolling next year...) The track was surrounded by a chainlink fence that had a metal turnstile entryway to it. As I walked through the turnstile towards the track I knew that I wouldn't be able to walk back out without recording it.
I'll let the video do most of the explaining, but the bottom line here was that it was pretty loose at the top joint and made this crazy rattly ringy jackhammer sound when I spun it. In this vid my voice is recorded with the iphone mic and the turnstile is recorded with the Sony PCM D50.
Even though I now know exactly where this metal gate is, I had to record it right then and there because I've learned through experience that if you let a recording pass you by you may never get a second shot. I do plan to return here though, if only to do exterior foly. I need to find out who the groundskeeper is. :)
This post is just a wrap up of the handheld shootout.
I did the tests because I wanted to find out for sure a few of things:
1: how did the internal mics and other features of these recorders stack up against one another 2: how do they stack up against an industry standard setup 3: when can I opt for the cheaper and more convenient option over the more expensive and time consuming one?
Here's generally how I interpret the results of what I found:
Sony PCM D50:
This unit costs 1.5x what the others do, but lacks some of the features and xlr inputs. So what are you paying for? Design and build quality.
The D50 is the only device made of metal, with all metal switches, jacks, and mounting threads. Its built like a tank, and sounds great. The limiter is the best of the bunch, the preamp knob feels great, the mics swivel and are protected with metal bars, there's 4 gigs of storage built into the device, and all of the most important functions are available without resorting to menus. The battery life obliterates that of the other devices, and the size isn't compromised at all.
Its designed to be 100% stand alone, so no XLR inputs. That's a pretty big bummer if you're looking for an alternative to a 702, but it seems to fit the mentality of the grab it and roll improptu recording device, which is where it gets most of its use in my world.
Tascam DR-100
This unit was a little disappointing IMO, but mostly due to missed opportunities. It has tons of switches on the outside, but only about 2/3rds of them are truly useful. I'd love to have seen a mono/stereo switch given how often I'm jumping into the menu to change that back and forth. The limiter is analog and pre a/d, but has an incredibly slow release time and is not adjustable. The unit is built from pretty sturdy plastic but plastic nonetheless and the XLR jacks could have been the neutrick dual use kind but are not. Also, the tripod mounting threads are plastic, which is a bad place to get cheap. The internal mics performed the worst of the three units, and I didn't bother testing the other "omni" mics that are included because I listened to them earlier and deemed them unworthy of competition in this specific arena. The unit has a proprietary Li-Ion battery that charges via USB and seamlessly switches to the AA backups, though the combination of the two still don't come close to matching the battery life of the D50 with its four AA setup. I'd have gladly payed another $100 for metal construction and switches, and neutrick dual use XLR jacks.
I'd only recommend this unit as a compliment to an external microphone, but in that capacity it handles the job well and could even serve as a cheap but effective backup recorder.
The Zoom H4n
This unit is the de-facto standard for dslr filmmakers. It's by far the most versatile unit. The internal mics are good enough for use, the XLR jacks are 1/4 compatible which is great for my contact mics, and this is the only unit that can record 4 channels at once (2 from the internal mics and 2 from the XLR inputs) This makes the H4n ideal for performance recordings where one has access to the soundboard. Just run the board mix into the 1/4 jacks, mount the device where the built ins can catch the crowd and you're good. I've used it in this context before to great effect, but there is one serious caveat here - power. The power in theaters and clubs is notoriously dirty, so if you can't take a clean feed without resorting to batteries be prepared for a long night because thing sucks batteries like crazy. The switches and jacks are plastic but pretty sturdy, and the tripod mount is metal. My unit has a nasty habit of telling me that there is no SD card until I reboot it sometimes, so be on the lookout for those type of quirks as well.
Overall its a sturdy unit that is more versatile than any other out there. It is competent at everything it tries to do, but take the battery thing seriously with this unit. Two AA are not enough.
Here's part 2 of the HH shootout - the listening test!
In this shootout I'm comparing the internal mics of the Sony PCM D50, Tascam DR-100 and Zoom H4n from a sound designer and field recordist's perspective. For reference I'm also including a sound devices 744t with a pair of SM81s in XY position as a benchmark. Part 1 covering comparative specs is here.
