Videos of Acoustically-Coupled Audio Recordings

i can you can pull your tooth, even i phone models have such big differences in the frequency response. you just have to google it to find out. people who have dealt with it and made measurements. supposedly iphone 6 is the best for recording. all smartphones have a loudness function when recording (picture) that shows why the same recording of a music title is heard so differently. just look at the critical range of 1-5 khz where hearing is most sensitive is very different. that's why some recordings sounds more natural and others don't because sibelates are displayed exaggeratedly. ergo get a cheap calbriated microphone and then you can compare recordings on a good level. my opinion about it.View attachment 111593
I did not know this. Your chart only lists the iPhone 7+ , do you have similar charts for all the iPhone models?

Question, if the phones sound so different, is that solely due to differences in the in-built omni-directional microphone (meaning a common external mic would remove all variances)? What is the “loudness function” each has and is that loudness function the same in each phone? Is that loudness function solely encapsulated within the different microphones, or in some other circuit. If some other circuit, how would an external microphone make all iPhones record and playback the same music track identically?

If you know of an external microphone that would make every iPhone record and replay exactly the same, then please tell us which so that we can all use it on our phones, when comparing systems at shows or other’s homes. Such would be excellent.
 
Last edited:
I make no apologies for repeating myself in recommending this $200 mic which is appreciably more affordable than an iphone upgrade.


Its significant advantage over other very good mics Viz Shure MV88+ being that all audio processing is handled via the electronics inbuilt into the mic itself Ergo the playing field is entirely levelled across any and all models of iPhone , Android , iPad , Windows tablet etc .

Technical Information​

The dual-gain range mic preamp, A/D converters, D/A converters and USB digital audio interface are all contained within the mic itself, so no Apple analog electronics are used. This lets us bypass the heavy filtering and compression that are normally in use, and also to store calibration values that are read by software.

iTestMic2 is equivalent to having a pro Type 2-class test & measurement mic, low-noise matched preamp with two fixed gain ranges, A/D converter, DAC, and USB digital audio interface, all combined in one portable device.

iTestMic2 meets ANSI / ISO Type 2 specifications for frequency response, linearity, and directional characteristics. S6D do not guarantee that this microphone can meet the strict environmental requirements of Type 2 or Type 1.

I quite understand the reasoning behind Kedar and others preference to retain and add to the large repository of system videos made via iPhones exclusively , however as per Stephane previous post this repository is far from a definitive control and is not without significant variation.
 
If you know of an external microphone that would make every iPhone record and replay exactly the same, then please tell us which so that we can all use it on our phones, when comparing systems at shows or other’s homes. Such would be excellent.
A phrase often heard in the House Of Commons “ I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago.”
 
I did not know this. Your chart only lists the iPhone 7+ , do you have similar charts for all the iPhone models?

Question, if the phones sound so different, is that solely due to differences in the in-built omni-directional microphone (meaning a common external mic would remove all variances)? What is the “loudness function” each has and is that loudness function the same in each phone? Is that loudness function solely encapsulated within the different microphones, or in some other circuit. If some other circuit, how would an external microphone make all iPhones record and playback the same music track identically?

If you know of an external microphone that would make every iPhone record and replay exactly the same, then please tell us which so that we can all use it on our phones, when comparing systems at shows or other’s homes. Such would be excellent.
It's difficult to find measurements of modern smartphones on the internet, no one seems to be interested these days. In the case of the Dayton imm6 microphone, I can say that 27 points in the frequency range from 20Hz to 20kHz are adjusted with a calibration file to smooth out valleys and peaks. I don't think this works equally well on every smartphone with different audio processing software. It works great on my Samsung Tablet S3 (tuned by AKG). is a measurement microphone.

BwE
IMG20230610123317.jpg
sounds much more natural and dynamic and the bass finally sounds like it really sounds in the listening room, not so thin.i'm satisfied to hear this with headphones

Dayton cost 24€ is manageable money for an attempt. you only need headphone extension cable for better positioning
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Argonaut and Rexp
I make no apologies for repeating myself in recommending this $200 mic which is appreciably more affordable than an iphone upgrade.


Its significant advantage over other very good mics Viz Shure MV88+ being that all audio processing is handled via the electronics inbuilt into the mic itself Ergo the playing field is entirely levelled across any and all models of iPhone , Android , iPad , Windows tablet etc .

