Hi.

Here's my first example/test of my Stereo Nano 172. This video is in UHD/4K 59.94 FPS with the latest F/W 01.06.00.30 for anyone interested .

Here's the original post about the mic build, I'll replace it soon with the final version.

https://forum.dji.com/thread-184318-1-1.html

Cheers,
Dave.

Hello and good day Dave. Thank you for sharing this test video you have created. Great work and thank you for your valued support.

I don’t get it David. Are you saying this is stereo recorded? If that was it, you should say something?

TheCameraGuy Posted at 4-19 16:43
I don’t get it David. Are you saying this is stereo recorded? If that was it, you should say something?

Are you saying you don't know what the difference is between mono and stereo?

TheCameraGuy Posted at 4-19 16:43
I don’t get it David. Are you saying this is stereo recorded? If that was it, you should say something?

How is everything going? TheCameraGuy. Is your Rode mic arrived? and Osmo Power Case working well?

Thanks Dave, a nice presentation of the mic performance.

Oh-no Posted at 4-19 17:25
Thanks Dave, a nice presentation of the mic performance.

Hi.

Thanks.

It's not a wide stereo recording as the capsules are omnis and very close to each other and the Pocket isn't the best two channel/stereo recorder.

I'll see if I can make up a quick stereo bar with capsules wider apart and try some traffic sounds, if I do this with my main camera you can really hear a difference. That said, I think the Pocket has gotten a bit better.

For your own recording try recording in high mode, this will be quieter than auto but doesn't process the sound as much and maybe is a bit wider. In post try and reduce some low end, maybe about -12db at around 100HZs and maybe boost around 3000Hzs by about +3db or so, this may help with the stereo perception. Basically, we don't really perceive stereo/direction with low frequencies and mid/high frequencies is where we perceive direction, hence wider stereo with binaural type stuff.

Cheers,
Dave.

David_Harry Posted at 4-19 17:11
Are you saying you don't know what the difference is between mono and stereo?

Not on my iPad. I didn’t comment to anger you?

Oh-no Posted at 4-19 17:24
How is everything going? TheCameraGuy. Is your Rode mic arrived? and Osmo Power Case working well?

Well the Rode didn’t work as well as the Movo, which is a copy.
The power case is as it is.

Thanks for The aggressions?

David_Harry Posted at 4-19 17:54
Hi.

Thanks.

Thanks Dave, I will try different audio level setting at OP to see which setting is optimal for a particular environment.

TheCameraGuy Posted at 4-19 17:59
Not on my iPad. I didn’t comment to anger you?

I think you've misunderstood me, you most certainly didn't anger me. I was asking if you knew the difference in case there was an explanation needed.

When you say you are listening on an iPad are you talking about just the built in speakers?

To gauge stereo properly you really need to use headphones or sit at the correct distance and angles using speakers.

Oh-no Posted at 4-19 18:02
Thanks Dave, I will try different audio level setting at OP to see which setting is optimal for a particular environment.

Hi.

The gain setting is more to do with the sensitivity of the mics as opposed to the scenario.

Even the high setting is still very low but it doesn't apply anywhere near the dynamics processing that auto does. Gaining the lower level of the high setting in post seems to have slightly better results as it wasn't effected as much in the original recording compared to auto.

LoudMax is a very good plugin for gaining, check my YouTube channel I've done a couple of tutorials about it,

Cheers,
Dave.

David_Harry Posted at 4-19 18:15
Hi.

The gain setting is more to do with the sensitivity of the mics as opposed to the scenario.

Thanks Dave, I will try LoudMax, for sure, you are my mentor :-)

Hi Dave.
I can't say I'm hearing a good stereo spread and I was puzzled at the pickup pattern response of the chosen capsules. There is definitely less phasing between channels but there is also a very low-frequency drone going on that does not appear to be wind-related that may need a roll-off. Some of the nearby speech occurring was clear enough and the overall sound seems an improvement as it no longer sounds as if it was recorded 'indoors'. Sound levels and noise floor all sounded good. Is there a possibility the low-frequency levels are attenuating the levels of the higher frequencies and do you think that could be improved?
Nice demo all the same and informative.

Ray-CubeAce Posted at 4-20 02:19
Hi Dave.
I can't say I'm hearing a good stereo spread and I was puzzled at the pickup pattern response of the chosen capsules. There is definitely less phasing between channels but there is also a very low-frequency drone going on that does not appear to be wind-related that may need a roll-off. Some of the nearby speech occurring was clear enough and the overall sound seems an improvement as it no longer sounds as if it was recorded 'indoors'. Sound levels and noise floor all sounded good. Is there a possibility the low-frequency levels are attenuating the levels of the higher frequencies and do you think that could be improved?
Nice demo all the same and informative.

Hi Ray.