I feel like I did a good job here of calibrating the various devices to get a good solid apples to apples comparison of how the built in mics, limiters, and preamps compare. Each of the audio samples in this post are 100% unaltered with the exception of editing the clips. Once the preamps were set I never moved them for any of the tests. All are downloadable in full 24 bit 96k from the soundcloud links. If anyone is willing to host the longer unedited recordings I'll gladly post a link to those here as well. Setup on all devices was as follows:
low cut - off limiter - on preamp - calibrated to 70dB spl = -12 dB fs mic positions - as close to one another as possible
The way I calibrated the preamps was to hold them at mix position and blow pink noise through the studio monitors at 70db spl, then adjust the preamps until the noise was peaking at around -12dbfs.
This step in itself was pretty instructive of what the devices are capable of and where they are happy in the recording zone. The D50's pre was set near 6, the DR-100 between 8 and 9, the H4n was set in the 90s, and the 744t was nearly wide open with the SM81s attached. The amount of gain left in the knob after setting 70db pretty hot like that was pretty indicative of how much juice each of these devices had left to give.
The other enlightening thing was listening to how the different pink noise recordings related to one another. Now, the noise was obv colored by the speakers and the room to some degree on the way out so you can't really compare the recordings to pure pink, but the relationship to one another was pretty eye opening. Here's the side by side comparison:
To my eyes and ears the DR-100 seems to really have deep broad dips around 4k and up in the 15k range. It also doesn't seem to extend above 20k as readily as the others, which has 96k implications. This also seems to make sense given that 96k functionality was added after the product was released as a firmware update - implying that the mics really weren't designed to reach up near and past the top end of the human spectrum.
The D50 and H4n were pretty similar, with the D50 being a little brighter and the H4n a little fuller. No major deficiencies in either though, which is nice. Both were a little thin around 300Hz compared to the SM81s on the 744t though.
--------
The next test was a self noise room tone test. This was done in the control room, which had an ambient noise floor of about 40-45 db spl. With the preamp gains up this high it was a very good test of what you're getting as far as cleanliness on the mics and pres.
Both the H4n and the PCM D50 had minor but audible hiss at those levels, and the high freq dips on the DR-100s mics mitigated the hiss fairly effectively, though that's not to say that they were capturing a very true sound.
---------
Next was a voice test. I just talked for a little while with my head about 12 inches in and centered up in front of the devices. I've only posted the short clipped comparison here, but I can post up a longer clip on each of there's any demand for that. Here it is:
The general theme here continues, as the DR-100 feels a little more lo-fi than the H4n and the D50, and all seem to lack the low end and low mids of the SM81s.
---------
To get a feel of the stereo imaging of the devices as well as the foley recording characteristics I grabbed a bag and jostled it while walking from one side of the room to the other.
This was actually pretty interesting with regards to the stereo field because of how well the DR-100 performed with regards to imaging. Much clearer seperation than the XY setups, and no loss of the middle. Sound quality was still below the others however. The H4n started to differentiate itself here as well, with a better lower mid definition than the D50 when the bag was directly in front.
----------
Now for some abuse - the limiter test! I did this test first by striking a piece of metal with a butter knife (which led to some interesting results), and then by striking a copper Noah Bell in the same manner. Listening to the bell ringout after jamming the limiters was pretty instructive here as well.
Here its also useful to see what's happening in the waveforms:
The 744t has an analog prefader limiter that catches clips before they get digitized. You can hear it working in the samples, but its pretty unobtrusive when you consider how hard I was hitting it there.
The PCM D50 has a "dual path digital limiter" which records a recessed channel about 20 db lower and inserts that into the signal if the limiter threshold is passed. In my experience that sounds excellent on short transients and horrible if you catch wind noise that triggers the limiter.
The DR-100 seems to have a radio-style limiter in the analog domain that engages quickly and then spends about 2 seconds slowly (slowly) releasing out to regular gain settings. That's kind of the opposite mentality of the Sony since it would probably be less intrusive if consistently pounded, but it is definitely more intrusive when it just encounters one spike.
The H4n must have digital limiters and no protection on the analog front end because oh man that sounds ugly.
------------
The next test is what these recorders are most useful for - outside ambiances. Unfortunately the wind protection I had on the SM81s was not adequate, so all you'll hear here is the handheld devices. This is just general traffic outside the studio side by side.
