 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: MRidgeP
Date: 2001-01-18 01:57
I am going to purchase a minidisc player/recorder to record my practice sessions and my lessons so that I can go back and hear myself. I could also use it to record my solos and other performances. Has anyone had any experience with minidisc players for this use? What are your results from that. I know that technically the clarinet is one of the hardest instruments to record. I was wondering if the minidisc could handle the job like that of a DAT Recorder or ect.
Any info or thoughts anyone could provide would be excellent. Thank You.
Matthew Parker Ridge
University of Northern Iowa
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gene Wie
Date: 2001-01-18 02:36
Minidisc recorders sound great, cost a lot less than DAT, are extremely portable, and run on rechargeable batteries.
I use a Sharp MDM-722 minidisc player/recorder with a Sony ECM-717 microphone for all my recording purposes, which have included violin, clarinet, and saxophone. A good quality microphone is one of the most important things to obtain, as that ultimately determines the quality of the recording (and microphones like the Sony will pick up every minute detail you need).
I've recorded using this setup for use in electronic/acoustic compositions, undergrad and graduate audition CD's, and even a voice-over for a product presentation at work.
I paid around $170 for the Sharp MD and $80 for the microphone. I purchased a box of twenty individual 74min Minidiscs for around $34. Pair that with a good shielded 1/8" to 1/8" stereo wire for about $10, and you'll be able to take anything you record, dump it to wave in something like CoolEdit2000 or SoundForge and have it ready to dump to CD.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: clarinetfreak
Date: 2001-01-18 03:51
There is a great web-site: www.minidisc.org and if you browse through it you can learn all about minidiscs. Also www.cnet.com allows you to get the best deals on the web for minidiscs. If you buy online there is no state tax. Also, a good mic is the most important thing, so try to find a eletronic specialty store that has one. good luck!!!
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Todd
Date: 2001-01-18 05:04
I agree with the other postings-- a good mic is very important. I use an AIWA minidisc recorder with a Sony ECM-MS907 mic. I got the mic from the Sony Store here in Seattle. It was not their top of the line, but the cost of the best mic was prohibitive for my budget. I have recorded band concerts solo recitals and rehearsals with it. The result has been great. One word of warning--if you have someone recording it for you, tell them NOT to move the microphone whatsoever when it is recording. Any slight movement of the mic sounds like thundering herds of buffalo. Get a mic stand if you can afford it.
I also recently bought a CD burner so I can transfer minidisc recordings of concerts onto CD for others.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel Bouwmeester
Date: 2001-01-18 16:52
Hello,
I am 100 % against minidisk, because it's not a fidel way of reproducing sound.
Why ?
1. minisdisk uses a compression algorith (ATRAC). Which automatically involves a loss in quality (like mp3 files). How does this work ? A compression algorith is a complex mathematicall procedure, which has the role of simplifying a digital sound signal (or sampled analog sound wave). Example : my wave is nearly straight. The compression algorith will replace this wave by a straight line... Thus... big loss in terms of details. For instance, if you record two different violins : A stradivarius and a 50'000 $ instrument, you will not hear any difference.
2. Most Minidisk recorders (the small ones) have poor A/D and D/A converters involving loss in Dynamic and frequency range, and signal to Noise ratio.
3. Most Minidisk recorders have poor compression/decrompression, and involve a loss in quality.
4. In totall, from the analog sound you record, to the analog sound that comes out of the speaker there are:
For a small minidisk system, with a dynamic, stereo mic (the small ones you get) using standard headphones : 8 loss stages :
- the mic
- the recording amplifier
- the A/D converter
- the compression
- the decompression
- the D/A converter
- the amplifier
- the headphone
In a good DAT systems you can remove 6 stages (losses are insignificant). (remains, the mic and the headphone(monitor)).
5. Added to that, standard minidisk uses 16 bit/41 Khz sampling rate. Versus 24 bit 96 Khz for a good DAT.
Finally, If really you want to buy a minidisk you should go for the DENON MD recorders, which are of superior quality, and use 20 bit/48Khz technology and high quality A/D & D/A converters and compression devices. But who cost ~4000 $.
I would recommend you using your PC to record ... Standard PC with standard soundcard, uses uncompressed 16bit/44 Khz technology (which is superior to Minidisk and equal to CD). The other advantages is that you will not loose any quality in transfering from the take to the editing (which you would have transfering from MD to PC through an analog cable). Then you can use the pc to edit (using wave editor), and finally CD burner to Master. I record directly from mixing table to PC using a 8 track soundcard (Gadget labs).
Most of you have no excuse not using your PC, most of you have one with a soundcard.
Recording a clarinet is very difficult indeed. The recording media is not very important yet to this point... a good dolby cassette recorder can be fine as well as minidisk and even better uncompressed digital recorders or large tape recorders (Revox).
