Digital camera with stereo sound recording

A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd
like to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I
could kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

I doubt it. The few camera I have had that did audio (because they also
recorded video) shows that the mics on these things generally suck.

Somebody!

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:30:09 +0100, rainandsnow
wrote:

A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd
like to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I
could kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

The Canon Powershot S3 IS and S5 IS (both currently available, but the S3 is
getting hard to find, for $200 less than the S5), they can record stereo sound
for up to 2 hours at a time with selectable 11, 22, or 44 kHz sampling rates. If
you have a large SD card you can fill it with as many 2 hour audio recordings as
you need. If I'm not mistaken these and the earlier Powershot S1 and S2 cameras
are the only digital still-frame cameras that can record sound clips and audio
for movies in stereo.

Be aware though that some of these cameras have a very soft 8kHz whine showing
up in one of the channels when the recording level is set to the 2 highest
settings, the highest gain. It seems to vary from camera to camera with most of
them being nearly, but not completely, free of this problem. This whine
disappears when recording at lower mic recording levels or when there's enough
sound to cause the mic to automatically lower its own gain to compensate for
louder noises. Under normal recording conditions most everyone doesn't even know
this problem exists. The danger in even mentioning this is that they'll now go
listen for it. They've never even heard it in their sound tracks if not told
about it. It was only found by some audiophiles that were upset when their
cameras happened to be ones with this noise at slightly higher levels. It is
suspected that it comes from some internal mechanism in the camera instead of
the audio circuitry because it shows up stronger only on one mic nearer the
unknown source.

The reason I mention this is in case you are needing the absolute best in audio
recording, where an almost imperceptible background noise appearing at the
quietest times would bother you. To tell the truth it is much quieter than the
normal hiss in all high-quality magnetic tape recordings. When I record bird
songs at a distance even this is enough to make the nearly undetectable 8kHz
noise disappear. I can only detect it in my camera if I make an audio recording
in an absolutely quiet room with the microphone gain on the highest setting and
at 44kHz sampling rate, then played back at a high volume on the computer. It
gets more quiet at 22kHz and is completely gone at 11kHz sampling rates. To get
anything better for audio recording you'll have to use something other than a
digital camera for these purposes. There's probably just too much going on
inside of a digital camera to isolate the circuitry enough for pristine audio
recording capabilities. On the plus side for audiophiles, the noise is such a
narrow bandwidth, so low in amplitude, and only strong in one channel that it is
easy to filter out with any decent WAV editing software that allows you to make
your own notch-filters. I made one for Cool Edit that cleans any important
recordings to perfect conditions. I wish they never told me about it because I
wouldn't know about it otherwise. Now that I do I take the extra step to remove
it if it's important.

"rainandsnow" wrote
A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd like
to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I could
kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

I just bought a Canon S3 IS. 12x optical zoom, image stabilization and stero
sound recording without using the movie feature. I have a 4gig memory card
(it came with a 16meg) which would record sound only over an hour without
any problem.
--
Les Stewart
Beaumont, TX

Neil J. wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:30:09 +0100, rainandsnow
wrote:

A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd
like to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I
could kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

The Canon Powershot S3 IS and S5 IS (both currently available, but the S3 is
getting hard to find, for $200 less than the S5), they can record stereo sound
for up to 2 hours at a time with selectable 11, 22, or 44 kHz sampling rates. If
you have a large SD card you can fill it with as many 2 hour audio recordings as
you need. If I'm not mistaken these and the earlier Powershot S1 and S2 cameras
are the only digital still-frame cameras that can record sound clips and audio
for movies in stereo.

Be aware though that some of these cameras have a very soft 8kHz whine showing
up in one of the channels when the recording level is set to the 2 highest
settings, the highest gain. It seems to vary from camera to camera with most of
them being nearly, but not completely, free of this problem. This whine
disappears when recording at lower mic recording levels or when there's enough
sound to cause the mic to automatically lower its own gain to compensate for
louder noises. Under normal recording conditions most everyone doesn't even know
this problem exists. The danger in even mentioning this is that they'll now go
listen for it. They've never even heard it in their sound tracks if not told
about it. It was only found by some audiophiles that were upset when their
cameras happened to be ones with this noise at slightly higher levels. It is
suspected that it comes from some internal mechanism in the camera instead of
the audio circuitry because it shows up stronger only on one mic nearer the
unknown source.