Each seems to do this job well. I've recorded mountains of ambiances with the D50 and H4n, and have used them consistently and successfully.
------------
Last test is more of a demonstration than anything. Here I'm opening and closing the trunk of my car with the devices about 2 feet away. This is mostly to demonstrate just how much of the environment gets left into any recording you make with these. The pickup patterns are just so wide that if you hope to get something isolated while out in the world you should be prepared for how much of the world you're bringing back with you to the studio.
So anyone anxiously waiting for my HH recorder listening test is going to have to wait just a bit longer. I actually recorded the listening tests before writing the first article, but on review I discovered a flaw in the way I had one of the recorders set up, which means I'll have to re do it.
I think I can get the recording done this week, but the other thing I have going on in my life right now is sound for Benavides Born, which just made it into competition at Sundance and has a very tight deadline.
Fortunately, I've got another cool post brewing based on a truck we recorded over the weekend for the film. Stay tuned, more coming!
This is the first in a series of posts that will cover a recent shootout done with three popular handheld recorders against a reference setup. This test is not in any way exhaustive, and in no way constitutes my endorsement of anything - all opinions are my own.
The portable recording device market has exploded in recent years, and everyone is looking around wonder which one to buy - so I’m here to help! The specific purpose of the shootout is to evaluate the recorders through the lens of sound designers and field recordists, and to measure them against an industry standard field recording setup. I’m testing out three recorders against a reference setup - the test includes:
Sony PCM D50
Tascam DR-100
Zoom H4n
Sound Devices 744t with Sure SM81s in XY setup (reference)
Part 1 of this review is measuring stats and features. Listening test comes in part 2.
I’ve owned the D50 almost since it came out, having purchased it to replace my plasticky H4. The DR-100 is a recent acquisition for me, but I’ve taken it out enough to be familiar with it. The H4n has been at use at the office for a while, and I’ve taken it out on several shoots. The sound devices rig speaks for itself, and is included as a pure benchmark against which to measure the other recorders.
Lets start with the bottom line:
Price (via B&H)
Sony D50
$441
Tascam DR-100
$272
Zoom H4n
$299
SD 744t/sm81
$3193 (priced 702 instead of 744t)
The D50 is nearly 1.5x the price of the other two, though the price point for each of the handhelds is peanuts compared to the big boy Sound Devices rig.
I/O
built in mics
mic in
line in
remote
Sony D50
stereo electret condenser
3.5mm stereo jack
3.5mm stereo jack
wired
Tascam DR-100
stereo electret condenser and stereo (pzm?) omni
stereo XLR
3.5mm stereo jack
optical (12 ft range)
Zoom H4n
stereo electret condenser
stereo Neutrick XLR or 1/4 inch
3.5mm stereo jack
wired
SD 744t/sm81
none
Stereo XLR
none
The D50 sorely misses XLR inputs, as the 3.5mm stereo jack lacks phantom power and is just about unusable in my experience. The DR-100 has adequate I/O, but the Zoom wins with its Neutrick combination jacks. The Sound Devices rig has 2 XLR inputs, but goes into specialty jacks quickly after that.
Battery Life
battery system
battery life
Sony D50
4 AA batterys in a sled
incredible
Tascam DR-100
Proprietary Li-Ion battery with 2 AA battery backup
passable
Zoom H4n
2 AA batteries
poor
SD 744t/sm81
Sony InfoLithium
very good
I have not run a scientific battery life test on these devices, but after a few months of usage for each the battery life ratings are what I believe to be accurate. The bottom line here is that D50 is the single most battery efficient piece of electronic equipment I own. The factory batteries lasted literally weeks of heavy use initially, and at 24 bit 96k the batteries far outlast the storage capacity, usually by an order of 3 to 6x depending on if I’m driving headphones. The H4n is the other end of the spectrum, sucking down batteries quickly and feeling a bit underpowered considering the size and brightness of the LCD screen and the ability to roll on 4 channels simultaneously. The DR-100 uses a proprietary battery that charges via USB and lasts long enough to be ok during a medium length record session. The ability to seamlessly switch to the AA backup is a plus.