Technical Information​

The dual-gain range mic preamp, A/D converters, D/A converters and USB digital audio interface are all contained within the mic itself, so no Apple analog electronics are used. This lets us bypass the heavy filtering and compression that are normally in use, and also to store calibration values that are read by software.

iTestMic2 is equivalent to having a pro Type 2-class test & measurement mic, low-noise matched preamp with two fixed gain ranges, A/D converter, DAC, and USB digital audio interface, all combined in one portable device.

iTestMic2 meets ANSI / ISO Type 2 specifications for frequency response, linearity, and directional characteristics. S6D do not guarantee that this microphone can meet the strict environmental requirements of Type 2 or Type 1.

I quite understand the reasoning behind Kedar and others preference to retain and add to the large repository of system videos made via iPhones exclusively , however as per Stephane previous post this repository is far from a definitive control and is not without significant variation.
I like this a lot, I am certain it would better differentiate each change to my system than my stock iPhone 8, but at £230 each a bit expensive. And could I expect everyone else to buy such use when recording theirs or someone else‘s system?

I am trying to build a great analogue playback rig for a fraction of the price of the front-runners. I go to shows (when I can) and record those I aspire to With my mobile phone. I look at videos from shows (I didn’t make it to) done with mobile phones as well. I also video before and after changes of my system to make sure I am addressing the right issues.

So, for me (and a few others on this site), mobile phone videos are being used as a “tool“ to evaluate and improve our home systems. Needless to say, this works best if everyone is recording to YouTube with basic unadulterated mobile phones.

Others contributing to this thread are looking at this from a different perspective. I believe they are happy with their home system as it is and wish to find whatever microphone/video recorder (even if that requires buying or renting a professional rig) that will show off their home system to the greatest extent. This group are not using it as a tool to evaluate differences and changes, but (IMHO) rather using it to show off what they have for recognition and admiration. That is great for them, I just haven’t reached that level of satisfaction with my rig yet.

I suppose I should just buy the fancy microphone, record the changes I make on my own system, take the rig to shows to record those systems I wish to emulate and disregard all current and future video postings on this website as they will be of no use whatsoever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tima and Argonaut
I make no apologies for repeating myself in recommending this $200 mic which is appreciably more affordable than an iphone upgrade.


Its significant advantage over other very good mics Viz Shure MV88+ being that all audio processing is handled via the electronics inbuilt into the mic itself Ergo the playing field is entirely levelled across any and all models of iPhone , Android , iPad , Windows tablet etc .

Technical Information​

The dual-gain range mic preamp, A/D converters, D/A converters and USB digital audio interface are all contained within the mic itself, so no Apple analog electronics are used. This lets us bypass the heavy filtering and compression that are normally in use, and also to store calibration values that are read by software.

iTestMic2 is equivalent to having a pro Type 2-class test & measurement mic, low-noise matched preamp with two fixed gain ranges, A/D converter, DAC, and USB digital audio interface, all combined in one portable device.

iTestMic2 meets ANSI / ISO Type 2 specifications for frequency response, linearity, and directional characteristics. S6D do not guarantee that this microphone can meet the strict environmental requirements of Type 2 or Type 1.

I quite understand the reasoning behind Kedar and others preference to retain and add to the large repository of system videos made via iPhones exclusively , however as per Stephane previous post this repository is far from a definitive control and is not without significant variation.
I am not sure as to what exactly this does.

Plugged-in to my iPhone, does it automatically work as the recording microphone when making a video? Is there any measurements being taken and printed/encoded onto that video by this microphone?

It seems to incorporate audio-testing software, is it necessary to buy as is or do they make a sole recording microphone to this level? Will the lead on this plug directly into an iPhone 8 (they give a non-Apple ext/adap source that when I looked no longer exists).

Thanks
 
I like this a lot, I am certain it would better differentiate each change to my system than my stock iPhone 8, but at £230 each a bit expensive. And could I expect everyone else to buy such use when recording theirs or someone else‘s system?
I appreciate your points, however do bear in mind the mic’s Raison D'etre in that one would also be acquiring a very high quality mic with dedicated software suite(s) basic free , further modules or packs to pay ( also usable with REW altho I am unsure as to the usability of each mics individual and unique calibration file with REW ) as a powerful tool to measure ones music room and speaker response.

. Altho this vid features the older FireWire version.
 
Others contributing to this thread are looking at this from a different perspective. I believe they are happy with their home system as it is and wish to find whatever microphone/video recorder (even if that requires buying or renting a professional rig) that will show off their home system to the greatest extent. This group are not using it as a tool to evaluate differences and changes, but (IMHO) rather using it to show off what they have for recognition and admiration. That is great for them, I just haven’t reached that level of satisfaction with my rig yet.

