Need a sound recorder, what should I get?
in [Repair]
|
From: Robert Macy on 11 Mar 2010 11:33 On Mar 11, 5:08 am, PeterD <pet...(a)hipson.net> wrote: > On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:46:53 -0800 (PST), Robert Macy > > <m...(a)california.com> wrote: > >Need a sound recorder for recording noise intrusion from an adjacent > >tenant. > > Why? A recording would prove nothing. You need to measure sound > levels, not record the sounds. A sensitive microphone would pick up > the smallest of sounds so there would be no way to determine that the > neighbor's noise/sounds were a problem or not. As well, what does your > lease say on noise, and his? If it is not covered, prepair for a long > hard time. > > >Using Sony ICD-SX700 did not achieve very good results. > > >What should I use? > > I'd use the threat of moving out at the end of my lease. We have our TV on while this is going on, that makes a great reference and/or talking and living normally as a comparison. Lease says "no tenant can operate a TV, Musical Device, of Computer Sound System in a manner that disturbs another tenant" no hours of operation, no arbitrary interpretation. That's why we moved in. I'm a firm believer in victims should not take action, perpetrators should. if our landlord cannot, or will not, provide quiet enjoyment, no waiting for end of lease, they have failed, and now must pay for move and all costs.
From: William Sommerwerck on 11 Mar 2010 11:58 This yet another example of a question that should have had a single response, with the thread ending at that point. You do not need a recorder, except perhaps to make a record of what is disturbing you. You need to borrow a sound-level meter to measure how loud the disturbance is. Otherwise, there is no good reason for the management to believe you. ----- The Lady from Philadelphia
From: hr(bob) hofmann on 11 Mar 2010 12:17 On Mar 11, 10:58 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > This yet another example of a question that should have had a single > response, with the thread ending at that point. > > You do not need a recorder, except perhaps to make a record of what is > disturbing you. You need to borrow a sound-level meter to measure how loud > the disturbance is. Otherwise, there is no good reason for the management to > believe you. > > ----- The Lady from Philadelphia Well Put!!!
From: Adrian Tuddenham on 11 Mar 2010 13:15 Robert Macy <macy(a)california.com> wrote: > On Mar 11, 1:38�am, adr...(a)poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Adrian > Tuddenham) wrote: > > Robert Macy <m...(a)california.com> wrote: > > > Need a sound recorder for recording noise intrusion from an adjacent > > > tenant. > > > > > Using Sony ICD-SX700 did not achieve very good results. > > > > > What should I use? > > > > The recorder isn't as important as the microphone and the playback > > loudspeaker. � > > > > Is the noise coming through in one place (e.g. hammer drilling or tap > > dancing) or is it diffuse? �If it is diffuse, an omnidirectional mic > > might work best. > > > > If the noise is predominantly low frequency (e.g. boom box) a cheap > > omnidirectional mic will generally have a better low frequency response > > than a cheap cardioid. �The big problem you will have with L.F. noise is > > demonstrating it realistically to someone, because loudspeakers are > > rarely flat at such frequencies and the bass from headphones will depend > > on their positioning on the listener's ears. > > > > Investment in a cheap analogue sound level meter will help; then you can > > calibrate the recording level and match the playback level to it when > > you come to demonstrate the problem. �Use the dBC scale if the noise is > > predominantly L.F. > > Thank you for your reply. Curious, why dBC, not dBA? dBA was originally intended as an indicator of the potential of industrial noise to cause hearing damage, it had deliberately reduced sensitivity to low frequencies because they caused proportionately less damage (and also to make an advantage out of the fact that the microphone of the original sound meters was not very sensitive to bass anyway). The use of dBC will give you a level measuremement over the normal hearing range. > The sounds are being transferred through above tenant's flooring and > then through our ceiling. It is possible to tell origin, but it's > like a spotlight diffused onto a sheet of paper - you can tell where > it's coming from a little. > > I like the idea of calibrating to verify the recorded sound > presentation recreates EXACTLY what was there, but may be difficult in > a large courtroom... You can demonstrate the exact effect you have been suffering to any official who comes to visit you, but a meter reading in dBC, coupled with a log of the times it occurs, is often sufficient to convince them. You wouldn't normally be expected to demonstrate it in a court. Unless the noise is of some particularly irritating character or requires specialist identification, you may not need to record it at all. The action you take will depend on three properties of the noise: 1) Its loudness 2) What time of day or night it occurs - and for how long 3) Its annoyance factor (is it a hum, intermittent banging noises, thudding bass, sounds of a murder, bagpipe practice?) ....only the third property might need a recording to demonstrate the point you want to make. > > Any recommendations for readily available sound level meters? the > Sony has vu meters on it, but I think they're relative and not > absolute. There used to be a simple SPL meter, with analogue readout, available from Tandy / Radio Shack at a very reasonable price. Its accuracy wasn't certified, but mine was spot-on when I checked it against an expensive calibrated meter. If you are contemplating legal action, you might have to get an 'expert' to take legally-valid measurements for you. -- ~ Adrian Tuddenham ~ (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply) www.poppyrecords.co.uk
From: William Sommerwerck on 11 Mar 2010 13:34
> You can demonstrate the exact effect you have been suffering to any > official who comes to visit you, but a meter reading in dBC, coupled > with a log of the times it occurs, is often sufficient to convince them. > You wouldn't normally be expected to demonstrate it in a court. > Unless the noise is of some particularly irritating character or > requires specialist identification, you may not need to record it at > all. The action you take will depend on three properties of the noise: > 1) Its loudness > 2) What time of day or night it occurs - and for how long > 3) Its annoyance factor (is it a hum, intermittent banging noises, > thudding bass, sounds of a murder, bagpipe practice?) > ...only the third property might need a recording to demonstrate the > point you want to make. Excellent advice. Listen to the man... |