Storage
Sony D50
internal 4gigs of flash memory - expandable with memory stick
Tascam DR-100
SD card
Zoom H4n
SD card
SD 744t/sm81
internal hard drive, CF cards, DVD Ram, Firewire
The built in internal storage on the D50 is a nice touch IMO, but the implementation of memory stick as the expansion media is outdated and crappy. Not only is memory stick a dead format, but the device mounts both as separate drives for recording and data transfer. With that said, 4 gigs is plenty for most hand held recording type gigs, so its not exactly a deal-breaker. SD cards on the other two devices are more standard.
Mic Mounts
Sony D50
swivel mount from wide to X/Y, protective bars on top
Tascam DR-100
both mics straight ahead with speaker in between (pseudo binarual?)
Zoom H4n
fixed XY with variable pickup patterns
SD 744t/sm81
none
The D50 wins the mic mounting and versatility contest, which is important considering how much it relies on the built ins. The protective bars are both reassuring and useful for mounting wind protection, and the wide mic setup sounds very wide compared to the XY setup. The DR-100s unorthodox setup may make for stranger stereo imaging than the others.
External Switches
transport
48v
hi pass
limiter
ext/int mics
pad
Hold
Sony D50
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Tascam DR-100
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Zoom H4n
Y
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
SD 744t/sm81
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
While the DR-100 has more external switches than the D50 does, the D50 has more that are of use to a field recordist that is looking to adjust record settings quickly. The H4n relies more heavily on the menu system, and compensates by having multiple ways to navigate the menu and the largest LCD screen of the three. I give the edge here to the D50, but not by a wide margin.
Preamp dial
Sony D50
continuous side mount-protected
Tascam DR-100
continuous side mount-split
Zoom H4n
up and down arrows-splittable with latest firmware
SD 744t/sm81
continuous front mount-split and recessable
The way that a recordist interfaces with a preamp is an important part of a device, and here we have less a clear winner than we do a clear loser. The DR-100’s ability to recess channels by splitting the preamp knob is a clear advantage over the D50, but the feel of the D50’s smooth metal knob really deserves points over the plastic counterparts of the competition. The H4n’s up and down arrows are functional, but
completely inadequate when one needs to make quick preamp adjustments in the heat of recording.
Most distinctive features
Sony D50
swivel mics, battery life, metal construction, quality components
Tascam DR-100
split preamp knob, extended battery life
Zoom H4n
4 channel record mode, neutrick dual mode xlr inputs
SD 744t/sm81
build quality, meters, preamps, AD converters, I/O
So based on pure stats and functionality the decision still depends entirely on how you plan to use it. Here’s how I would break it down:
Sony PCM D50:
Excellent build quality, just the right switches built into the chassis, swivel mics and a great preamp mean that this is a perfect candidate to always have by your side as a stand alone recording system. External mics are a no-go so more specialized applications like foley and voiceover recording should go to a different device, but this device is hard to beat for spur of the moment or low profile ambiances, music, crowds and other close or medium distance stereo sound sources.
Battery life means you can plant this device in a location and roll while waiting for audio to develop minutes and hours later.
Tascam DR-100
This device is a workhorse when used in conjunction with external mics, and can make a great lightweight capture device for DSLR filming, VO recording, moving vehicle recording, etc - especially when recessing one channel for safety in critical situations. The built in mics aren’t as solid as the other devices, but are usable if in need.
Construction is plastic but solid and navigation is quicky and easy.
Zoom H4n
The 4 channel record mode makes this the only device that can record both a board feed (thorugh the line in) and the
audience response (through the built in mics) of a live show. This is a functionality that the DR-100 lacks, and I’ve had great success using the H4n in that context. The built in mics are very good on their own right, though they don’t quite reach the level of quality of the Sony (while being better than those on the DR-100).
This device has become the industry standard for DSLR video shooters, though I’d still personally recommend the DR-100 over the H4n for that specific purpose both because of the recessed channel function, battery life, and preamp quality.
This is not to say the H4n has poor preamps, because it does not. Its just that the DR-100s are that much better.
Poor battery life and capacity are the biggest issues here.
So that’s how these things do on paper. In part 2 we’ll do a listening test that focuses on the built in mics. Stay tuned!
While cooking some spaghetti for dinner today I added some salt to the noodles and oil and got some pretty intense crackling going on due to the millions of tiny tiny bubbles.