Yes, the width is very narrow. This is in part the distance of the capsules but mostly the way the Pocket is recording stereo, or lack of.

There is zero phasing in this recording as a result of the Pocket's processing, as you would get with the internals. Any other phase related anomalies are natural.

As for the low end, this again is the Pocket. It can be quite severe with its compression and especially with auto mode, which is really the only useful gain setting to use unless you don't mind doing post.

These capsules are very good across the audible frequency range and do have better/accurate LF response compared to the Pocket's internals.

The capsules are also mega quiet for inherent noise floor. You'd never hear anything on these capsules when matched with a good power source, pre-amp and A/D. Any hiss would be the Pocket. That said and aside from the obvious stereo and dynamics issues, I think the Pocket's external audio is very respectable  with regard noise and tone.

To get the absolute best, as long as the Pocket likes the source mics, recording in high mode is the best for a few reasons. While high is still very low and not much different compared to low and mid, it does appear much less unaffected by the dynamics processing. If you gain in limit in post it's arguable that you'll get a slightly better sound using high and the stereo width also appears better but still not what it should.

I've no reason to believe that DJI can't improve the audio facilities on the Pocket. A bit more relaxing with the threshold of the AGC/dynamics and it's summing, plus better fixed points for the manual settings and maybe an option to completely bypass the dynamics in a full manual mode and the Pocket would sound excellent with external mics. I wouldn't be surprised if we see something like this, if not all of it, in future software updates.

For now, the best and easiest option is to use auto mode and them raise it in post with a ceiling limiter, all of which takes seconds to do.

Cheers,
Dave.

David_Harry Posted at 4-20 04:18
Hi Ray.

Yes, the width is very narrow. This is in part the distance of the capsules but mostly the way the Pocket is recording stereo, or lack of.

Dave, for me, your current nano stereo mic is very good already, if you extend the distance between both mic capsules with plastic tube, sure can achieve wider sound results, but it will then less petite ...  I am also struggle to shorten the distance to make it more handy, have to find the sweet spot ....

David_Harry Posted at 4-19 18:08
I think you've misunderstood me, you most certainly didn't anger me. I was asking if you knew the difference in case there was an explanation needed.

When you say you are listening on an iPad are you talking about just the built in speakers?

OK, Im glad I didn't upset you. Yes, I know the difference, and yes, it was just through the 9.7 inch iPad speaker. I guess I could plug in some headphones. I have a small shot gun, the Nikon ME-1 that is stereo that I should check out on the Osmo Pocket.

My recordings in mono only produces data on the left track, the right is clean. Is that the same for you?

David_Harry Posted at 4-20 04:18
Hi Ray.

Yes, the width is very narrow. This is in part the distance of the capsules but mostly the way the Pocket is recording stereo, or lack of.

Hi Dave.
I'm wondering if Dji deliberately set the input levels low as they have no influence on end user use.
I would think attending an event recording a loud PA system, that the output would be more than sufficient.
I would like to see some form of metering available on the Pockets screen and if possible the slider control to be turned into a volume switch when showing the volume, if not an actual volume control.
I have always been quite happy with the Pockets S/N/R.

The only thing I dislike about modern mic capsules I see for sale is I seldom see accompanying frequency response curve graphics or polar rejection response curves. On the other hand, the ones you have used so far seem great value for money.

TheCameraGuy Posted at 4-20 06:06
OK, Im glad I didn't upset you. Yes, I know the difference, and yes, it was just through the 9.7 inch iPad speaker. I guess I could plug in some headphones. I have a small shot gun, the Nikon ME-1 that is stereo that I should check out on the Osmo Pocket.

My recordings in mono only produces data on the left track, the right is clean. Is that the same for you?

I usually only record mono myself as I don't like dialogue moving in a stereo field. When I record with a mono mic I get signal on both recorded channels. If the mono mic is using a TRS connection where T&R are normalised, joined together, the sound is on both channels meaning it's centred. If I use TS then the right channel is all messed up, this isn't an issue for me as I only use the left channel which sounds fine, I then just centre the left channel and gain it in post using a limiter and re-summing. If you're only getting the left channel when using a mono mic that's wired TRS, it may mean that you only have T/tip/pole 1 live and R/ring/pole 2 may not be connected. I can't say for sure as I don't have anything wired that way. Or may suggest that there's an issue somewhere between your adaptor or Pocket.

Ray-CubeAce Posted at 4-20 06:51
Hi Dave.
I'm wondering if Dji deliberately set the input levels low as they have no influence on end user use.
I would think attending an event recording a loud PA system, that the output would be more than sufficient.

Hi Ray.


I'm wondering if Dji deliberately set the input levels low as they have no influence on end user use.

I doubt this very much as the levels are too low, I think it's a mistake as even a loud mic/signal records very low.

I would think attending an event recording a loud PA system, that the output would be more than sufficient.