The most important things while recording anything, are the mics. You will need two (or even three ) high quality condensor microphones to record clarinet : such as the AKG condensor mics (AKG C 414 B - ULS is one of the best).
one placed at 20 cm of the middle of the clarinet, and the 2nd one at 20 cm under the bell.
you will need two tracks (or more if you want the acoustics of the room) to record one clarinet. Thus.. left and right on a standard stereo recorder
This is only if you wish to record professionally. and that means (interms of equipment)
MICS
Cables
mixing panels
recording device
Editing device (tips on clarinet : use a little compressor to improve sound)
Mastering device
For other situation such as live and/ or big orchestras (such as recording windband.. the mic setup is again different)
If all this is too complicated for you and of course too expensive (I usually rent equipment which makes it cheaper) and you just wish... just record, to have a vague idea of what you played. you can use a standard stereo mic (not a small one that is delivered with your MD, a big one) (Sony make acceptable ones). use a reasonable recorder.. MD if you wish. Place you mics at a reasonable distance of the clarinet, (2-3 or more meters) adjust the gains, and record... But don't expect a good recording.
A couple of tips :
- Use good mic setup and a mixing table (if available)
- when recording with close mics.. DON'T MOVE
- always edit and master your recording
have fun recording !
Daniel Bouwmeester
Geneva (Switzerland)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jeff Gegner
Date: 2001-01-18 20:08
For non-profesional use Mini-disc is fine. If you are ever looking to transfer to a CD and expect a really true recording you will be disappointed. I do a lot of recording, mainly live direct to DAT or CD depending on the situation. I tried a MD side by side with a DAT. The signal going into each recorder came from the same soundboard, mics etc. The difference in clarity between the MD and the DAT is amazing. The DAT has so much more depth and clarity. Its like the first time you listened to a CD after listening to a cassette tape. So each have there place. For a quick low cost recording MD is fine. If you want quality go with a DAT(or CD, direct to hard drive etc).
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Gene Wie
Date: 2001-01-19 02:47
"Quality" is a very subjective thing indeed. I don't think any of us are planning to use minidisc to record the master for a large run press of CD's for the mainstream market. But a few things to consider:
>I am 100 % against minidisk, because it's not a fidel
>way of reproducing sound.
Are any "digital" formats? If we're arguing about reproducing sound in a "fidel" way, then analog is really the only real way of preserving every last bit of detail (one reason why turntables are still sold today). Any reduction of information into fragments like "bits" and "bytes," no matter how small, does not preserve the original source.
If not MD, then what is a reasonably good sounding, cost effective solution for recording the average musician can use? DAT hardware is out of reach (financially and physically) for a lot of people. A single DAT cassette of 120min length is around ~$30. A person can buy twenty MD's for that price.
>3. Most Minidisk recorders have poor
>compression/decrompression, and involve a loss in quality.
*ALL* minidisc recorders use compression (I wouldn't call it "poor." Some brilliant chaps spent lots of time and study designing the algorithms involved in a somewhat optimal storage of audio data in limited space) and involve a loss in "quality," if we are defining "quality" as the percentage of the sound's original source. However, blind tests with CD and MD audio nearly result in inconclusive comparisons. Simply put, the average musician needing to record their playing will achieve impressive and usable results with MD.
>Example : my wave is nearly straight. The compression
>algorith will replace this wave by a straight line... Thus...
>big loss in terms of details. For instance, if you record
>two different violins : A stradivarius and a 50'000 $ instrument,
>you will not hear any difference.
How does one accomplish a "straight" wave with a violin? And a clarinet for that matter? Sounds generated by acoustic instrument don't generate flat waves. The disadvantage posed by this situation isn't feasibly real.
And for that matter, how many students wanting to record auditions are playing on a Strad or even a $50,000 instrument? Anyone with that instrumental budget can just hire a professional recording studio; now how about the rest of us?
>I would recommend you using your PC to record ...
>Standard PC with standard soundcard // Most of
>you have no excuse not using your PC,
>most of you have one with a soundcard.
Yes, but the average PC sound card is of terrible quality (bulk "these just work" cards or integrated chipset audio). And somehow I can't see myself dragging a full tower case, monitor, keyboard, and mouse into a little practice room or the concert halls. That's a good ~50 pounds of metal and plastic to haul around (depending on your monitor)...
It's great that DAT offers sonic superiority over MD. Now when someone makes a portable DAT recorder that runs for 5 hours on rechargeable batteries, is the size of one's hand, uses inexpensive media, can be found in the local electronics superstore, and costs less than $200, maybe the rest of us can think about it.