Your condescending words (which I have emphasized in bold in your message) are irritating, and I am going to take them personally and reply to you one last time, because my "bullshit meter" is at its highest level here.

Perhaps you are the type of person that assumes the worst of people simply because what you see in others is in fact your own attitude ?

I started posting videos on youTube (with my phone) to share my excitement about a system which I take zero credit for. How I could personally "gain" from all this I have no idea.

My system only uses two components, both designed by the same person (the speaker, I assembled based on his plan). I gave links to this person's website in all my videos, and have written articles about his work, because I find it interesting and unconventional and I know that there are other people who are interested - and indeed, some people have contacted me as a result and I have given them my honest appraisal.

Moreover, this designer is constantly working himself on improving things (and in fact I am waiting for a fix on one of those components).

The only thing I can "tweak" myself is my room, and I have asked for advice on this forum and gotten some (thanks again @pjwd ) which has allowed me to improve the sound I get in my room and my listening pleasure. This is work in progress. Everything is work in progress...

I use higher quality equipment, not just a phone, because I simply believe a phone does not do justice to our systems. When it comes to audio, written words are one thing, but the proof is in the pudding, and that pudding is listening.

I have welcomed advice, criticism, and offered my own about my system. I don't have set ideas about what makes a system sound good - no posturing about digital vs analog, tube vers solid state, horns vs other types of speakers - and as a result no condescending attitude, I hope, towards people who go entirely different routes that I have taken - on the contrary there are a lot of systems here that I admire, and some forum members have great experience and expertise. As is often the case, real expertise often goes hand in hand with humility, something which I think you could use a good dose of. Have a nice day!
 
Last edited:
Your condescending words (which I have emphasized in bold in your message) are irritating, and I am going to take them personally and reply to you one last time, because my "bullshit meter" is at its highest level here.

Perhaps you are the type of person that assumes the worst of people simply because what you see in others is in fact your own attitude ?

I started posting videos on youTube (with my phone) to share my excitement about a system which I take zero credit for. How I could personally "gain" from all this I have no idea.

My system only uses two components, both designed by the same person (the speaker, I assembled based on his plan). I gave links to this person's website in all my videos, and have written articles about his work, because I find it interesting and unconventional and I know that there are other people who are interested - and indeed, some people have contacted me as a result and I have given them my honest appraisal.

Moreover, this designer is constantly working himself on improving things (and in fact I am waiting for a fix on one of those components).

The only thing I can "tweak" myself is my room, and I have asked for advice on this forum and gotten some (thanks again @pjwd ) which has allowed me to improve the sound I get in my room and my listening pleasure. This is work in progress. Everything is work in progress...

I use higher quality equipment, not just a phone, because I simply believe a phone does not do justice to our systems. When it comes to audio, written words are one thing, but the proof is in the pudding, and that pudding is listening.

I have welcomed advice, criticism, and offered my own about my system. I don't have set ideas about what makes a system sound good - no posturing about digital vs analog, tube vers solid state, horns vs other types of speakers - and as a result no condescending attitude, I hope, towards people who go entirely different routes that I have taken - on the contrary there are a lot of systems here that I admire, and some forum members have great experience and expertise. As is often the case, real expertise often goes hand in hand with humility, something which I think you could use a good dose of. Have a nice day!
You HAVE taken my general comments personally, haven’t you. What difference does it make to you what I think or believe? Why do you care that I prefer analogue LPs as a source over digital files? We don’t know each other, we’re not related, it’s just a forum for audiophiles to talk about their hobby, share ideas and learn new things. Forget what I post, I’m nobody important, it doesn’t matter. Chill.
 
You HAVE taken my general comments personally, haven’t you. What difference does it make to you what I think or believe? Why do you care that I prefer analogue LPs as a source over digital files? We don’t know each other, we’re not related, it’s just a forum for audiophiles to talk about their hobby, share ideas and learn new things. Forget what I post, I’m nobody important, it doesn’t matter. Chill.

If what I think and you believe is irrelevant, then why are you posting here in the first place ? This is a forum, where we exchange ideas not make snide comments about others.

I actually don't care whether you prefer analogue over digital - and that is exactly what I wrote in my reply.

Talking about our hobby, sharing ideas, and learning new things - YES.
Being condescending, and even insulting, towards others - NO.