Again, this is unlikely to be the case, I've done loudness tests and distortion at the capsule would be an issue before the recorded level.

I would like to see some form of metering available on the Pockets screen and if possible the slider control to be turned into a volume switch when showing the volume, if not an actual volume control.
I have always been quite happy with the Pockets S/N/R.

I agree, given that certain other things seem to work very small on the tiny screen, manual adjustment and indicator may work as well.

The only thing I dislike about modern mic capsules I see for sale is I seldom see accompanying frequency response curve graphics or polar rejection response curves.

For me personally I never go by specifications, printed or otherwise. I've never found these things to be accurate even with expensive mics. I always go by ear.

On the other hand, the ones you have used so far seem great value for money.

I agree. The only problem is that after a certain point using better more expensive mics with the Pocket just gives diminishing returns. I've tried a number of very good cardioids and preamps with the Pocket and the results aren't appreciably better than using some of the better sounding cheap options. You definitely won't hear the characteristics of a better mic on the pocket as you would with a better recording system.

Cheers,
Dave.

I'm wondering if Dji deliberately set the input levels low as they have no influence on end user use.

I doubt this very much as the levels are too low, I think it's a mistake as even a loud mic/signal records very low.

I would think attending an event recording a loud PA system, that the output would be more than sufficient.

Again, this is unlikely to be the case, I've done loudness tests and distortion at the capsule would be an issue before the recorded level.

That I wasn't aware of, thanks for the info.

I would like to see some form of metering available on the Pockets screen and if possible the slider control to be turned into a volume switch when showing the volume, if not an actual volume control.
I have always been quite happy with the Pockets S/N/R.

I agree, given that certain other things seem to work very small on the tiny screen, manual adjustment and indicator may work as well.

What about just a couple of small squares to one side that go from blue to green to amber to red? Anything would be better than nothing.

The only thing I dislike about modern mic capsules I see for sale is I seldom see accompanying frequency response curve graphics or polar rejection response curves.

For me personally, I never go by specifications, printed or otherwise. I've never found these things to be accurate even with expensive mics. I always go by ear.

You are lucky then, I've never been given a chance to test out an expensive mic without buying it

On the other hand, the ones you have used so far seem great value for money.

I agree. The only problem is that after a certain point using better more expensive mics with the Pocket just gives diminishing returns. I've tried a number of very good cardioids and preamps with the Pocket and the results aren't appreciably better than using some of the better sounding cheap options. You definitely won't hear the characteristics of a better mic on the pocket as you would with a better recording system.

Agreed. Outside in particular there is little control over tone anyway.  

In my other post of binaural mics set up test, the mics are just simple ones, could be relatively higher quality from an old Sony camcorder, no power feed to it, just wired correctly and connects to the OP audio adapter, I was surprised by the result at almost no cost, OP level set to auto, and I did nothing to it, the video/audio are straight out (I didn't connect the phone to it to monitor the level meter at all), I can hear the low hums from a factory and high squeaks from the brakes of a van same as what I can hear at the site during playback, I am happy with it,

I do not mean that if others doing more on audio side is wrong, what I mean is for the size and purpose of the OP, some very simple set up to achieve reasonable/acceptable/real life like audio quality is my goal, besides, I myself hate/lazy to do editing, the straight out result is promising, and my daughter said it was amazing and smile, thanks to Dave's instruction :-)

IMHO, due to the limited processing power inside the OP, I don't think it will offer some very high end audio results. If there is a future firmware update which improves audio, we will try and test to make better recordings.

One more question to Dave, my current Olympus digital stereo recorder is rather old, and something not working properly, it automatically switch on when the HOLD switch at off position and drain the battery, I tend to buy a new one, a medium grade one cost not more than 100 pounds, the question is some mic setting are A-B, some X-Y, which one is better if I want a decent back up sound track for the OP?

Oh-no Posted at 4-20 14:41
One more question to Dave, my current Olympus digital stereo recorder is rather old, and something not working properly, it automatically switch on when the HOLD switch at off position and drain the battery, I tend to buy a new one, a medium grade one cost not more than 100 pounds, the question is some mic setting are A-B, some X-Y, which one is better if I want a decent back up sound track for the OP?

Hi.

Those mic configurations are going to be for the internal mics and not anything connected externally. Also those configurations are going to be for cardioid mics and don't work with omnis, although you could argue that one of them will work with omnis but only if they're spaced far enough, as in a binaural setup or similar wide stereo.

Cheers,
Dave.

David_Harry Posted at 4-21 08:16
Hi.

Those mic configurations are going to be for the internal mics and not anything connected externally. Also those configurations are going to be for cardioid mics and don't work with omnis, although you could argue that one of them will work with omnis but only if they're spaced far enough, as in a binaural setup or similar wide stereo.