>The difference in clarity between the MD and the DAT
>is amazing. The DAT has so much more depth and clarity.
I'd agree...on the $10,000 speaker system hooked in with the DAT hardware at my university. Now when a music professor tosses in the next audition CD into his $99 Sony all-in-one boombox on the filing cabinet in his office, the "difference in clarity" is a moot point.
MD is...
1. Cheap.
2. Easy to use.
3. Easy to find.
4. Much better than standard tapes.
...and it sounds "good enough." And again, I'm not advocating MD's use in top-of-the-line professional recordings. But MD is great for the student, the player, the teacher, and anyone who wants an effective and decent sounding solution that is available at reasonable cost.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Kristen Denny
Date: 2001-01-19 03:41
It's too bad you got bombarded with all of this technical mumbo jumbo. I use my minidisc
recorder for exactly what you are talking about. Lessons, practice sessions, small recitals,
and the like. The result is a nice clear clarinet sound that is stored on a piece of equipment
that can stand a pretty good test of time. How long are you going to live anyway... All of
these posts have been saying to get a good mic... well a "good" mic when I was shopping
cost twice the amount of the MD recorder itself. Just make sure that the mic records in
stereo and you're good to go. Mine was about $80.
Happy Practicing.
Kristen Denny
The University of Tulsa (grad)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: MRidgeP
Date: 2001-01-19 04:59
After all of my searching I have just purchased my Sony Minidisc MZR-90. I bought a good mic from Sony that is specifically designed for instrumental applications. It's the ECM 907 model.
On the issue of sound quality, I have heard a lot of opinions. Some from top recording engineers that say they can't tell the difference, some that say minidisc in some areas sounds better than CD's.
Thank you for all of your information. I hope that everyone will continue to discuss the Minidiscs and the benifits that they could bring to helping us all to continue to develop more as musicians.
Matthew Parker Ridge
University of Northern Iowa
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: beejay
Date: 2001-01-19 14:53
I have almost the same set up (MZR-70 + ECM 907 mike). Results depend much on room accoustics and distance to mike, but are usually excellent -- certainly leagues better than the cassette recorder I used before.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-01-19 19:14
For casual recording I find the minidiscs to be excellent. I have a Sony 55 and the Sony stereo mike (about 300 or so dollars total when I bought it).
The one part i find problematical is the transport/control mechanism of the 55 (and most other portable minidiscs). They're not very rugged, and I don't like the multi-use buttons. I've erased the wrong track many times - you get into an "erase?" "ok" cycle really easily since the same button advances through the menu. The remote does not echo all the functionality, either (editing) so if I every wear out those tiny little buttons I'm out over a hundred bucks.
I have to keep the instruction manual handy, too, to remember how to insert track marks, combine tracks, etc. One little messup of the TOC and your out of luck, too. It's not as recoverable as a cassette.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: beejay
Date: 2001-01-19 21:20
If you have a problem with the TOC, does that mean you have to ditch the disc, or can you erase all and re-use?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2001-01-20 01:26
You ditch the disk. They're pre-formatted. There's some other problems if the disks get fragmented too much (track marks get lost, etc.).
I
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Daniel
Date: 2001-01-22 01:56
I am replying without having read the other replies. So i may be repeating some things that have been said. So my appologies at the start.
I've used my MD deck to record my recitals for the last three years. It works great. Assuming you have good mics, it should sound just as good as DAT. Some audiophiles and recording engineers feel strongly that the compression scheme reduces the quality of the playback, but in my opinion, you really can't tell. For a couple performances i had one guy using a pair of Shure SM94's (or 92 or something like that) that run around $180ea., and for the last couple i had a different guy using a pair of AKG C414B-ULS large diaphragm mics (those didn't sound as good, they were more for vocal recording, but they were alright). For my own use at home i have an SM88 (about $280-$300 new) which requires an external power source (called Phantom Power) where i use an ART tube mic pre-amp (about $100 new).
What i've done after the recital (well a while after the recital whenever i'm recovered from the self-disgust of mthe mistakes i made) i run it through my computer and edit out long gaps between movements and whatever, and then put it on to a CD for friends and family and my own records. I also use DAT as a backup, incase i lose the MD i atleast still have another source that i can take to someone with a DAT unit that can convert it to CD or MD for me.
For practicing, it works well, though i don't use it for that often because my studio is down the hall from my bedroom (which is where my stereo is). And i get tired of hitting record, walking back to my studio, making sure the reed's gonna play, play a few passages, then going back to my bedroom, stopping the MD, then having to FW through the dead space before i get to the stuff i needed to hear. One of these days i'll rig up some mirrors on the doors and walls so i can hit record on the remote aimed at the mirrors to reflect the signal to the MD deck and make life a little easier. :-)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