I am glad we are not related.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Al M.
I appreciate your points, however do bear in mind the mic’s Raison D'etre in that one would also be acquiring a very high quality mic with dedicated software suite(s) basic free , further modules or packs to pay ( also usable with REW altho I am unsure as to the usability of each mics individual and unique calibration file with REW ) as a powerful tool to measure ones music room and speaker response.

. Altho this vid features the older FireWire version.
I watched the video and got a glimpse of extreme depth of my ignorance. I did understand a little about the acoustics test and fancied I might be able to use such to place my speakers most effectively, as well as discovering what frequencies need diffusing or absorbing in my room, but I would require some heavy tuition in order to gain enough competence to make it worthwhile. Does it come with URLs of teaching videos?

I appreciate your learning and, because of it, your confidence in this product and its many uses. I wish I had enough to make it as desirable to me. Thank you for the tip however, but I fear that you are casting pearls before swine here.
 
If what I think and you believe is irrelevant, then why are you posting here in the first place ? This is a forum, where we exchange ideas not make snide comments about others.

I actually don't care whether you prefer analogue over digital - and that is exactly what I wrote in my reply.

Talking about our hobby, sharing ideas, and learning new things - YES.
Being condescending, and even insulting, towards others - NO.

I am glad we are not related.
Where exactly was I condescending and insulting to you personally?
 
i can you can pull your tooth, even i phone models have such big differences in the frequency response. you just have to google it to find out. people who have dealt with it and made measurements. supposedly iphone 6 is the best for recording. all smartphones have a loudness function when recording (picture) that shows why the same recording of a music title is heard so differently. just look at the critical range of 1-5 khz where hearing is most sensitive is very different. that's why some recordings sounds more natural and others don't because sibelates are displayed exaggeratedly. ergo get a cheap calbriated microphone and then you can compare recordings on a good level. my opinion about it.View attachment 111593

With some higher quality microphones, you may avoid some of these issues of frequency response, but another important aspect is the ability to pick up low level sound. This is once aspect that motivated me to use better recording equipment: I wanted to see how well the details that I was hearing in my room could be conveyed through a recording. Recording with an iPhone, you simply cannot grasp the level of "finesse" that many systems produce (whether using digital or analog sources, and for probably many different types of speakers). This low level detail is something that I feel is fundamental to our appreciation of hi-fi.

Recordings of hi-fi shows are probably always going to be inadequate to evaluate that aspect of sound reproduction, to the extent that the rooms are so noisy. Playback at high SPL do compensate somewhat for this. The better recordings made on some YouTube channels also seem to be taken when less people were in attendance.

Unfortunately for us, things are not so simple, and we also have to take into account the ambient noise of the spaces we listen in (and more generally the acoustics). In a living room, noise level is typically above 30db (very good). 40db would probably be the norm, if you don't live in a noisy urban environment or have good sound insulation (ex: double-glazed windows). In a recording studio, noise level can be as low as 20db! This noise-level obviously makes a huge difference in our ability to hear low level detail without risking damaging our ears by pushing the volume too high.

Since our listening conditions are not all the same, it can make comparisons difficult (again, on that aspect).

The cello recordings we discussed before were made with a Zoom H4N Pro recorder, in what seems to be a living room, with the recorder located probably fairly close to the instrument. The level of detail in the recording is quite good (as mentioned before, you can hear the faint noise of NY streets in the background when she is talking):


This level of refinement in the recording obviously contributes greatly to the sense of realism, though there may be other aspects to take into account.

A basic SPL meter giving a noise level in your room may not give us the full picture.

In my room, my microphone/recorder was picking up too much low frequency noise. I recently found the issue, walking around the room late at night, with the recorder & mic in my hand and headphones plugged in. I realized that this noise was coming mostly from the building's ventilation shaft in the far corner of the living room. As I live on the top floor of the building, the extractor is located just above me, and produces a constant low level and low frequency hum that is perfectly inaudible, to my ears, from my listening position. You can hear it clearly in some of my recordings, before the music starts and when the music ends.

So in order to avoid noise, using these sensitive recorders, you may need to adjust the input level of the recorder, to mask the ambient noise, and record from your listening point at significantly higher volumes than you would normally be listening to (which is something I was not doing, being such an "amateur"). You can also attempt to isolate the source of noise...
 
Last edited:
With some higher quality microphones, you may avoid some of these issues of frequency response, but another important aspect is the ability to pick up low level sound. This is once aspect that motivated me to use better recording equipment: I wanted to see how well the details that I was hearing in my room could be conveyed through a recording. Recording with an iPhone, you simply cannot grasp the level of "finesse" that many systems produce (whether using digital or analog sources, and for probably many different types of speakers). This low level detail is something that I feel is fundamental to our appreciation of hi-fi.