Thank you Dave, yes I mean internal mics, for sure if I need wider space, I can connect external binaural setup, what I mean is, if I use the digital recorder alone in general purpose, say work in an environment to capture sound not more than 15 meters away,  A-B or X-Y is better? I know I can select those with mechanical adjustable A-B, X-Y, but it will cost much more than my budget.

The main purpose I need are: a) record a meeting, b) record percussion play or some singing, c) expansion recording kit for the OP.

for example, Zoom H1n or Tascam DR-05 better?

Oh-no Posted at 4-21 08:30
Thank you Dave, yes I mean internal mics, for sure if I need wider space, I can connect external binaural setup, what I mean is, if I use the digital recorder alone in general purpose, say work in an environment to capture sound not more than 15 meters away,  A-B or X-Y is better? I know I can select those with mechanical adjustable A-B, X-Y, but it will cost much more than my budget.

The main purpose I need are: a) record a meeting, b) record percussion play or some singing, c) expansion recording kit for the OP.

Hi.

A/B without much distance between mics isn't as effective as it is designed for difference in time, this what omnis would work really well with as long as the distance between mics is there. Any X/Y arrangement, crossed pair etc. is designed for time alignment as the mics/capsules are right over each other in the same plane. This only works with cardioids and the stereo field is dictated by the angle used, usually 90 degrees. You can also have spaced (not time aligned) cardioid arrangements that require set distances and angles, crossed or not crossed. Google 'ORTF', this is a specific technique and will give you other ideas of setups, also do a generic google search 'stereo microphone setup technique'.

As for what's better, A/B, X/Y or others, it all depends on what you are recording and what you want. The only proper way to gauge and understand these things is to do a lot of recording and get a feel for what works. It's all good reading about these things but nothing beats practical use and experience. I've been producing audio/music for over 30 years and I still do many test recordings and setups, you never stop learning.

Cheers,
Dave.  

Oh-no Posted at 4-21 08:30
Thank you Dave, yes I mean internal mics, for sure if I need wider space, I can connect external binaural setup, what I mean is, if I use the digital recorder alone in general purpose, say work in an environment to capture sound not more than 15 meters away,  A-B or X-Y is better? I know I can select those with mechanical adjustable A-B, X-Y, but it will cost much more than my budget.

The main purpose I need are: a) record a meeting, b) record percussion play or some singing, c) expansion recording kit for the OP.

I would say X-Y is less hassle, especially if you are moving around, you can keep things more compact. A-B needs separation possibly wider than is practical for a mobile setup. I didn't even have time to set up external mics today and had to rely on internals. I will have to see what the results are like later.

David_Harry Posted at 4-21 09:18
Hi.

A/B without much distance between mics isn't as effective as it is designed for difference in time, this what omnis would work really well with as long as the distance between mics is there. Any X/Y arrangement, crossed pair etc. is designed for time alignment as the mics/capsules are right over each other in the same plane. This only works with cardioids and the stereo field is dictated by the angle used, usually 90 degrees. You can also have spaced (not time aligned) cardioid arrangements that require set distances and angles, crossed or not crossed. Google 'ORTF', this is a specific technique and will give you other ideas of setups, also do a generic google search 'stereo microphone setup technique'.

Thank you Dave for the hints and instruction, I will keep learning :-)

Now go to read some articles from Wiki and others may be youtube demos.

Ray-CubeAce Posted at 4-21 09:20
I would say X-Y is less hassle, especially if you are moving around, you can keep things more compact. A-B needs separation possibly wider than is practical for a mobile setup. I didn't even have time to set up external mics today and had to rely on internals. I will have to see what the results are like later.

Ray, I got Dave's meaning, nothing can fits all scenario, need to test every time or at every situation, I agree with that.

Your experience and what you mentioned, I did think about it before I start the question to Dave, but it is all base on some kind of imagination, because I think though X-Y is less separation but seems can capture sound in a more foolproof way.... I have to consider the pros and cons ....

Oh-no Posted at 4-21 09:32
Ray, I got Dave's meaning, nothing can fits all scenario, need to test every time or at every situation, I agree with that.

Your experience and what you mentioned, I did think about it before I start the question to Dave, but it is all base on some kind of imagination, because I think though X-Y is less separation but seems can capture sound in a more foolproof way.... I have to consider the pros and cons ....

Hi Oh-no.
If you have time to plan or set up I would agree.
X-Y needn't be narrower but are more suited to closer work.
A-B, on the other hand, needs a ratio of three to one for a good sound spread. So three times apart for every one length away from the nearest sound source. But as you say, scenarios vary and it does depend on what you want to record.  

Ray-CubeAce Posted at 4-21 11:04
Hi Oh-no.
If you have time to plan or set up I would agree.
X-Y needn't be narrower but are more suited to closer work.

Ray, thank you for the information, I will keep this in mind and pay attention to it :-)