Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Google

Results:

References: [ LS-10: 1206 ]

Total 1206 documents matching your query.

1. Re: Olympus LS-10 clock accuracy (was Olympus LS-10 and ext mic (score: 68)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:15 +1000
I have used Hi-MD recorders many times for weddings or event shoots without ever having a timing problem in "post". Gene Whoa! The Sony and Sharp Hi/MD's I use drift 4 frames max in 74 minutes. Could
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00077.html (8,614 bytes)

2. Re: Olympus LS-10 clock accuracy (was Olympus LS-10 and ext mic (score: 66)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:15 +1000
Whoa! The Sony and Sharp Hi/MD's I use drift 4 frames max in 74 minutes. Could the LS-10 really be 100 times less accurate? It seems accurate timing could be important,.. but maybe not as there are n
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00076.html (8,192 bytes)

3. 2. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 49)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Max, Kevin, Rob et al, Max - You need the limiter OFF!!!! And you need recording level set at MANUAL (not auto). If you have a good blimp for the ME67 try recording with low cut off, for a wider r
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00385.html (26,260 bytes)

4. 3. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 49)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Yes. The samples are taken from sections of all three samples when the loud, close Lyrebird is NOT calling-- only the distant ones. The "signal" in these sections is softer making the noise component
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00386.html (28,331 bytes)

5. 4. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 49)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Vicki! From now on Limiter is off! I have also always used MANUAL. I will do some experiments later, taking a more note of recording level values. It's likely I was expecting too high a level to r
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00387.html (29,281 bytes)

6. Re: LS-10 vs 702, ambience (score: 47)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:35:49 +1000
Rob, Problem is, Rob, that I cannot use the SASS set up with the LS-10, due to the mics requiring phantom power. I guess what I was originally trying to show was a. that the LS-10 COULD pick up low r
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2009-08/msg00213.html (19,311 bytes)

7. 1. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 46)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Max and all, Max, try putting your LS-10 on recording level 5 (REC LEVEL knob on right hand side). Make sure the high sensitivity switch is on. Then try to get as close as possible to the singing bir
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00380.html (18,300 bytes)

8. 1. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 46)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Vicki! I've been doing a little bit of experimenting, and a couple of points have come up. Firstly, what I've discovered is that I get a higher level reading with the Low cut off (makes sense I su
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00384.html (21,659 bytes)

9. Re: Recording Gear For Installation (was Olympus LS-10 and S (score: 46)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:13 +1000
Hi Lilly-- I don't think I'd bother with substituting a Sony D50 or Edirol R09 thinking a different recorder will get you the quality improvement you are after. These recorders are similar enough and
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-07/msg00156.html (20,882 bytes)

10. 7. Re: SP-TFB-2 with Edirol R-09HR or Olympus LS-10? (score: 45)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:35:51 +1000
While Martyn, Kevin, and I were leading a soundscape workshop in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, last week, we had a moment to record a dramatic series of thunderstorms that swept through the valley. Basicall
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2009-07/msg00047.html (28,316 bytes)

11. 4. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Max, and everyone, I will post a photo on the naturerecordists web page, of my home-made wind cover for the LS-10. It works OK in a light breeze, and has an air gap between the fleece and the mics. I
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00366.html (13,051 bytes)

12. 5. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Vicki and Syd, Vicki, it sounds as though your thinking on the shield is similar to mine; air gap plus cover over foams. I look forward very much to seeing your photo. You have me slightly worried
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00367.html (15,562 bytes)

13. 1. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:13 +1000
Hi Rob, OK since you asked! I will upload to the naturerecordists web page, my LS-10 beeper test that compares 16 bit with 24 bit. I was using an ME67 with the LS-10, set 3.5 metres from an electroni
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-07/msg00197.html (22,944 bytes)

14. 2. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:13 +1000
Hi Vicki-- Thanks! I agree that there's no difference in the noise between these two samples. I think, however, that both the metronome and the room ambience behind it are considerably too loud for q
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-07/msg00198.html (25,500 bytes)

15. 5. Re: SP-TFB-2 with Edirol R-09HR or Olympus LS-10? (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:35:51 +1000
Hi Bernie & KlasNo contest on the quest for convenience and reliability. I'm running trials and thinking about taking an MP2->H2 combo on a once in a lifetime jaunt with a bunch of 8GB cards. I would
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2009-07/msg00045.html (24,976 bytes)

16. Re: LS-10 plus DPA 4060 (score: 42)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:35:44 +1000
Hi Dan-- So, for the above, the loudest noise was from the EM-23 -> MT90 combo but low Hz noise from the LS-10's _line input_ was also audible? Does this suggest the noise could be created in the A-D
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2009-11/msg00142.html (12,115 bytes)

17. 1. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 41)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Vicki! What an incredible sounding bird! I've never heard one of these before (they don't often turn up on the Cambridgeshire fens) and I was just stunned. How wonderful to have such a quiet place
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00363.html (10,915 bytes)

18. 2. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 41)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
This is a great set of recordings, and I love the Olympus info right now, since I'm waiting for an Olympus LS-10 to arrive. I may try it woth some other outboard mics, and will be sure to let anyone
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00364.html (9,811 bytes)

19. 6. Re: OLYMPUS LS-10 VS DAT RECORDINGS UPLOADED (score: 41)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:16 +1000
Hi Raimund-- Numerically, one would think the LS-10's mic pre would be inaudible. Maybe the battery/phantom powering self-noise discrepancy could account for some or all of the audible increase in no
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-06/msg00399.html (10,358 bytes)

20. Re: Recording Gear For Installation (was Olympus LS-10 and S (score: 41)
Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2010 12:36:13 +1000
Re: [Nature Recordists] Recording Gear For Installation (was Olympus LS-10 and S Hum, it may be that I'll want 2 recorders since I want to walk around to get sounds (stealth, conversations, interview
/archives/html/naturerecordists/2008-07/msg00155.html (16,441 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu