<p>I have used <a href="https://www.cetaceanresearch.com/hydrophone-systems/crt/sq26-h1/index.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cetacean Research's SQ26-H1 Portable Underwater Sound Recording System</a> for listening for fish sounds from a boat, similar to what you're proposing with whales, and I believe the system should be at least close to within your budget. I was able to get a student discount for mine, so I can't recall the usual full cost of it.</p>
<p>The paper discussing the relatively new HydroMoth prototype (<a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.249" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Lamont et al. 2022</a>) also presents the results of a systematic review of recent acoustic studies and the costs of the recorders used by their authors, to quantify the lack of low-cost underwater recording equipment, especially when compared to terrestrial recording equipment. So you're not alone in struggling to find affordable options!</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-24T21:40:53.353Z
I don't think the [Hydromoth](https://groupgets.com/campaigns/1048-hydromoth/show) will be capable of the live-listening that @jackbarkowski seeks. It's more of the GoPro model -- deploy and record underwater, then recover and listen.
Scott Veirs
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-25T21:27:07.133Z
You're totally right, thank you for pointing that out! I'll edit my response accordingly.
Audrey Looby
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-31T13:44:29.590Z
2023-01-25T21:28:36.713Z
2023-01-25T21:28:36.713Z
Audrey Looby
<p>I have made hydrophones from scratch using elements like: <a href="https://www.piezoelements.com/piezo-ceramic/piezo-cylinder/pzt5-piezo-ceramic-tube.html" rel="noreferrer">https://www.piezoelements.com/piezo-ceramic/piezo-cylinder/pzt5-piezo-ceramic-tube.html</a>
If you solder some wires to them (I think we used &quot;silver-solder&quot;) and encase them in silicone, you've got yourself a hydrophone.</p>
<p>I used mine for embedding in suction cups attached to the melon of harbour porpoises for monitoring the click-timing (ABR/AEP research).
Worked a charm!</p>
<p>Depending on your cable length requirements, you might have to install some sort of pre-amplifier in your system close to the element.</p>
<p>You'll likely need a small amplifier before you recorder (e.g: <a href="https://www.aquarianaudio.com/pa1.html" rel="noreferrer">https://www.aquarianaudio.com/pa1.html</a> ask them for compatibility, they're very helpful!).</p>
<p>Next step is analog-to-digital conversion: I think the latest &quot;audiomoth&quot; (<a href="https://www.openacousticdevices.info/audiomoth" rel="noreferrer">https://www.openacousticdevices.info/audiomoth</a>) has a jack input and can sample up to 384 kHz (but for humpback whale song anything will really do, it's in the human hearing range). I don't thing the audiomoth supports real-time monitoring.</p>
<p>Using this approach you could be up and running for 50-100 USD.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-25T07:26:26.047Z
Sure, if you build your own and buy piezos in quantity from China (PZT), you can get the prize somewhat down.
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-04T10:53:13.630Z
2023-01-04T10:53:13.630Z
Rasmus
<p>Over 5 locations and 20 years, the <a href="https://orcasound.net" rel="noreferrer">Orcasound hydrophone network</a> in Washington State (USA) has tested many makes and manufacturers, but for our <a href="https://live.orcasound.net" rel="noreferrer">live-streaming 24/7 web application</a> the hydrophone and cable still require 60-90% of the expense budget for each network node! So, like you and the International Quiet Ocean Experiment, we are interested in reducing the cost of the hydrophones. To this end, and thanks to some of you who helped crowdfund it, we have an on-going <a href="https://experiment.com/projects/can-low-cost-diy-hydrophones-identify-orca-matrilines-in-real-time" rel="noreferrer">project to engineer a low-cost (&lt;$100) hydrophone via Experiment.com</a> which all are welcome to join or study.</p>
<p>For your purpose -- which doesn't require recording, I gather -- you may get away with a kayaker-style hydrophone with a short (&lt;5m) cable and a speaker. On a calm day (low ambient noise) in the ocean with a strong source like singing humpbacks nearby, your hydrophone can be just a few meters below the sea surface. On windy/wavy days, getting 5-10m down will yield a better SNR.</p>
<p>Aquarian offers their H1a with 3 meters for 150 dollars. Their recommended amplifier/speaker won't put you over $500 U.S. even with Washington's 10% sales tax.</p>
<p>For many hydrophones with preamps, your speaker will also need to power the hydrophone, typically via a line-in or hot-mic jack. One combination we've enjoyed is the CRT SQ26-08, powered by the Zoom H1n recorder. The H1n has a tiny speaker built-in, but we prefer to use the headphone jack for more careful monitoring. You could add a headphone splitter and an external speaker if you need multiple people to be able to hear the underwater sounds on a noisy boat or a windy day.</p>
<p>If you want more options, we'd appreciate your comments and new data (especially recent quotes) in <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yRxvllcRFqCD2XoBE96YamPgboD5sRBOzdUdtEHt2kk/edit?usp=sharing" rel="noreferrer">Orcasound's shared Google spreadsheet of hydrophone manufacturers and models</a>. (There are other tabs for cable if you like to splice or build your own, plus other hardware, ADCs, power supplies, and historic makes/models).</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-27T23:05:11.383Z
