Tascam portacapture X6 (2 Viewers)

[Jon Roads]

I want to buy a field recorder, and from my research the Tascam portacapture X6 seems like a good choice. I'll be using it outdoors, as well as for nocmig at my house, and eventually I'll want to attach a shotgun mic to it. From my reading it seems self noise is one of the main things to be aware of. Tascam give the EIN as ≤−125 dBu, is this ok? Also, when I do get a mic, which is more important, the self noise of the mic or the self noise of the recorder?
Would definitely appreciate any advice!

 

[Mono]

Noise is additive. Ideally you should be trying to minimise it through the chain. The important thing is the signal to noise ratio. A good field setup will enable a good signal.

 

[Jon Roads]

Noise is additive. Ideally you should be trying to minimise it through the chain. The important thing is the signal to noise ratio. A good field setup will enable a good signal.

That's what I thought. Do you think this field recorder is a good one for that? Most of the reviews I'm reading are coming from musicians, which I think probably don't have quite the same requirements as birders.

 

[3dpan]

I want to buy a field recorder, and from my research the Tascam portacapture X6 seems like a good choice. I'll be using it outdoors, as well as for nocmig at my house, and eventually I'll want to attach a shotgun mic to it. From my reading it seems self noise is one of the main things to be aware of. Tascam give the EIN as ≤−125 dBu, is this ok? Also, when I do get a mic, which is more important, the self noise of the mic or the self noise of the recorder?
Would definitely appreciate any advice!

EiN of -125 dBu is very good, almost as good as my (affordable) reference standard of -127dBu for the ZOOM F3, F6 series.
But I would suspect that did not include the attached mics. You would need to use a separate low noise mic, (as Mono suggested above).

 

[Jon Roads]

EiN of -125 dBu is very good, almost as good as my (affordable) reference standard of -127dBu for the ZOOM F3, F6 series.
But I would suspect that did not include the attached mics. You would need to use a separate low noise mic, (as Mono suggested above).

That's good to know! I looked at the Zoom F3 and F6, but really want one with built in mics as I won't necessarily want to be carrying external mics all the time. I think as soon as I have got it I'll start using it as is, while saving for a proper shotgun mic to go with it, but it'll be nice to have the ability to carry it with me as a standalone unit as well.

 

[Jon.Bryant]

That's good to know!

As mono says, the signal to noise ratio is key.

For bird recordings (and I think all field recordings), you are probably going to get more unwanted environmental noise than self noise from the equipment. The addition of noise through the chain is not so simple to calculate, but using this site Noise calculator, if we assume we have 40dB of environmental noise, and 20dB each of mic and 20dB of recorder noise, the total is still only 40dB, as under the logarithmic scale the equipment noise is very small compared to the environmental noise - the noise outside my house (where it is currently reasonably quite) is about 43dB!

I personally wouldn’t worry too much about self noise of whatever equipment you choose. Most reputable companies are unlikely to manufacture field recorders with very poor equivalent noise values. I think you will enjoy the results more by focussing on minimising environmental noise (early mornings, quite locations) and improving signal to noise ratio. For field recordings this invariably means getting as close as you can to the target, so the wanted signal is as loud as reasonably possible.

If the signal to noise ratio is poor, then when you adjust the gain during recording, or you level the recording in post, you are of course increasing the unwanted noise as well.

 

[Jon Roads]

As mono says, the signal to noise ratio is key.

For bird recordings (and I think all field recordings), you are probably going to get more unwanted environmental noise than self noise from the equipment. The addition of noise through the chain is not so simple to calculate, but using this site Noise calculator, if we assume we have 40dB of environmental noise, and 20dB each of mic and 20dB of recorder noise, the total is still only 40dB, as under the logarithmic scale the equipment noise is very small compared to the environmental noise - the noise outside my house (where it is currently reasonably quite) is about 43dB!

I personally wouldn’t worry too much about self noise of whatever equipment you choose. Most reputable companies are unlikely to manufacture field recorders with very poor equivalent noise values. I think you will enjoy the results more by focussing on minimising environmental noise (early mornings, quite locations) and improving signal to noise ratio. For field recordings this invariably means getting as close as you can to the target, so the wanted signal is as loud as reasonably possible.

If the signal to noise ratio is poor, then when you adjust the gain during recording, or you level the recording in post, you are of course increasing the unwanted noise as well.

Thanks for that, that's reassuring! Always quite daunting to lay out a lot of money on something technical when you're not well versed in the field!
I'm hoping to get a shotgun mic fairly soon afterwards, and I'm hoping that that will help cut down on extraneous noise.
Certainly I'm reassured that the recorder itself should be suitable for what I need, so thank you!

 

[Mono]

As you may have seen from the optics forums obsessives can get obsessive about the minutiae of specs sheets. Audio recordists, especially hobbyists and especially musicians can get equally obsessive. What matters in the end is if the final recording does what you want it too.

 

[Jon.Bryant]

I'm hoping to get a shotgun mic fairly soon afterwards, and I'm hoping that that will help cut down on extraneous noise.

Just as a word of warning, shotgun mics are very good at filtering out off-axis high pitched sounds, but are not so good at filtering out off-axis low pitched sounds. I think this is to do with physics - a main front part of a shotgun is an interference tube, which creates off axis sound waves out of phase, that cancel each other out. Low pitched sounds diffract around obstacles very easily, and I understand this diminishes the effect of the interference tube. This can be seen in the polar diagrams in the specs. Looking at some Senheisser mics, at 125KHz, at 30 degrees off axis, the reduction is minimal, at 60 degrees off axis, the deduction is about 3dB - so a halving of the noise, and at 90 degrees about 9dB (so 1/8 of the noise).

So you have a pretty big cone in front of the mic where you don’t get a lot of noise reduction.

By contrast parabolic mics provide increasing gain at higher frequencies. So assuming your target is high pitched, you get gain applied to the target, but far less gain applied to lower pitched sounds. But parabolic mics are generally cumbersome, relatively expensive and colour the recording (creating an impression you were much closer to the bird). If you want a recording as you would normally hear the bird, i.e less stood less close, then a shotgun is probably the best option, but you may need to also try and reduce any noise in post.

 

[Jon Roads]

Y

As you may have seen from the optics forums obsessives can get obsessive about the minutiae of specs sheets. Audio recordists, especially hobbyists and especially musicians can get equally obsessive. What matters in the end is if the final recording does what you want it too.

Yes, I thought there was probably an element of that! Since at the moment I'm just trying to capture audio using Merlin on a smartphone, any of this kit is likely to be such a leap forward for me I'll be happy with it I'm sure. But I always like to buy right and buy once, and it'll be good to be set up with the right kit at the start.

 

[Jon Roads]

Just as a word of warning, shotgun mics are very good at filtering out off-axis high pitched sounds, but are not so good at filtering out off-axis low pitched sounds. I think this is to do with physics - a main front part of a shotgun is an interference tube, which creates off axis sound waves out of phase, that cancel each other out. Low pitched sounds diffract around obstacles very easily, and I understand this diminishes the effect of the interference tube. This can be seen in the polar diagrams in the specs. Looking at some Senheisser mics, at 125KHz, at 30 degrees off axis, the reduction is minimal, at 60 degrees off axis, the deduction is about 3dB - so a halving of the noise, and at 90 degrees about 9dB (so 1/8 of the noise).

So you have a pretty big cone in front of the mic where you don’t get a lot of noise reduction.

By contrast parabolic mics provide increasing gain at higher frequencies. So assuming your target is high pitched, you get gain applied to the target, but far less gain applied to lower pitched sounds. But parabolic mics are generally cumbersome, relatively expensive and colour the recording (creating an impression you were much closer to the bird). If you want a recording as you would normally hear the bird, i.e less stood less close, then a shotgun is probably the best option, but you may need to also try and reduce any noise in post.

Thanks for the info! I've pretty much ruled out a parabolic on the grounds of carrying the thing, and attaching it to my window ledge (I was thinking of using a clamp to hold the shotgun, but a parabolic would end up touching the window I think). As for doing stuff in post I'm going to start trying to learn the basics of audacity with the .wav files from my smartphone. I know the portacapture X6 does 32bit float recording, which from my reading sounds like it's an advantage when it comes to trying to reduce noise in post.

 

[Jon.Bryant]

I was thinking of using a clamp to hold the shotgun, but a parabolic would end up touching the window I think

Looks like I am trying to be a party pooper, but I wouldn't personally use a shotgun for nocmigging. The reason is because of the way shotguns works. Basically a shotgun is like a mic with filter attached, that reduces off-axis noise. The mics are better at filtering out high pitched sound, which means that targets (which will be mainly high pitched), that are off axis will be reduced in volume, which is not really what you want.

I have personally used an omni mic, but then of course you have to contend with capturing environmental noise as well - every late night reveler making there way home, every fox bark and every house alarm! I quite like the Wildlife Acoustics kit, as you have an omni mic, waterproof recorder and mic, a way of securing the device to avoid theft and very good battery life. I previously used the SM4 with the external mic (but this model is a bit expensive). It was very simple to make a support for the mic on chains, and then to slide the support out of a roof light onto the tiled roof. I actually found that I didn't get a lot of ambient noise from a roof mounted mic - I just think that Surrey is not a great migrant location, and I got bored reviewing hours and hours of recordings, and only locating Redwing calls and very occasionally a Moorhen or Grey Heron. I also tried the same recorder at my allotment, which is nearer to a lake, and would occasionally get Green and Common Sandpiper.

The SM Mini was used in Beijing to record nocturnal migrants Wild Beijing, although they were lucky enough to have a rooftop location on a high building. I am pretty sure that the results were good, although I haven't reviewed the complete posts. The following link Nocmigging shows an SM Mini placed above a parabola for nocmigging - see my comments below. There is now an SM Micro, which they have reduced the price of to £156.00 for a unit without card, but I am unsure if anyone has tried nocmigging with this unit.

I have been a bit anti about using a parabola for nocmiging, because the focus of a parabola is quite narrow, so I wounder what is the real benefit. But others on this forum have highlighted that a parabola with an omni mic will capture sound direct, as well as sounds in focus that are reflected (and boosted) by the dish. So assuming the omni has a similar sensitivity as my SM4 mic, you would get equal capture of most sounds and 'boosted' sounds for the few birds in focus - so some benefit. You must however, be sure of the type of mic in the parabola - for instance I have a Telinga Twin-Science, where you have two mics and you can choose which one you place in focus. If you were to use the cardiodal (which faces in), you get a very directional recording, with very little ambient noise - but this would be pretty useless for nocmigging, as the mic would reject calls out of focus, which would fall on the back of the mic and would not be reflected back on to the mic by the dish.

So a parabola and shotgun are almost opposites - a parabola with omni will capture all sounds in front of the dish and boost sounds in focus, whereas a shotgun will capture only sounds in focus, but reject/reduce sounds out of focus.

Hope this makes sense and good luck with your endeavors.

 

[Jon Roads]

Looks like I am trying to be a party pooper, but I wouldn't personally use a shotgun for nocmigging. The reason is because of the way shotguns works. Basically a shotgun is like a mic with filter attached, that reduces off-axis noise. The mics are better at filtering out high pitched sound, which means that targets (which will be mainly high pitched), that are off axis will be reduced in volume, which is not really what you want.

I have personally used an omni mic, but then of course you have to contend with capturing environmental noise as well - every late night reveler making there way home, every fox bark and every house alarm! I quite like the Wildlife Acoustics kit, as you have an omni mic, waterproof recorder and mic, a way of securing the device to avoid theft and very good battery life. I previously used the SM4 with the external mic (but this model is a bit expensive). It was very simple to make a support for the mic on chains, and then to slide the support out of a roof light onto the tiled roof. I actually found that I didn't get a lot of ambient noise from a roof mounted mic - I just think that Surrey is not a great migrant location, and I got bored reviewing hours and hours of recordings, and only locating Redwing calls and very occasionally a Moorhen or Grey Heron. I also tried the same recorder at my allotment, which is nearer to a lake, and would occasionally get Green and Common Sandpiper.

The SM Mini was used in Beijing to record nocturnal migrants Wild Beijing, although they were lucky enough to have a rooftop location on a high building. I am pretty sure that the results were good, although I haven't reviewed the complete posts. The following link Nocmigging shows an SM Mini placed above a parabola for nocmigging - see my comments below. There is now an SM Micro, which they have reduced the price of to £156.00 for a unit without card, but I am unsure if anyone has tried nocmigging with this unit.

I have been a bit anti about using a parabola for nocmiging, because the focus of a parabola is quite narrow, so I wounder what is the real benefit. But others on this forum have highlighted that a parabola with an omni mic will capture sound direct, as well as sounds in focus that are reflected (and boosted) by the dish. So assuming the omni has a similar sensitivity as my SM4 mic, you would get equal capture of most sounds and 'boosted' sounds for the few birds in focus - so some benefit. You must however, be sure of the type of mic in the parabola - for instance I have a Telinga Twin-Science, where you have two mics and you can choose which one you place in focus. If you were to use the cardiodal (which faces in), you get a very directional recording, with very little ambient noise - but this would be pretty useless for nocmigging, as the mic would reject calls out of focus, which would fall on the back of the mic and would not be reflected back on to the mic by the dish.

So a parabola and shotgun are almost opposites - a parabola with omni will capture all sounds in front of the dish and boost sounds in focus, whereas a shotgun will capture only sounds in focus, but reject/reduce sounds out of focus.

Hope this makes sense and good luck with your endeavors.

I had wondered about that, but I've seen shotguns recommended for nocmig so I assumed capturing the birds that fly through the 'beam' was the idea. I guess there's a trade off between capturing fewer birds, but also fewer extraneous sounds, or capturing more of everything. But the X6 does have it's own mics anyway, and I'd be using them while I save for an external mic, so it might be that they work well enough on their own for nocmig, though if course the recorder would need to be weatherproofed for that.

THe shotgun would be useful out in the field, but I have wondered a bit about just how often I'm likely to carry a lot of recording gear whilst also having scope, bins etc. You've definitely given me a lot to think about there. That wildlife acoustics site looks good, I'll check out their range. I hadn't found that before now.

 

[ICatchSounds]

The X6 is a nice all rounder. Just be mindful if you like to use 3.5mm external mics. The XLR and onboard mics use Dual ADC but the 3.5mm jack is only a single ADC. You can still clip recordings in 32 bit. The built in mics are also indistinguishable from the sound quality of the cheaper DR-07XP 32bit.