I had my recorder in arms reach, so I parked it up close and recorded a few minutes. When I brought it in to catalogue I started varispeeding the sound, and realized just how much it sounds exactly like pure unmoving tv or radio static, even at very slow pitches:
A few weeks back I went to the camera show in Grapevine looking for both camera equipment and anything interesting sounding. While I largely passed on the stuff that I'd actually want to shoot footage with, I did find this little treasure to record - and at a bargain price of $20!
What you're looking at there is a B and H Filmo Sportster 8mm film camera. It has a manual crank, a thick metal casing, an a million little noises to record.
While I did manage to get tons of coverage while recording it today, I'd like to focus on one specific usage that I get tons of mileage out of these kinds of things for: UI and small servos.
Now this particular device doesn't have any electronic parts, but it still made tons of very clean servo sounding noises regardless - especially since I was able to drag the switch you hold down to make the film spin and get a cool scraping noise. When highpassed, and pitched around it can be pretty convincing, while remaining very natural and organic sounding.
In this sample the first half is as recorded and the second half is severely highpassed. I tend to use these types of noises with a little flange for sci fi servos and UI sounds pretty frequently.
The mp3 compression on soundcloud doesn't handle pure high end all that well, but you get the idea.
The other thing this camera had loads of was mechanical latch and click sounds. In many ways it sounded like gun foley, but I can also use this kind of thing for high tech sounding buttons and clicks with the same highpass technique.
Its a little ironic that I'm dreaming up all of these high tech sounds given the source, but in the end no one cares what the thing looked like when you recorded it.
Here's a little demo of the clicks and latches using the same superhighpass filter and with the same soundcloud limitations.
All in all it was well worth the purchase, especially when you add in future foley possibilities with weapons and other mechanical devices.
So we've just wrapped an incredibly busy period at work marked by the elections in November. The political world keeps us very busy on its cycle, and the wave kind of creeps up on you until you just stop for a moment and marvel at how buried you are.
When you come out of a busy cycle like this you tend to uncover your eyes, look around and realize how much of your normal routine you've neglected or delayed. In my case that meant that I had a big backload of sfx that needed editing and cataloging, as well as a few personal video projects that needed editing.
With those done and some breathing room in between now and my next big busy time I'm finding myself in a period of downtime, which was refreshing for a couple of weeks but is now starting to make me antsy, so I'm starting to dream up some new sound design projects to keep me sharp and busy.
The problem of course, is that by nature I run at these things all at once and tend to not just sit down with one until I finish it. Without a client and a deadline I tend to be more scattered.
So, my upcoming projects include:
recording more sound-infused timelapses like this one:
composing an actual video edit in collaboration with my co-worker Brad Dale, who has written some incredible music based on some of the stuff that I've shot
doing more electrostatic recordings with my new trusty guitar pickup rig
doing more contact mic recording
continuing to scout remote locations for potential car, fire and gunshot recordings
doing a shootout on some portable recorders for the blog
blogging more in general
Now, in a few weeks we should be getting our next film, Benavides Born, into the house so that should sate my appetite for intense creative projects. But between now and then, we'll see...
So I'm keeping the promise I've made to the zero people following this zombie blog to start posting more and specifically to start posting about recording more.
I'd like to start off by sharing some recordings made on Halloween at the Alliance Air Show in Ft Worth. I went with my sister and family and took some recording gear, but I was going into the situation pretty blindly. My main goal was to get some good aircraft recordings of whatever I could, and I brought a rig that would be able to isolate the aircrafts from the noisy backgrounds while being as portable as possible.
What I didn't anticipate was the total and complete coverage of the PA announcers throughout the entire airstrip who were talking through was a series of horns scattered across the entire perimiter. The PA wasn't loud especially - it was just ubiquitous, so there were no clean spots in the entire area to record from, and the PA guys really never stopped describing the action.
Despite that, I came back with some useable stuff and ended up very happy with my first real
test of the new DR-100 I picked up a few weeks ago. I was able to move about in a dense crowd with ease because I was only carrying a micstand and the handheld recorder.
So, I've been ignoring this blog for a LONG time now, and I think its time for that to end.
With the recent explosion of development in the sound designer community, I think its high time I get back in this thing and do it with a renewed focus.
so, redesign coming - sound designer focus coming, and good things to follow after that.
