Portable recorder for fieldwork

T

time4d

New member
Hi everyone! I am new to this forum and I really need some help in choosing a portable recorder. I have searched the forum for similar threads but I could not find anything identical to what I need.

For some upcoming projects, I need to do field recordings (it will be in rural villages, etc.) of native speakers speaking their languages. As such, I need a portable recorder which excels in voice recording. I really need as much detail in the voice as possible, because I will run the recordings into the computer and analyse the spectrograms and the like. I don’t care too much about recording ambient sounds or music though.

I am concerned about ambient noises which will affect the recording of the voice. Also, I am just an undergraduate and cost is a legitimate concern for me.

I am looking at the following portable recorders:
  • Zoom H1
  • Zoom H2n
  • Zoom H4n
  • Tascam DR-05
  • Tascam DR-07
  • Tascam DR-08
  • Tascam DR-40
I understand that none of these recorders may make the cut, but I really cannot afford a professional-level recorder.

Could you recommend me 2 portable recorders:

1. Supposing cost is an issue (Budget: US$150)
2. Supposing cost isn’t an issue

Please feel free to recommend other portable recorders not listed above, as I really know next to nothing about such recorders. Please also feel free to direct me to a previous thread addressing a similar question, as I may have missed it out when searching.

Many thanks in advance!
 
Last edited:
Supposing cost is an issue
Click to expand...

Budgets are relative. "Cost being an issue" to me may be anything under $2,000, plus I already have mics, accessories and experience.

The DR-40 would be my personal choice in the under $150 range; at least there is some semblance of upgradability; you'll be able to add XLR mics at a later date, although I would recommend that you get one now, as you have said that you want to minimize ambient sound interfering with the voices that you want to record. Getting the mic in close is part of the solution to your problem of ambient sounds There are LOTS of passable XLR mics to use for interviews that cost under $200; your total cost would be around $350.
 
you might want to add the sony pcm-m10 to your list (notwithstanding the lack of xlr inputs). Here is a detailed review by someone doing speech recording/analysis - http://bartus.org/akustyk/PCMM10/index.php - you will find he recommends other recorders, external mics and preamps, all in the context of the sort of thing that you are trying to achieve rather than filmmaking. Hope this helps. Cheers, Roland
 
I love my Tascam DR-05! Cheap, robust and friendly. For interviews I plug in an AT lavalier and get really clear voice recordings...
 
I'm not entirely sure that I understand what you want to do - you are going to do voice recordings, but are these ambience tracks from nearby or interview style where you can get as close as possible? You don't mind a little ambience and music, but are worried if it affects the voices. Please clarify what exactly it is you mean to do and we will be able to give you better advice. Also, are you interested in getting something you can build on later, or is it more important to get the most suitable gear for just this project?

Regardless of which, your budget is really tight, and will just barely get you a handheld recorder like the ones you mention. Of the small handhelds in your budget, I would recommend the roland r-05, olympus ls-5 or ls-11, or the tascam dr-40. If you can find a good deal for one, others to look at would be the tascam DR100mkII and sony D50. All of these have internal mics that are decent as long as you can get close enough, and some can take external mics through XLR while others only through a 3,5mm input. They are a bit different in size too and battery life.
Regardless of which you choose, if you want to use the internal mics, you need to budget for some wind protection. Look it up.
I would not recommend the sony M10 for this application, because it has omni mics and you will be better of with cardioids to isolate the voices better (otherwise it's one of the best).

I highly recommend that you search for used equipment.

If you decide to up the budget you might want to consider an external mic.
 
Thanks for the valuable advice so far, everyone!

Perhaps I should clarify what exactly is it I want to do. I need to do voice recordings, and these will be interview style recordings where I can get as close as possible to the participant. I will use this recorder primarily to record and analyse spoken voice, and I doubt I will ever use it to record music. I want as little ambient noise as possible, because that will affect the recording. I am interested in something that can be built upon later, but this is not my top priority.

Also, the US$150 is just a guideline for myself which I placed for the lower-end recorders. If there are better recorders which are especially good at voice recording, I don't mind pay more than what I stated. I will also budget for the equipment I will need, like windscreens and the like, on top of the recorder.

Is there any reason why no one seems to recommend any of the Zoom players? Are they a class behind the rest?
 
Zoom never made really stellar recorders. They just started the ball rolling on affordable, feature-packed, handheld recorders. Once the other companies jumped on board, better machines came out and Zoom just hasn't improved (in my opinion, the H4n was a step back from the original H4).

The TASCAM DR-40 is probably the best offering in the $150 range, and allows for expansion later with XLR inputs, 1/4" TRS, and the ability to accept +4dbu line level signals. Get a RedHead screen if you plan to use the built-in stereo mic array.

The trick to minimizing ambient sound in your recordings has to do both with mic selection and placement, with emphasis on placement. The closer the mic is to the source, the higher the ratio of dialog to noise floor is recorded. Selecting a mic with a narrower pickup pattern is also important, but the "closer is better" rule still applies. And narrower patterns aren't always the best. A dynamic, omnidirectional, handheld mic could be more appropriate than a shotgun, and a cardioid lav is actually a little more constrictive than an omni lav.

B&H actually has a couple of kits based around the DR-40. One comes with two lavs (not the best lavs, but functional), and one comes with a dynamic handheld (ENG reporter style). And then there's one that comes with a better-quality condenser mic.
 
Last edited:
If you need to keep ambient noise down, then this also means the self noise of these recorders. If you are doing serious spectrum analysis of what you are recording, the self noise of everything listed is going to be a problem. I've tried a bunch of these things, and they are all noise, at least to my ears. I'd go with a Sound Devices recorder. If you can't afford to buy, then rent one.
 
You can always get better stuff... for more money... But for a tight budget the Tascams and similar do a great job. I was interviewed by Swedish Radio a couple of weeks ago, and the reporter used an Olympus LS5 recorder close to my face, using the built-in mics and a fur windbreak. No nonsense...
 
I think there needs to be a distinction made here, between intelligibility and sound quality. One does not necessarily mean the other. If what you want is intelligibility, then a handheld with fur cover placed close to the speaker will probably do a great job. What that may NOT do, is give a realistic and natural sound perspective with low noise. For the latter, a higher quality mic (possibly an omni for close positioning) into a higher end recorder might be needed.

Looking at something you can rent is also not a bad idea.
 
The new Olympus LS-12 and LS-14 are now out and are excellent little beasties with superb battery life and very easy to use.
 
I used to work in a university lab that did acoustic phonetics research (although it was long enough ago that all our equipment was analog), so I think I have some idea what the OP is after. More recently, I have done a little work in our hearing sciences lab, which had similar sound requirements. The standards for this kind of recording in terms of frequency response and electronic S/N are not extraordinarily high, and any modern recorder would probably meet them easily. (We used to think 45 dB S/N was pretty decent, and 60 dB extraordinary.) What is important is getting clear and uncolored articulation of the voices with an absolute minimum of background noise from the environment (noise from the electronics and recorder is a trivial issue by comparison). You'll also need to take pains to avoid close-recording artifacts like proximity effect, "P"-pops and excessive sibilance. I, too, would recommend the DR-40, but think an external, omnidirectional, dynamic microphone like the Electro-Voice RE50, used with a foam windscreen and about 6" from the subject's mouth, will probably give the cleanest results possible. The RE50 probably doesn't have much useful frequency response above 12 kHz or so, but that is not usually considered an important part of the voice range from a research perspective. More important, it's flat over the range of interest (roughly, 100 Hz - 8 kHz or so), has no proximity effect, little handling noise, and is plenty rugged enough to handle life in the field reliably and gracefully. The balanced output will largely eliminate cable quality and length as a concern.

You can save a few bucks with the E-V 635A instead of the RE50. It sounds the same, but it's not as well shock mounted and will require more careful handling.

I would avoid the built-in mics for very close range voice work because they're susceptible to sibilance and plosive pops, although a foam windscreen will help a bit.

One detail missing from your description is whether you're going to be recording indoors or outdoors. This can affect the kinds of background noises you may have to deal with. In any case, choose the quietest environment you can for your recordings, and stay away from walls and other hard surfaces. If you can put up sound absorbing blankets and such to reduce unwanted reverberation, all the better. You should be trying to get as close as possible to an environment like a radio studio announcer's booth, with an absolute minimum of reflections and a straight path from the subject's mouth to the microphone -- which, as I said, should be as close as you can make it without getting unwanted pops and s-hisses in the recording.

Hope this helps.

- Greg
 
Thanks for all the suggestions, you all! What would I do without you?:laugh:

I think Greg has a very good idea of what I am looking for. I have to carry out the recordings outdoors, as this will be in rural villages surrounded by farms and jungle and there wouldn't be any quiet, conducive place I can think of.
 
time4d said:
Thanks for all the suggestions, you all! What would I do without you?:laugh:

I think Greg has a very good idea of what I am looking for. I have to carry out the recordings outdoors, as this will be in rural villages surrounded by farms and jungle and there wouldn't be any quiet, conducive place I can think of.
Click to expand...

The DR-40 kit I linked that has the ENG-style handheld mic includes an Audio Technica version of the EV mics mentioned by Greg.
 
The Tascam DR-40 does not have an option (or plug-in pwr.) for using mics without an XLR, if that's an issue. Otherwise the DR40 is a decent recorder, The DR-40's +4dB line-in option is also very important if one wishes to use a high quality external preamp or mixer at some point.

BTW, the H4n's 1/4" 'line in'is not designed to support +4dB (nominal) operation only -10dB .. as are most other recorders with 1/8" line level unbalanced option. ( -10dB)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top