The reason I mention this is in case you are needing the absolute best in audio
recording, where an almost imperceptible background noise appearing at the
quietest times would bother you. To tell the truth it is much quieter than the
normal hiss in all high-quality magnetic tape recordings. When I record bird
songs at a distance even this is enough to make the nearly undetectable 8kHz
noise disappear. I can only detect it in my camera if I make an audio recording
in an absolutely quiet room with the microphone gain on the highest setting and
at 44kHz sampling rate, then played back at a high volume on the computer. It
gets more quiet at 22kHz and is completely gone at 11kHz sampling rates. To get
anything better for audio recording you'll have to use something other than a
digital camera for these purposes. There's probably just too much going on
inside of a digital camera to isolate the circuitry enough for pristine audio
recording capabilities. On the plus side for audiophiles, the noise is such a
narrow bandwidth, so low in amplitude, and only strong in one channel that it is
easy to filter out with any decent WAV editing software that allows you to make
your own notch-filters. I made one for Cool Edit that cleans any important
recordings to perfect conditions. I wish they never told me about it because I
wouldn't know about it otherwise. Now that I do I take the extra step to remove
it if it's important.



Hi, Thanks for your reply. Actually I already have an S1. It is a great
camera but no good for macros. I was hoping to find a compact -
something like the Cybershot - that would do macros and decent sound
recordings - until the card was full. The S1 does sound recordings, but
only for 1 minute and not in stereo and it is relatively large. If I
want longer I have to record video. The sound is surprisingly good though.

Your comments about the S3 are useful. I'll think about Ebaying my S1
and buying an S3.

Neil J. wrote in
:

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:30:09 +0100, rainandsnow
wrote:

snip

Be aware though that some of these cameras have a very soft 8kHz whine

/snip

Neil: Any chance this comes from the IS? Can you turn the IS off on the
S3? (I own one and have never tried!) ~Ray

In article , rainandsnow wrote:
A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd
like to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I
could kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

Well, my cancorder does stills, video, and sound.

I feel lucky I have a older Sony camcorder thats able to record very
loud sounds without overloading like most do.

greg

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 13:38:13 GMT, Ray Paseur
wrote:

Neil J. wrote in
:

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:30:09 +0100, rainandsnow
wrote:

snip

Be aware though that some of these cameras have a very soft 8kHz whine

/snip

Neil: Any chance this comes from the IS? Can you turn the IS off on the
S3? (I own one and have never tried!) ~Ray

Yes, you can turn off the IS.

From what I've read and what others have tested as well as myself, it doesn't
come from the IS, nor the ultrasonic zoom and focus, not even the LCD or EVF
light sources and their sync signals. The IS can cause some thudding sounds at
times during very quiet recordings if it has to correct for wild camera shakes.
And the zoom is what it is, a slight (for lack of a better term) zooming sound
when used at the 2 lower zoom rates, it records pretty loud at the fastest rate.
All have been turned on and off by various people while fooling around trying to
find the source.

This low amplitude 8kHz noise seems to be independent of anything that you can
turn on and off manually, except for the sampling rate and mic gain. At 11kHz
the sampling rate must be too low to record whatever harmonics from whatever are
causing it. At anything but the 2 highest mic gain settings it just doesn't
detect or create this sound.

I really didn't want to mention this because as I said, unless you are told
about it you would probably never notice it. It's that unobtrusive. The only
reason I brought it up is that the OP targeted their concern for audio-recording
quality. I felt it important to point this out as something they'll have to
watch for if audio quality is a primary concern.

Interestingly, I have an ultrasonic sound converter that down-samples
ultrasonics to normal human hearing ranges. I use it for recording/analyzing
insect sounds. I used it to listen to the noises that the S3 makes. Its a
veritable smorgasbord of ultrasonic noises even when nothing is moving. You
should hear the ultrasonic motors when they are engaged. It's a good thing that
you or the camera's audio circuits can't hear that. :-)

GregS wrote:
In article , rainandsnow wrote:
A good digital stereo sound recorder costs a few hundred pounds. I'd
like to have one. I'd also need a new digital camera - so wondered if I
could kill two birds with one stone:

Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality stereo
sound recordings of over an hour??

Well, my cancorder does stills, video, and sound.

I feel lucky I have a older Sony camcorder thats able to record very
loud sounds without overloading like most do.


What model?? Does it record in stereo?? And for how long??

rainandsnow writes:
Is there a digital camera, preferable compact, capable of quality
stereo sound recordings of over an hour??

I made some nice stereo recordings with a Sony TRV-87 video camcorder.
It was not digital (hi-8 analog) but could record 2 hours on a regular
tape, with 2.5 or 3 hour tapes available if you looked around, and
with a long play mode that was awful but that would run as long as 5
or 6 hours on the extended tapes.

These days there are also hard disk recorders available.