Recordings of hi-fi shows are probably always going to be inadequate to evaluate that aspect of sound reproduction, to the extent that the rooms are so noisy. Playback at high SPL do compensate somewhat for this. The better recordings made on some YouTube channels also seem to be taken when less people were in attendance.

Unfortunately for us, things are not so simple, and we also have to take into account the ambient noise of the spaces we listen in (and more generally the acoustics). In a living room, noise level is typically above 30db (very good). 40db would probably be the norm, if you don't live in a noisy urban environment or have good sound insulation (ex: double-glazed windows). In a recording studio, noise level can be as low as 20db! This noise-level obviously makes a huge difference in our ability to hear low level detail without risking damaging our ears by pushing the volume too high.

Since our listening conditions are not all the same, it can make comparisons difficult (again, on that aspect).

The cello recordings we discussed before were made with a Zoom H4N Pro recorder, in what seems to be a living room, with the recorder located probably fairly close to the instrument. The level of detail in the recording is quite good (as mentioned before, you can hear the faint noise of NY streets in the background when she is talking):


This level of refinement in the recording obviously contributes greatly to the sense of realism, though there may be other aspects to take into account.

A basic SPL meter giving a noise level in your room may not give us the full picture.

In my room, my microphone/recorder was picking up too much low frequency noise. I recently found the issue, walking around the room late at night, with the recorder & mic in my hand and headphones plugged in. I realized that this noise was coming mostly from the building's ventilation shaft in the far corner of the living room. As I live on the top floor of the building, the extractor is located just above me, and produces a constant low level and low frequency hum that is perfectly inaudible, to my ears, from my listening position. You can hear it clearly in some of my recordings, before the music starts and when the music ends.

So in order to avoid noise, using these sensitive recorders, you may need to adjust the input level of the recorder, to mask the ambient noise, and record from your listening point at significantly higher volumes than you would normally be listening to (which is something I was not doing, being such an "amateur"). You can also attempt to isolate the source of noise...
Bummer about the ventilation extractor noise coming in through the shaft. Have you figured a way of quieting it?
 
It is really only an issue when recording, as I was recording too low. I actually removed a door to the entrance of my kitchen (close to my listening position) and am thinking of putting it back, because the fridge also makes a little noise, and a clock on the kitchen wall as well.... As the back half of the kitchen is open to the back of the living room, I am not sure it would make a difference.

Vis a vis detail levels in recordings, it is something that often frustrates me with YouTube videos. The video of Fermer's system playing "Truly" was a good example of the limitations, which naturally makes one wonder what the system really sound like on that aspect?

Jay's Audio Lab videos are another good example. Granted he only plays typical "Audiophile" tracks, but even on those it is apparent that the recording is veiled in comparison to original tracks. He is using a Shure mic, probably something close to the MV88+. Why a YouTuber who has a 1.000.000$ system and makes it his business to showcase "ultra high end audio systems" not realize it would be worth investing in a better microphone is beyond me.

Anyway, I just wanted to point out this limitation of many recordings, which is usually taken for granted.

On a side note, measurement microphones, which we are tempted to use for their extended range and flat frequency response, are typically not very good in that respect.
 
Last edited:
The option is using any USB mic with an adaptor:
Very nice and concise comparisons. And of course the harp is such a beautiful sounding instrument.

As I mentioned before, I never thought the Shure MV88 (the only external mic I've ever used) was all that much better than the iPhone XR and 12 Pro's built-in mics for the purpose of in-room recordings. But I did say I thought the MV88 provided greater consistency.

Only two concerns with this rather simple and straight-forward comparison (a concept audiphiles could never understand) include:

1. I suspect she may not have choosen the most natural/musical setting (flat) for the MV88 mic.

2. She did an overall excellent job attempting to perform an apples-to-apples comparison. Except that she brought the Yeti Nano mic (by far the biggest mic) about 1 ft away from the harp whereas the other 2 mics were about 3 ft away from the harp. Though I didn't hear significant differences (except for her voice), the concept of moving one mic that much closer is potentially a real game changer and potentially compromises the entire comparison between the 3 mics.

Still very well done and a good reminder that my satisfaction with the MV88 was somewhat substantiated here - even if per chance the MV88's settings were less than ideal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rensselaer
Very nice and concise comparisons. And of course the harp is such a beautiful sounding instrument.