That linked spreadsheet is wonderful!
selene
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-24T21:34:15.837Z
2023-01-24T21:34:15.837Z
Scott Veirs
<p>Hydrophones are notoriously the most expensive part of underwater acoustic sensing systems. If you look to some affordable commercial systems that allow listening to underwater sound, maybe you could start with the offerings of <a href="https://www.aquarianaudio.com/hydrophones/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">aquarian audio</a>. Have not used them myself, I cannot comment on use, but certainly others are willing to comment.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-30T13:32:37.130Z
2022-12-30T13:32:37.130Z
WMXZ
<p>At risk of sacrificing my scientific credibility, but because I love options on the silly-side, I give you the following suggestions. These aren't cheap hydrophones, but could be the cheapest ways to check whether the humpback is a singer:</p>
<p>In the intro of Urick's Principles of Underwater sound he recounts a quote from none other than Leonardo da Vinci from 1490: &quot;If you cause your ship to stop and place the head of a long tube in the water and place the outer extremity to your ear you will hear ships at a great distance from you.&quot; I believe said &quot;long-tube&quot; can probably be readily scrounged for free, or purchased for less than the cost of a hydrophone.</p>
<p>And assuming that your boat is suitable and that your health, safety, and ethics guidelines are allowing, one could always use their own ears as a pair of dipping hydrophones.</p>
<p>And finally, there's always the option of building your own hydrophone(s). I have used and can recommend Jay Barlow, Shannon Rankin and Steve Dawson's <a href="https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/3620" rel="nofollow noreferrer">guide to building hydrophone arrays (NOAA Technical Memo NMFS-SWFSC-417)</a> though unless you've already got or can scavenge all of the &quot;capital&quot; equipment, piezo elements, and urethane required, I doubt this is likely to be the cheapest option. Maybe it would start to become cost effective if you wanted to make dozens of very small hydrophones. But I can vouch for the guide and, the hydrophoens do work reliably -- for long enough to complete a PhD project anyway. And all but the piezo could potentially be swapped out for cheaper/scrounged parts to keep costs down (for example, I used ethernet cable instead of &quot;proper&quot; hydrophone cable).</p>
<p>Anyway, hope this helps, or at the very least generates a few laughs or smiles on faces.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-08-02T08:06:32.820Z
To pile onto the silly side, we actively used telemetry dishes to listen in real-time and triangulate the position of sperm whales from small vessels.  Basically, you stick the dish/sensor in the water at around 5 m, with a cable connected to headphones where someone is actively listening. You move the dish around 360 * until your signal is the loudest, and then move the boat in that direction. Rinse, repeat when you need a fresh heading.
etgriffiths
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-28T23:27:58.213Z
2023-08-28T23:27:58.213Z
Brian Miller
<p>I and my colleagues have used <a href="https://www.aquarianaudio.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.aquarianaudio.com/</a> hydrophones (mentioned in <a href="https://bioacoustics.stackexchange.com/a/1270/73">WMXZ's answer</a>) for years. They are relatively cheap, robust, sound good (I am an artist rather than a scientist ;) and they have a wide frequency response.
We have already had a generation of students misusing them at the Institute of Sonology here in The Hague and they have lasted pretty well.</p>
<p>For amplification / recording I suggest using a recorder such as a SoundDevices MixPre - you can connect this easily to headphones or a monitor loudspeaker.</p>
<p>If using a loudspeaker system, you might want to filter out some low frequencies as the hydrophones are quite sensitive to LF and having a speaker in your boat may cause feedback. Aquarian audio can make long cables for you if their standard lengths are not suitable.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-10T14:49:51.397Z
2023-09-11T16:16:09.690Z
2023-09-11T16:16:09.690Z
Justin Bennett
<p>Jez Riley French makes good, affordable hydrophones that can be used with relatively cheap PCM recorders (note you'll need a XLR impedance matching adapter though if you use via XLR port) - with a bespoke cable length too:
<a href="https://jezrileyfrench.co.uk/hydrophones.php" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://jezrileyfrench.co.uk/hydrophones.php</a></p>
<p>I've used these and Aquarian hydrophones for freshwater recordings (obviously a bit shallower!) and got good clear recordings back.</p>
<p>If you go for Acoustic Devices instead note that you need the AudioMoth 1.2 if you want to use a 3.5mm jack input, and you'll need to buy the jack separately and solder it on yourself (easy to do though).  They now also have a HydroMoth in a waterproof case which is up for sale periodically on GroupGets:  <a href="https://store.groupgets.com/products/hydromoth-with-underwater-case" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://store.groupgets.com/products/hydromoth-with-underwater-case</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T16:07:47.070Z
Without any sensitivity diagram or reference to used microphone (?) is is difficult to advice
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-24T14:29:57.977Z
Merely highlighting a potential supplier the OP may not have been aware of; I'm sure they can check it out for the relevant specifications if interested.   It certainly does appear to be difficult to adviSe !
Bob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T15:45:46.667Z
2023-04-18T15:45:46.667Z
Bob
<p>You could try the LSTN2 from Seiche: <a href="https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1CnZSrEZ6o8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1CnZSrEZ6o8</a></p>
<p>It’s a very simple small unit with headphone out, and line out option to a recorder (I use a Zoom F3 with it) or an iPhone for a real-time spectrogram.</p>
<p>Seiche (hands up - I work for Seiche) do a high spec portable recorder (PAMGo), but that’s probably too pricey for what you are looking for in this case.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-26T07:26:54.630Z
Can you please give a proper link to the LSTN2. The Youtube links are, IMHO, not very useful
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-26T17:02:00.377Z
I thought the YouTube clip might illustrate audio out from a LSTN2, on a small boat around cetaceans. Here is a link to a datasheet - i'll post a permanent link next week:
https://we.tl/t-Bb9yymmi8X
ChrisP
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-27T06:24:57.630Z
I hope the website will become active soon and gives more details including frequency response, directionality, construction and price tag.
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-11T18:10:51.670Z
Chris,  actual link expired (I have a copy). Any indication on when www.LSTN2.com is again accessable and more specs on device?
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-12T06:43:54.863Z
I’m working on getting the LSTN2 pages up and running again. It shouldn’t be too long now. Thanks.
ChrisP
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-14T14:08:27.423Z
Here's a link to the LSTN2 web site:
http://www.lstn2.com/
ChrisP
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-23T11:02:43.310Z
"next week" - next of which week? ;)
Shadow Wizard
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-26T05:36:14.170Z
2023-08-29T12:00:05.800Z
2023-08-29T12:00:05.800Z
Chris Pierpoint
<p>just wanted to share my experience with this company and their hydrophones. I grabbed some hydrophones and a preamplifier from them, and I gotta say, they're pretty solid without burning a hole in my pocket. I've been recording all sorts of sounds with them – from sea waves to lab experiments – and they've held up well. Even dropped them about three meters into the sea, and they still picked up some great non-directional sounds. Overall, I'm happy with the results! If you're interested, you can catch the link to their products here <a href="https://natakoaudio.com/shop/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Natakoaudio</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-23T14:11:37.863Z
I would appreciate some measured spectral sentitivity curves, especially as I'm surprised so see the the 80 kHz bandwidth claim with rather large piezo buzzers.
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-26T19:12:11.247Z
Regarding 80 kHz, I'm not entirely sure, but up to 20 kHz, it sounds quite impressive, especially when paired with their preamplifier.
user1949
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-26T20:31:24.897Z
Fair enough.  BTW, it looks very similar to the one presented at https://felixblume.com/hydrophone/
WMXZ
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-27T07:12:50.200Z
Absolutely, you've got a point there. Personally, I lean towards purchasing rather than DIY, especially when it's something reproducible, tested, affordable, and does the job well. Comparing it to the pricier hydrophone with tube elements, I'm not sure if there's a notable distinction – perhaps in the radiation pattern? Sensitivity-wise, I'm uncertain since they haven't provided calibration details. Do you happen to know what the difference might be?
user1949
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-02-22T20:38:30.857Z
2024-02-22T20:38:30.857Z
user1949
<p>HY-10 is a very affordable hydrophone system, hydrophone with a amplifier.
<a href="https://www.h-instruments.com/product/hydrophone---amplifier-for-underwater-hearing" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.h-instruments.com/product/hydrophone---amplifier-for-underwater-hearing</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-23T14:36:18.700Z
Hi - welcome to the community! Please check our community rules on self-promotion: https://bioacoustics.stackexchange.com/help/promotion
Dan Stowell
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-07-23T10:36:38.890Z
2024-07-23T10:36:38.890Z
HI Instruments
<p>I am looking to purchase a hydrophone and speaker system that I can use to identify singing humpback whales while at sea, in order to deploy different tags to better understand song behavior on feeding grounds. I want to be able to lower my hydrophone over the side of the boat and listen for song - most of the options I have found are quite expensive (&gt;\$1000) and I was hoping to find something cheaper - ideally less than $500 total. What hardware have other folks used for in the field listening? What's the cheapest option? It doesn't have to be high quality recordings - we just want to be able to have some confidence that we're tagging a singer.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-01-06T10:24:20.033Z
why is a speaker needed? (If not, perhaps modify your question to just specify needing a listening system)
Chloe
<fieldwork><hydrophone><realtime>
What affordable hydrophone options exist for in-the-field listening?
# What affordable hydrophone options exist for in-the-field listening?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-12-29)

I am looking to purchase a hydrophone and speaker system that I can use to identify singing humpback whales while at sea, in order to deploy different tags to better understand song behavior on feeding grounds. I want to be able to lower my hydrophone over the side of the boat and listen for song - most of the options I have found are quite expensive (>\$1000) and I was hoping to find something cheaper - ideally less than $500 total. What hardware have other folks used for in the field listening? What's the cheapest option? It doesn't have to be high quality recordings - we just want to be able to have some confidence that we're tagging a singer.

**Tags:** fieldwork, hydrophone, realtime

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: why is a speaker needed? (If not, perhaps modify your question to just specify needing a listening system)  

---

## 10 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2022-12-31. Score: 8

I have used [Cetacean Research's SQ26-H1 Portable Underwater Sound Recording System](https://www.cetaceanresearch.com/hydrophone-systems/crt/sq26-h1/index.html) for listening for fish sounds from a boat, similar to what you're proposing with whales, and I believe the system should be at least close to within your budget. I was able to get a student discount for mine, so I can't recall the usual full cost of it.

The paper discussing the relatively new HydroMoth prototype ([Lamont et al. 2022](https://doi.org/10.1002/rse2.249)) also presents the results of a systematic review of recent acoustic studies and the costs of the recorders used by their authors, to quantify the lack of low-cost underwater recording equipment, especially when compared to terrestrial recording equipment. So you're not alone in struggling to find affordable options!

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: I don't think the [Hydromoth](https://groupgets.com/campaigns/1048-hydromoth/show) will be capable of the live-listening that @jackbarkowski seeks. It's more of the GoPro model -- deploy and record underwater, then recover and listen.  
> **username_2**: You're totally right, thank you for pointing that out! I'll edit my response accordingly.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2023-01-04. Score: 6

I have made hydrophones from scratch using elements like: <https://www.piezoelements.com/piezo-ceramic/piezo-cylinder/pzt5-piezo-ceramic-tube.html>
If you solder some wires to them (I think we used "silver-solder") and encase them in silicone, you've got yourself a hydrophone.

I used mine for embedding in suction cups attached to the melon of harbour porpoises for monitoring the click-timing (ABR/AEP research).
Worked a charm!

Depending on your cable length requirements, you might have to install some sort of pre-amplifier in your system close to the element.

You'll likely need a small amplifier before you recorder (e.g: <https://www.aquarianaudio.com/pa1.html> ask them for compatibility, they're very helpful!).

Next step is analog-to-digital conversion: I think the latest "audiomoth" (<https://www.openacousticdevices.info/audiomoth>) has a jack input and can sample up to 384 kHz (but for humpback whale song anything will really do, it's in the human hearing range). I don't thing the audiomoth supports real-time monitoring.

Using this approach you could be up and running for 50-100 USD.

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Sure, if you build your own and buy piezos in quantity from China (PZT), you can get the prize somewhat down.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2023-01-24. Score: 5

Over 5 locations and 20 years, the [Orcasound hydrophone network](https://orcasound.net) in Washington State (USA) has tested many makes and manufacturers, but for our [live-streaming 24/7 web application](https://live.orcasound.net) the hydrophone and cable still require 60-90% of the expense budget for each network node! So, like you and the International Quiet Ocean Experiment, we are interested in reducing the cost of the hydrophones. To this end, and thanks to some of you who helped crowdfund it, we have an on-going [project to engineer a low-cost (<$100) hydrophone via Experiment.com](https://experiment.com/projects/can-low-cost-diy-hydrophones-identify-orca-matrilines-in-real-time) which all are welcome to join or study.

For your purpose -- which doesn't require recording, I gather -- you may get away with a kayaker-style hydrophone with a short (<5m) cable and a speaker. On a calm day (low ambient noise) in the ocean with a strong source like singing humpbacks nearby, your hydrophone can be just a few meters below the sea surface. On windy/wavy days, getting 5-10m down will yield a better SNR.

Aquarian offers their H1a with 3 meters for 150 dollars. Their recommended amplifier/speaker won't put you over $500 U.S. even with Washington's 10% sales tax.

For many hydrophones with preamps, your speaker will also need to power the hydrophone, typically via a line-in or hot-mic jack. One combination we've enjoyed is the CRT SQ26-08, powered by the Zoom H1n recorder. The H1n has a tiny speaker built-in, but we prefer to use the headphone jack for more careful monitoring. You could add a headphone splitter and an external speaker if you need multiple people to be able to hear the underwater sounds on a noisy boat or a windy day.

If you want more options, we'd appreciate your comments and new data (especially recent quotes) in [Orcasound's shared Google spreadsheet of hydrophone manufacturers and models](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yRxvllcRFqCD2XoBE96YamPgboD5sRBOzdUdtEHt2kk/edit?usp=sharing). (There are other tabs for cable if you like to splice or build your own, plus other hardware, ADCs, power supplies, and historic makes/models).

> **Comments:**
> **username_6**: That linked spreadsheet is wonderful!  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2022-12-30. Score: 4

Hydrophones are notoriously the most expensive part of underwater acoustic sensing systems. If you look to some affordable commercial systems that allow listening to underwater sound, maybe you could start with the offerings of [aquarian audio](https://www.aquarianaudio.com/hydrophones/). Have not used them myself, I cannot comment on use, but certainly others are willing to comment.


---

### Answer by username_7 on 2023-08-28. Score: 2

At risk of sacrificing my scientific credibility, but because I love options on the silly-side, I give you the following suggestions. These aren't cheap hydrophones, but could be the cheapest ways to check whether the humpback is a singer:

In the intro of Urick's Principles of Underwater sound he recounts a quote from none other than Leonardo da Vinci from 1490: "If you cause your ship to stop and place the head of a long tube in the water and place the outer extremity to your ear you will hear ships at a great distance from you." I believe said "long-tube" can probably be readily scrounged for free, or purchased for less than the cost of a hydrophone.

And assuming that your boat is suitable and that your health, safety, and ethics guidelines are allowing, one could always use their own ears as a pair of dipping hydrophones.

And finally, there's always the option of building your own hydrophone(s). I have used and can recommend Jay Barlow, Shannon Rankin and Steve Dawson's [guide to building hydrophone arrays (NOAA Technical Memo NMFS-SWFSC-417)](https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/3620) though unless you've already got or can scavenge all of the "capital" equipment, piezo elements, and urethane required, I doubt this is likely to be the cheapest option. Maybe it would start to become cost effective if you wanted to make dozens of very small hydrophones. But I can vouch for the guide and, the hydrophoens do work reliably -- for long enough to complete a PhD project anyway. And all but the piezo could potentially be swapped out for cheaper/scrounged parts to keep costs down (for example, I used ethernet cable instead of "proper" hydrophone cable).

Anyway, hope this helps, or at the very least generates a few laughs or smiles on faces.

> **Comments:**
> **username_8**: To pile onto the silly side, we actively used telemetry dishes to listen in real-time and triangulate the position of sperm whales from small vessels.  Basically, you stick the dish/sensor in the water at around 5 m, with a cable connected to headphones where someone is actively listening. You move the dish around 360 * until your signal is the loudest, and then move the boat in that direction. Rinse, repeat when you need a fresh heading.  

---

### Answer by username_9 on 2023-09-10. Score: 2

I and my colleagues have used <https://www.aquarianaudio.com/> hydrophones (mentioned in [username_5's answer](https://bioacoustics.stackexchange.com/a/1270/73)) for years. They are relatively cheap, robust, sound good (I am an artist rather than a scientist ;) and they have a wide frequency response.
We have already had a generation of students misusing them at the Institute of Sonology here in The Hague and they have lasted pretty well.

For amplification / recording I suggest using a recorder such as a SoundDevices MixPre - you can connect this easily to headphones or a monitor loudspeaker.

If using a loudspeaker system, you might want to filter out some low frequencies as the hydrophones are quite sensitive to LF and having a speaker in your boat may cause feedback. Aquarian audio can make long cables for you if their standard lengths are not suitable.


---

### Answer by username_10 on 2023-04-18. Score: 2

Jez Riley French makes good, affordable hydrophones that can be used with relatively cheap PCM recorders (note you'll need a XLR impedance matching adapter though if you use via XLR port) - with a bespoke cable length too:
<https://jezrileyfrench.co.uk/hydrophones.php>

I've used these and Aquarian hydrophones for freshwater recordings (obviously a bit shallower!) and got good clear recordings back.

If you go for Acoustic Devices instead note that you need the AudioMoth 1.2 if you want to use a 3.5mm jack input, and you'll need to buy the jack separately and solder it on yourself (easy to do though). They now also have a HydroMoth in a waterproof case which is up for sale periodically on GroupGets: <https://store.groupgets.com/products/hydromoth-with-underwater-case>

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Without any sensitivity diagram or reference to used microphone (?) is is difficult to advice  
> **username_10**: Merely highlighting a potential supplier the OP may not have been aware of; I'm sure they can check it out for the relevant specifications if interested.   It certainly does appear to be difficult to adviSe !  

---

### Answer by username_11 on 2023-08-26. Score: 1

You could try the LSTN2 from Seiche: <https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1CnZSrEZ6o8>

It’s a very simple small unit with headphone out, and line out option to a recorder (I use a Zoom F3 with it) or an iPhone for a real-time spectrogram.

Seiche (hands up - I work for Seiche) do a high spec portable recorder (PAMGo), but that’s probably too pricey for what you are looking for in this case.

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Can you please give a proper link to the LSTN2. The Youtube links are, IMHO, not very useful  
> **username_12**: I thought the YouTube clip might illustrate audio out from a LSTN2, on a small boat around cetaceans. Here is a link to a datasheet - i'll post a permanent link next week: https://we.tl/t-Bb9yymmi8X  
> **username_5**: I hope the website will become active soon and gives more details including frequency response, directionality, construction and price tag.  
> **username_5**: username_11,  actual link expired (I have a copy). Any indication on when www.LSTN2.com is again accessable and more specs on device?  
> **username_12**: I’m working on getting the LSTN2 pages up and running again. It shouldn’t be too long now. Thanks.  
> **username_12**: Here's a link to the LSTN2 web site: http://www.lstn2.com/  
> **username_13**: "next week" - next of which week? ;)  

---

### Answer by username_14 on 2024-02-22. Score: 0

just wanted to share my experience with this company and their hydrophones. I grabbed some hydrophones and a preamplifier from them, and I gotta say, they're pretty solid without burning a hole in my pocket. I've been recording all sorts of sounds with them – from sea waves to lab experiments – and they've held up well. Even dropped them about three meters into the sea, and they still picked up some great non-directional sounds. Overall, I'm happy with the results! If you're interested, you can catch the link to their products here [Natakoaudio](https://natakoaudio.com/shop/)

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: I would appreciate some measured spectral sentitivity curves, especially as I'm surprised so see the the 80 kHz bandwidth claim with rather large piezo buzzers.  
> **username_14**: Regarding 80 kHz, I'm not entirely sure, but up to 20 kHz, it sounds quite impressive, especially when paired with their preamplifier.  
> **username_5**: Fair enough.  BTW, it looks very similar to the one presented at https://felixblume.com/hydrophone/  
> **username_14**: Absolutely, you've got a point there. Personally, I lean towards purchasing rather than DIY, especially when it's something reproducible, tested, affordable, and does the job well. Comparing it to the pricier hydrophone with tube elements, I'm not sure if there's a notable distinction – perhaps in the radiation pattern? Sensitivity-wise, I'm uncertain since they haven't provided calibration details. Do you happen to know what the difference might be?  

---

### Answer by username_15 on 2024-07-23. Score: -2

HY-10 is a very affordable hydrophone system, hydrophone with a amplifier.
<https://www.h-username_15.com/product/hydrophone---amplifier-for-underwater-hearing>.

> **Comments:**
> **username_16**: Hi - welcome to the community! Please check our community rules on self-promotion: https://bioacoustics.stackexchange.com/help/promotion  

---