As I mentioned before, I never thought the Shure MV88 (the only external mic I've ever used) was all that much better than the iPhone XR and 12 Pro's built-in mics for the purpose of in-room recordings. But I did say I thought the MV88 provided greater consistency.

Only two concerns with this rather simple and straight-forward comparison (a concept audiphiles could never understand) include:

1. I suspect she may not have choosen the most natural/musical setting (flat) for the MV88 mic.

2. She did an overall excellent job attempting to perform an apples-to-apples comparison. Except that she brought the Yeti Nano mic (by far the biggest mic) about 1 ft away from the harp whereas the other 2 mics were about 3 ft away from the harp. Though I didn't hear significant differences (except for her voice), the concept of moving one mic that much closer is potentially a real game changer and potentially compromises the entire comparison between the 3 mics.

Still very well done and a good reminder that my satisfaction with the MV88 was somewhat substantiated here - even if per chance the MV88's settings were less than ideal.
Yes I think she set the MV88 to 'voice'
This video I think it's set to flat:
 
With some higher quality microphones, you may avoid some of these issues of frequency response, but another important aspect is the ability to pick up low level sound. This is once aspect that motivated me to use better recording equipment: I wanted to see how well the details that I was hearing in my room could be conveyed through a recording. Recording with an iPhone, you simply cannot grasp the level of "finesse" that many systems produce (whether using digital or analog sources, and for probably many different types of speakers). This low level detail is something that I feel is fundamental to our appreciation of hi-fi.

Recordings of hi-fi shows are probably always going to be inadequate to evaluate that aspect of sound reproduction, to the extent that the rooms are so noisy. Playback at high SPL do compensate somewhat for this. The better recordings made on some YouTube channels also seem to be taken when less people were in attendance.

Unfortunately for us, things are not so simple, and we also have to take into account the ambient noise of the spaces we listen in (and more generally the acoustics). In a living room, noise level is typically above 30db (very good). 40db would probably be the norm, if you don't live in a noisy urban environment or have good sound insulation (ex: double-glazed windows). In a recording studio, noise level can be as low as 20db! This noise-level obviously makes a huge difference in our ability to hear low level detail without risking damaging our ears by pushing the volume too high.

Since our listening conditions are not all the same, it can make comparisons difficult (again, on that aspect).

The cello recordings we discussed before were made with a Zoom H4N Pro recorder, in what seems to be a living room, with the recorder located probably fairly close to the instrument. The level of detail in the recording is quite good (as mentioned before, you can hear the faint noise of NY streets in the background when she is talking):


This level of refinement in the recording obviously contributes greatly to the sense of realism, though there may be other aspects to take into account.

A basic SPL meter giving a noise level in your room may not give us the full picture.

In my room, my microphone/recorder was picking up too much low frequency noise. I recently found the issue, walking around the room late at night, with the recorder & mic in my hand and headphones plugged in. I realized that this noise was coming mostly from the building's ventilation shaft in the far corner of the living room. As I live on the top floor of the building, the extractor is located just above me, and produces a constant low level and low frequency hum that is perfectly inaudible, to my ears, from my listening position. You can hear it clearly in some of my recordings, before the music starts and when the music ends.

So in order to avoid noise, using these sensitive recorders, you may need to adjust the input level of the recorder, to mask the ambient noise, and record from your listening point at significantly higher volumes than you would normally be listening to (which is something I was not doing, being such an "amateur"). You can also attempt to isolate the source of noise...
the noise level in the room is not the determining factor. the inherent noise of the microphone in connection with the sensitivity is the problem. cheap microphones are already at 40db-55db noise. Do you still have a sensitivity of more -40dbv at 1khz 94db test tone, there will be guaranteed noise.microphone-sensitivity-comparison-image.jpg
I think you will still hear how much better it sounds than with a standard microphone. it's about fun and not a professional recording. if you want it professional you have to use bruel&kjaer microphone these are the best in 60 years. there is nothing better but I don't spend 900-2000€ for microphone + preamp to make a youtube video.
Specs bruel &kjaer
 
The option is using any USB mic with an adaptor:
I listened to the video on Sony ZR1 headphones. The standard mic sounds fuller, like sitting under a big bell (soundstage), with Shure mic harp strings they have more energy and more timbre, the soundstage is more realistic without reverb. Shure's voice looks very different, more like a woman's, with the standard microphone it sounds like a baritone.:p simply formulated, I'm not an expert.
To record voices well, listen to a newscaster on the radio with headphones, it's easier to understand how a voice sounds natural than when a voice is singing in the video. my opinion about it.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing