A Stenomask records the voice writer speaking into the mask. A room microphone, such as the Martel HGM-USB, records the people speaking in the courtroom or deposition room. In a properly configured system, you can preserve those as separate recordings and toggle playback between the mask channel and the room channel to check each source.
The useful arrangement is easy to describe: record both sources during the session, then choose which recording you hear during review. Your software and connected equipment must support that arrangement. Establish it with a saved test before relying on the channel labels or assuming that two plugged-in microphones will create two usable recordings.
Imagine a deposition table with a witness at one end, an attorney asking questions and a voice writer working beside a laptop. The witness answers a question in the room. The voice writer listens and repeats the material into a fitted Stenomask using the reporting method they have learned. Those are two different people producing sound at different microphone positions. A complete recording plan identifies which of those sounds each input is intended to capture.
The mask channel contains the writer's spoken rendition. Depending on the reporting method and application, that speech may include dictated punctuation, speaker identifications or other conventions. The room channel contains the participants' voices as the room microphone receives them. It can preserve the question, the answer, a speaker change and the surrounding exchange. That difference becomes useful when you return to a passage and need to hear how it sounded at each stage.
The National Verbatim Reporters Association's explanation of a voice writer's work provides professional context for trained speech capture. The equipment plan here follows the source through the recording system. Your reporting method determines the speaking conventions; the connected microphone and recording application determine which sound reaches each saved track.
Concept map: the actual channel numbers, receiving devices and playback controls depend on the configured system.
If you want to hear how you dictated a name, begin with the mask recording. If you want to hear the participant's original pronunciation or the question immediately before an answer, begin with the room recording. You can then return to the other source and compare the relevant passage. This makes the recordings complementary tools: each gives you access to a different part of the work you are reviewing.
A clear mask recording can help you identify a recognition issue because you can hear the speech supplied to the recognition application. A clear room recording can help you assess what was spoken by the participants before it became your own dictation. Neither observation automatically resolves every transcript question. Listen to the surrounding exchange and follow the professional review process appropriate to the assignment, especially when the available audio remains unclear.
The microphone inside the mask is positioned close to the writer's mouth, while the mask enclosure helps contain that spoken voice. A room microphone is placed to receive voices beyond the writer's position. The room may still contain some sound from the writer, and the mask channel may contain some surrounding sound. Judge whether each intended source is usable in the saved result rather than expecting absolute acoustic isolation in every space.
This also explains why microphone placement belongs in the same plan as software routing. A room microphone placed beside the writer's mouth can favor nearby sound while making distant participants harder to understand. A mask that has shifted from its working position can alter the writer's captured speech. You can have correct channel labels and still need to improve the physical arrangement before the recordings serve their intended purposes.
The room path is intended to cover the relevant speakers throughout the courtroom or deposition room. The HGM-USB and other Martel room microphones provide options for that task, including omnidirectional pickup and arrangements with additional microphone positions. Whole-room coverage is a result to establish in the actual space. List the speaking locations and check each one in a saved recording, including the quieter or more distant position.
Think beyond an empty-room demonstration from the reporter's chair. The witness may speak softly, an attorney may turn toward an exhibit, and another participant may be farther down the table. Your coverage plan should account for those ordinary positions. Where one microphone position gives an uneven result, evaluate a supported arrangement with more pickup points. You can improve the room path while keeping the separate mask path organized around the writer.
A microphone is the physical sound-capturing device. An input is the receiving connection or software device selection. A recorded channel is a separately preserved stream of audio. A file is the saved container that stores one or more channels. These terms often appear together on product pages, yet they answer different purchasing and setup questions. Naming them separately prevents a surprisingly common mistake: buying more microphones and assuming the recording will automatically contain more independently selectable sources.
| Term | What it describes | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| Microphone | The physical pickup point | Which person or room area it receives |
| Input | The connection and selected recording device | Which source actually reaches the application |
| Recorded channel or track | A separately preserved audio stream | Whether its source can be heard independently |
| File or recording session | The saved container and related project information | Whether all required sources reopen correctly |
| Playback selection | The source currently sent to your headphones | Whether selecting it changes listening only |
A system may combine several room microphones before their sound reaches a single recording input. That can be useful for wider room coverage. It also means that selecting the saved room track plays the combined room pickup. You cannot assume that each individual tabletop microphone remains available as a separate playback choice. Ask how the system saves its inputs, and verify that behavior in a short test.
Similarly, a stereo-looking display can show the same mono source on both sides. Two waveforms alone do not prove that one contains the mask and the other contains the room. A source-identification test is more useful: speak a distinctive phrase into the mask, have a helper speak a different phrase from the room, and then listen to each saved channel independently. You should be able to explain what each displayed track actually contains.
A dual-microphone Stenomask can provide two output paths for the writer's speech. Those paths can serve compatible destinations such as a computer and a separate recorder. The additional mask output does not become a room microphone simply because the recording system calls it Channel 2. The physical microphone position remains inside the mask. Keep the output labels tied to the source: writer voice, writer voice copy, and separately captured room speech.
In this guide, MASK and ROOM are descriptive names. One system may assign them to Channels 1 and 2; another may save them as separate files or include additional room channels. Write down the actual assignments. A useful label might read “MASK — writer USB input” or “ROOM — witness-table microphone.” Include the device name if the application permits it. That makes the arrangement easier to understand after a software restart, equipment change or handoff to someone reviewing the files.
The goal is a recording you can explain without reconstructing the setup from memory. Before the session, you know what enters each path. After the session, you know where the corresponding sound was saved. During review, you can select the source you intend to hear and return to the relevant exchange. Those three observations provide a practical foundation for the more detailed equipment and playback choices below.
Plan separate recordings of your voice-writing mask and the room microphone, choose compatible Martel equipment, and learn how to switch playback between the two sources.
Begin with the receiving equipment and the reporting application you intend to use. Identify whether the writer's microphone needs a direct USB connection, a compatible analog microphone input, or a supported interface between the mask and computer. Then decide whether the writer's speech must also reach a separate recording destination. This approach keeps a useful distinction in view: selecting the right mask connection solves the writer's input requirement, while the room recording remains a separate part of the setup.
The Dragon provides a direct USB computer connection for the writer's voice. Consider it when your supported configuration calls for one USB mask path. Plan the room microphone and the recording application's handling of both sources separately.
The Double Dragon 2 offers USB and a separate 3.5mm microphone output. Its two internal microphones receive the writer's speech. The additional output can serve a compatible second destination; a room microphone still supplies the participants' audio.
The MM-ST1 provides two independent 3.5mm microphone outputs. Evaluate it around the actual analog receiving inputs or supported interfaces in your setup. The model name does not mean that one internal microphone records the courtroom while the other records the writer.
The MM-18 has one 3.5mm microphone output for a compatible input. Include any required interface when planning a computer connection. A matching plug shape alone does not establish that a computer socket or recorder input is suitable.
Use the Dragon, Double Dragon 2 and MM-ST1 model comparison when you need a more detailed hardware decision. The complete Stenomask buyer's guide covers the wider Martel range. In this article, the buying question remains specific: which mask path gives your recording system the writer's voice in the form it is designed to accept?
A recognition application receiving the mask is only one part of the answer. Determine whether your chosen workflow preserves the original mask audio for later playback, where that recording is stored, and whether it remains associated with the work you are reviewing. Words appearing on screen do not, by themselves, prove that a replayable mask recording exists. Demonstrate the saved result before planning your comparison routine around it.
Also distinguish a second mask recording from a separate room recording. You may have a computer receiving the writer through USB, a compatible recorder receiving another mask output, and a room microphone supplying participants' speech. Label all three destinations accurately. The extra writer recording may improve continuity for that source, while the room recording gives you access to the original exchange. Each should be checked according to its assigned purpose.
A courtroom or deposition room asks a different question of the microphone: can the participants be understood from their actual speaking positions? Compare room microphones by their receiving connection, placement options, monitoring arrangement and support for additional pickup points. Begin with your existing recording equipment, then choose a microphone or supported system that can supply its room input. Keep the recording-system requirement for separate mask and room channels visible throughout the purchase.
The HGM-USB is a USB-powered room microphone with omnidirectional pickup. Its separate microphone head gives you a pickup position to plan around the speakers, while its USB connection supplies the computer audio path. Martel lists live monitoring support and a USB-C adapter in the package. Confirm the headphone arrangement in your supplied setup. The current listing is the place to check price, contents and ordering availability.
Choose it for the room side of a supported mask-and-room workflow when a computer USB input fits your plan. Test the actual application's simultaneous-source handling. A successful HGM-USB recording by itself establishes the room input; the two-source test establishes the complete arrangement.
View the HGM-USB listing →
The USB Miracle Mic combines USB-powered omnidirectional room pickup with a headphone connection for live monitoring. Martel lists expansion with up to six compatible Audio Grabber microphones. That makes it an option when additional room pickup positions belong in the plan. Confirm the supported arrangement and saved-channel behavior before assuming that each added microphone will be independently selectable during playback.
Check Miracle Mic details →
The HGM-2 is a battery-powered omnidirectional microphone with a 3.5mm output and a built-in battery tester. Evaluate it for a compatible recorder, writer or receiving interface when the room path needs analog microphone audio. Include the battery check and the receiving input in your setup plan. A computer connection requires a supported complete path, rather than an assumption that the microphone is itself a USB device.
Check HGM-2 details →
The Audio Grabber is a low-profile tabletop boundary microphone with a 3.5mm connection. It uses microphone power from compatible receiving equipment and requires no internal battery. Supported daisy-chain arrangements can add room pickup points. Confirm the receiver, power and allowed chain configuration together. It does not become a direct USB microphone through a simple mechanical plug adapter.
Check Audio Grabber details →Map the witness, questioning attorney, opposing side and any other required speaking positions. One well-positioned microphone may give a useful room recording in a particular space. Another layout may call for several microphones near different areas. Establish which arrangement provides understandable room audio first, then identify whether the individual pickup points need separate saved tracks or can serve one combined ROOM recording.
These are separate decisions with separate benefits. Additional positions can bring a microphone nearer to a quiet participant. Separate tracks can let you choose among those positions later. A system can offer one benefit without the other. Ask both questions when comparing packages: “Where can the microphones go?” and “Which of those sources remain separate when I reopen the recording?” Your equipment list should make the answers explicit.
When speakers occupy several positions, compare packages that place microphones nearer to those areas. The following two Martel options address room pickup with several microphones and include different connection and control arrangements. Plan either one as the room side of the workflow, then confirm how your supported recording system keeps that room audio separate from the Stenomask recording.
The HGMUSB3 package provides three omnidirectional microphone pickup points in a USB-powered daisy-chain arrangement. Its listing includes 25-foot microphone extension cables, live headphone monitoring and a carrying case. Consider it when you want distributed room pickup while retaining a USB computer connection.
The three pickup positions can serve the room recording. Their number does not establish three independently saved tracks. Confirm the recording behavior with your application and preserve the writer's mask speech through its separate supported route.
SKU 2037 · Listed $499.99 when checked November 3, 2026. Use the product page for current price and ordering availability.
View the HGMUSB3 package →Conceptual room-signal map · SKU 12. Confirm the actual channel assignments and connections.
This package supplies four boundary microphones and a mixer with USB computer output, a separate 1/8-inch output for a compatible recorder, individual microphone-level adjustment and headphone monitoring. It is an option for distributing room pickup while planning simultaneous computer and recorder destinations.
The two listed outputs support an additional recording destination; they do not by themselves establish four separate saved tracks. Confirm whether the required room output is combined or separately preserved, and have the mask route specified alongside it.
SKU 12 · Listed $599.99 when checked November 3, 2026. Use the product page for current price, contents and ordering availability.
View the four-microphone mixer package →A room with one quiet witness position may need a different arrangement from a courtroom with several separated speaking areas. Use the placement worksheet and saved seat samples to decide what those added pickup points need to accomplish. Ask Martel to confirm the complete combination of the room package, your Stenomask, the receiving equipment and your software before treating any proposed route as established.
Some assignments need more than a writer track and one overall room track. You may want to review a witness-area microphone separately from an attorney-area microphone. In that case, look for documented multichannel recording and playback, with the complete combination of software, interface and microphones configured for that purpose. The count of physical microphones in a package is only the beginning of the question.
The Martel DM4 four-channel courtroom recording package documents four separately recorded tracks and the ability to isolate channels during playback. Its listed package includes software, a USB four-channel mixer, four microphones, cables, stands, monitoring headphones and a case; the compatible computer is separate. This provides a concrete example of recording architecture that preserves room sources for individual review.
Plan a Stenomask addition around the exact system rather than treating that example as proof that every mask or USB microphone connects directly to every mixer input. Provide Martel with the intended mask model, room microphones, software and receiving equipment. Ask for the supported routing and saved-channel assignments. That conversation is more useful than purchasing a room package first and trying to infer a writer input from the number of unused sockets.
For additional room-microphone choices, use the court reporter microphone buying guide and the Martel court reporter microphone category. Keep the shopping decision connected to a demonstrable result: understandable participants on the room path, usable writer speech on the mask path, and a recording application that preserves the sources you intend to select later.
Write the desired saved result at the top of the page: “I can reopen the recording and listen to the writer's mask speech separately from the participants' room speech.” Work backward from that result. Identify the recording application, the number and type of inputs it accepts, the devices supplying those inputs, and the microphones supplying those devices. This gives every component a defined job before you begin changing settings.
A useful map follows the whole route. For the mask, write the model, connector, receiving device, software input and saved destination. Do the same for the room microphone. If a separate recorder also receives the mask, give that route its own line. Avoid a single note that says “audio connected.” The point of the map is to distinguish the recordings when several similar device names or cables appear during setup.
| Source label | Physical equipment | Selected input | Saved result to demonstrate |
|---|---|---|---|
| MASK | Chosen Stenomask and supported connection | Write the exact application input name | Writer speech can be replayed separately |
| ROOM | Chosen Martel room microphone or system | Write the exact application input name | Participants can be replayed separately |
| MASK COPY, if used | Compatible additional recording destination | Write its actual microphone input | Second writer recording opens independently |
| ADDITIONAL ROOM, if used | Named room-area microphone | Write its documented channel assignment | Confirm separate track or combined room mix |
A computer may recognize both a USB Stenomask and a USB room microphone while an individual recording application offers only one selected device. Seeing both names in the operating system therefore does not establish a two-source recording. Confirm that your actual software edition and supported hardware arrangement can capture the required sources at the same time and preserve them separately. Ask for the complete configuration, including any interface or approved device-handling requirement.
Official recording-software guidance on multiple inputs and multichannel capture illustrate why hardware, drivers and application support must be considered together. Use your own application's documentation for its specific procedure. A USB hub provides connection ports; it does not by itself supply the recording features needed to combine separate devices into independently saved tracks.
The writer's mask may supply speech recognition while a recording function saves audio for review. Those jobs can involve related settings, but they are different results to verify. Check that recognition receives the intended mask and that the audio you expect to review is actually retained. Then confirm the room recording independently. A successful recognition exercise does not establish that the room input was selected or that either audio file was saved.
If several applications are involved, name them in your map by function: writer recognition, mask recording, room recording and playback. Test the combination while all required applications are running. An arrangement that works with one application alone can behave differently when another application starts or selects the same device. Record what you observed in the working combination so that the setup can be repeated without relying on an operating-system default.
A 3.5mm plug may resemble another plug while the connected equipment expects a different signal or power arrangement. Identify whether the receiving socket is a microphone input, headphone output, combined headset connection or another type of input. The signal level, wiring and supported microphone power also matter. Provide the exact equipment models when asking for a connection recommendation, rather than describing the available socket only as “the small round one.”
The same care applies to interfaces with several input types. A diagram showing two sources is a functional plan, not permission to connect any microphone to any numbered socket. Have the complete combination confirmed, including adapters and power settings. Once the correct route is established, label both ends of similar cables. The equipment map and the labels should agree when everything is connected in its ordinary working position.
You can preserve the mask on one supported device and the room on another supported device. That arrangement needs a clear start, stop, file and timing plan. Check each device's recording state independently. Keep the related files together under a session identifier, and note whether either device was paused or restarted. Two saved files are easier to compare when you can identify the corresponding portions without guessing how their elapsed-time counters relate.
A second device also deserves its own power, storage and playback check. Describe the independence it actually provides. Two recording destinations sharing one computer, power supply or input can still share a point of failure. Meanwhile, a room recording and a mask recording preserve different content. Decide what continuity you need, then verify the specific source and destination that address it. The word backup alone leaves too much of that arrangement unexplained.
Begin the room plan with a simple seating sketch. Mark the witness, the questioning position, the other attorney positions and any additional location that needs to be heard. Include the reporter's working position, because the mask and room equipment must coexist on the available desk or table. Note likely obstructions such as a screen, a stack of exhibits or a high monitor. These details turn “pick up the whole room” into a set of speaking positions you can actually check.
A useful room test includes a person speaking from each required location at a comfortable level. Ask them to read a short fictional sentence and identify the seat. Include a quieter passage rather than testing only a strong voice directed toward the microphone. If people commonly turn toward a display or document, include that orientation in the test. Listen to the saved ROOM recording rather than deciding from the live sound in the room.
Keep your test note specific. “Witness position: every word of the sample is understandable” tells you more than “microphone sounds powerful.” If the far side is unclear, record the observation and change one part of the arrangement. You might adjust a supported microphone position or evaluate an additional pickup point. Repeat the same sentence from the same seat so the result can guide the next decision.
An omnidirectional room microphone receives sound from around its pickup position. That helps with participants seated in different directions. The actual recording still reflects distance, speaking level, room noise, obstructions and the relationship between the microphone and the speakers. A voice across the room can be less intelligible than one nearby. Choose a useful location and verify the entire seating plan instead of treating pickup direction as a complete coverage measurement.
Advertised pickup ranges can help describe a product, but they cannot tell you how a particular quiet witness will sound in your room. The practical question is whether the words you need can be understood in the saved file. That question remains the same whether the microphone is compact, connected by USB, battery powered or part of a larger system. Evaluate the result under the conditions in which the equipment will be used.
Look at what will happen around the pickup point during the session. Papers may be moved, a keyboard may be used and exhibits may be placed on the table. Position the microphone and route its cable so those ordinary actions are less likely to dominate the recording or pull the microphone out of place. Then include some normal desk activity in your test to learn what the room path actually receives.
For a tabletop boundary microphone, follow the product's placement instructions for its supporting surface. For a separate microphone head on a stand or clip, establish the intended position and keep it clear of obstructions. Avoid covering the pickup area with a folder after the test. A small placement note or photograph of the approved equipment arrangement can make it easier to reproduce the layout when the room is set up again.
When considering an additional microphone, identify the specific location it is meant to improve. “A pickup point near the far end of the deposition table” is a clear purpose. Connect it through the supported equipment and repeat the far-seat sample. Also check the other positions, because the useful result is the complete room recording. Keep the saved-channel description accurate whether the added microphone joins a combined room input or receives its own track.
Additional microphones can hear some of the same room sound. The benefit should be judged by intelligible speech from the intended positions, not by a larger microphone count on the equipment list. If separate channels are preserved, test each one as well as the combined listening view. This lets you understand which room source is most useful when you later need to isolate a particular area.
The writer still needs comfortable access to the mask, keyboard and recording controls. Provide enough cable slack for ordinary movement and keep connectors from carrying tension. If a supported mask stand belongs in the setup, evaluate its placement alongside the room microphone rather than after the desk is crowded. The Martel Stenomask Flex Stand is an accessory to consider around the actual mounting and positioning requirements.
Finish the layout check by using the desk normally. Read the sample material, operate the keyboard and reach the controls you will need. Then reopen both test recordings. You are checking a working arrangement, so the physical setup and the saved results should agree. Write down any final changes to the source map before considering the room ready for the intended recording routine.
Use a short fictional exchange before the actual assignment, with any recording authorization and operating requirements already addressed through the appropriate process. The purpose is to establish the equipment behavior. You need to know which input is selected, whether both sources record together, where the result is saved and whether each source can be replayed independently. Give the test a recognizable name so it cannot be confused with the work that follows.
Run the test with the full intended setup: the same computer, microphone connections, interfaces, recording application and recognition application that will be used together. If a separate recorder belongs in the plan, include it too. A disconnected rehearsal with only one microphone cannot establish the final two-source routine. Keep your source map beside the equipment and record each observation against the correct line.
Start the intended recording functions and say a simple identifier through the fitted mask, such as “Mask test, green notebook, sample one.” Keep the room helper quiet for this part. Observe the expected mask input indication, then allow a short pause. Your purpose is to give the saved mask recording a phrase you can recognize immediately during playback. Use ordinary speech and the working position you intend to maintain.
Do not rely on a moving meter alone. Nearby speech can make a computer's built-in microphone respond even when the intended external device has not been selected. Check the device name in the actual application and listen to the resulting recording. The source should be consistent with the planned mask route. If it is unclear which microphone was captured, resolve that uncertainty before progressing to the combined test.
Have a helper speak a different identifier from the witness or another required room position, such as “Room test, blue folder, sample two.” Keep the writer quiet for that passage. Repeat from the other important locations, naming each position. This gives you a small set of recognizable room samples and makes the saved file useful for both source identification and placement assessment.
Some sound from the room may also be audible in the mask recording, and some writer sound may reach the room microphone. Evaluate whether the intended source is clearly represented by its own recording. If both displayed channels sound like the same close laptop pickup, investigate the input assignments. The test should establish a useful separation of sources, even when the room provides some acoustic spill between them.
Read a brief fictional question and answer while the writer repeats the assigned material into the mask. Allow the actual reporting applications to operate together. Watch the recording state for each required source. This step checks the combined configuration, including whether starting another application changes an input, interrupts a recording or affects the listening arrangement. Note any change rather than assuming that the earlier individual checks still establish the result.
Include a short period of ordinary working activity. The writer can type a practice note, turn a page or reach the normal controls. A helper can speak from the quieter position used in the coverage check. These simple actions help reveal practical issues such as a cable being pulled or a microphone being covered. The exercise remains a setup check, so keep the material short and easy to recognize when reopened.
Stop the test recording and allow the application or device to complete its normal saving process. Record the file name, session location and any related project information the application needs. If another recorder is running, complete its saving process separately. A file appearing in a folder is useful evidence of a saved item, but you still need to reopen it and check its contents.
Use the same opening method you expect to use during review. A reporting application may manage audio through a case or session rather than through an obvious standalone file. Confirm that you can return to the test after closing the recording view. This establishes a repeatable route from the working session to the saved audio instead of depending on a temporary playback buffer that happened to remain available.
Open the saved test and use the supported playback selection to hear MASK alone. Find the writer's distinctive identifier and the dictated portion of the exchange. Then select ROOM alone and find the helper's identifier and the original question and answer. If several room tracks are intended to remain separate, test each assignment. Write down the actual controls or approved shortcut that accomplish this in your software.
Listen for meaning as well as the presence of sound. A track can contain a recognizable voice while still being too distant, clipped or interrupted to serve the task well. Record any problem with its source label and the approximate passage. Improve the affected route and repeat the same test. A clear description of the result makes support more effective than a general report that “the two microphones do not work.”
Once the short test works, use a practice session long enough to resemble the applications and equipment running together in normal use. There is no universal duration that certifies a setup. Your purpose is to observe continuity and the way the saved sources relate over time. Reopen the result and check corresponding material near the beginning, later in the session and near the end.
This is especially helpful when the mask and room are recorded by different devices or applications. Their elapsed-time counters may start at different moments, and their timing relationship can change over a long recording. Note the observed relationship rather than assuming identical timestamps identify identical words. The playback section below explains a practical way to compare matching passages while accounting for the writer's own speaking delay.
Live monitoring lets you hear audio while the system is operating. Saved playback lets you hear what the recording retained. Both are useful, and each answers a different question. A headphone feed can help you notice a poorly positioned room microphone immediately. Reopening the saved test tells you whether the application preserved the intended source. Include both observations in the routine instead of treating either one as a complete recording check.
Identify the headphone connection and the audio it supplies. It may be a microphone's monitoring connection, an interface's monitor mix or computer playback. The sound can be the live room source, the saved audio being reviewed, or a supported combination. Write the expected listening route in the setup note. That makes it easier to interpret a quiet headset or an unexpected mixture of the writer and room voices.
The USB Miracle Mic listing specifically describes a headphone connection for live room monitoring. HGM-USB monitoring should be set up according to the supplied configuration and computer workflow. In either case, hearing room speech through headphones does not establish that the separate mask recording is being saved. Complete the source checks for each required path, then confirm the recording state using the application or device assigned to it.
Begin with a comfortable listening level and adjust according to the actual source. If the room recording is faint, investigate placement and the supported input controls rather than compensating only by making headphone playback louder. Headphone volume changes what you hear; it may leave the saved recording unchanged. Keeping that distinction clear helps you avoid making a playback adjustment and assuming it corrected an input problem.
If the listening route produces an echo or makes ordinary work difficult, identify whether you are hearing delayed software monitoring together with another feed. Review the supported monitoring arrangement before changing several controls at once. In a practice setup, make one documented change and listen again. The useful result is a monitoring path you understand and a saved recording you can verify, rather than simply the loudest available sound.
Microsoft's microphone setup and test instructions explain how to select an input in Windows sound settings and hear a recorded test sample. This can help establish that the computer receives a particular microphone. Continue with the recording application afterward, because its device selection and saved-channel configuration determine the result used for your work.
Keep the final checklist short enough to use. Confirm the named mask input, the named room input, the intended recording state, the headphone route and the saved test. Add any separate recorder to the list by its actual source. A concise working checklist gives you a repeatable way to establish readiness, while the more detailed source map remains available when something changes or needs explanation.
Once the system has saved the two sources separately, use its supported playback controls to choose which source reaches your headphones. You may see a channel selector, an audio-source choice, track mute controls or a solo function. Learn the behavior in your actual application with the saved test. The key is to identify both the recording you opened and the source you selected before drawing a conclusion from what you hear.
The practical routine is to locate the exchange, hear the room source, switch to the corresponding mask speech, and return to the room as needed. You can begin with the mask when that better fits the question. Keep the comparison focused on a short meaningful passage and include enough surrounding speech to understand it. Replaying a disconnected syllable repeatedly can remove the context that makes the exchange intelligible.
Begin in the recording or review application that supports the saved format and its channel selection. Confirm the session identifier and the relevant recording segment. If the application uses a project or case to locate the audio, open that project through its normal process. A separately exported listening file may contain only a combined mix or one selected source, so establish what you opened before searching for missing channel controls.
Look for the source labels you wrote in the routing note. If the recording uses numbers, translate them through the known assignments: for example, Channel 1 was verified as MASK and Channel 2 was verified as ROOM. If several room microphones have independent tracks, keep their location labels visible. A label is useful because it links the saved track to a tested input, not because a number inherently identifies the sound.
Use the supported listening selector to hear the room source. Find a recognizable phrase, speaker change or question near the passage you want to review. Play from slightly before the point of interest so you hear the lead-in. Note the displayed position if that will help you return. Keep the headphone level comfortable and avoid changing recording-input settings when your immediate task is saved playback.
Listen for what the room source can establish. You may hear the participant's original pronunciation, the words around an unclear term or which person began speaking. You may also find that the room audio remains uncertain. Describe that observation accurately. The presence of a second source gives you another recording to examine; it does not guarantee that every difficult exchange will become clear.
Select the mask source and locate the corresponding dictated passage. The writer typically speaks after hearing the participant, so the matching words may occur later on the mask recording's timeline. Listen for the phrase itself rather than treating the room timestamp as an exact word locator. Include the relevant dictated context, especially when speaker labels or punctuation conventions are part of the writer's speech.
This comparison can help separate what the writer said from what recognition produced. If the saved mask speech contains the intended word but the text shows something else, that is a different observation from hearing a different word in the writer's dictation. Record the observation alongside the relevant passage. Follow the reporting application's normal review process and the assignment's requirements when resolving the resulting text.
Switch back to ROOM and replay the exchange with the new question in mind. You might listen to the full question, the answer and the next speaker's response rather than repeatedly replaying only one word. If the software supports a playback selection or repeat region, learn how that selection behaves across its tracks. Keep track of whether you are moving the playback position or simply changing which source is audible.
Use a short note to preserve what you found. For example: “Room passage identifies the term clearly; mask rendition differs” or “Both sources remain unclear at the same exchange.” These are descriptions of the recordings, not substitutes for the reporter's judgment. They make the review repeatable and help you explain the remaining question without presenting an uncertain interpretation as a verified result.
A solo control commonly lets you hear one selected track; a mute control commonly removes a track from playback. Their exact behavior can differ by application and mode. Official playback documentation provides one example in which solo behavior depends on preferences. Use the saved test to confirm that your chosen action leaves only the intended source audible.
Some programs allow several tracks to remain soloed together. Hearing both voices after pressing Solo may therefore reflect the current selection rather than a failed recording separation. Check the audible-source state and the actual application instructions. Learn a reliable sequence for MASK only, ROOM only and the usual full listening view. Write that sequence in plain language beside your source map so it remains usable when you return to the work later.
When making a review copy, check whether the export preserves channels, creates a combined mix or includes only the selected source. Software can use the current audible-track state when determining an export. The documentation on combining audio tracks illustrates the distinction between separate tracks and a resulting mix. Confirm the exported file by reopening it with the intended playback tool.
Keep the original multichannel recording or complete source files according to your normal handling process. Give a listening copy a descriptive name such as MASK review or ROOM review, so someone receiving it understands its contents. If separate source selection is needed downstream, agree on a supported format and verify that the receiving person can access the required tracks. A convenient mixed file and a complete source-preserving recording can serve different purposes.
The room captures participants as they speak. The mask captures the writer's response to what they heard. Those moments do not have to line up word for word, even when the recording channels share the same recording clock. A voice writer may be a little behind one speaker and differently positioned relative to another exchange. This makes phrase-based comparison more useful than assuming one fixed delay applies throughout an entire session.
ROOM: The participant says, “The blue folder arrived on Tuesday.”
MASK, a little later: The writer dictates the corresponding sentence using the taught reporting conventions.
Review: Find the same phrase on each source. The exact time gap depends on the actual speech and recording arrangement.
If the room recorder starts before the mask recorder, the displayed elapsed times can differ before either person begins speaking. A pause, restart or new file segment can change that relationship again. Keep a note of the segments and use an identifiable passage in each recording to find the corresponding exchange. Do not assume that 20 minutes on one device refers to the same moment as 20 minutes on another.
Long recordings made by independent devices can also develop timing differences between their clocks. When comparing later material, check a nearby phrase again rather than carrying forward an offset observed only at the beginning. If your supported review software provides an alignment method, use its documented process on the appropriate working copy. Preserve the source recordings and keep any comparison notes clear about what was aligned and why.
Use a meaningful exchange as the unit of review: the question, the answer and any immediate clarification. A number can refer to a time, a quantity or an exhibit depending on what came before it. The room source may preserve that lead-in, while the mask source may include a speaker label or spoken punctuation that helps you follow the writer's rendition. Listening to both in context can make the comparison more informative.
If you change playback speed, use the supported controls and return to ordinary playback when needed to assess the original sound. Keep the question clear: are you trying to locate the passage, understand a participant's word, or assess the writer's captured speech? A deliberate listening goal helps avoid making unrelated changes to the recording while searching for one difficult point.
The following fictional material was written for this guide. Use it with an instructor or helper as a recording and review exercise. It is not a certification test or a claim about a particular product's performance. Choose the reporting conventions and practice pace appropriate to your training. The equipment goal is to save identifiable room and mask sources and demonstrate that each can be heard independently afterward.
Question: “Which folder did you place beside the window?”
Answer: “I placed the blue folder beside the window. The green folder stayed in the cabinet.”
Question: “When did you move the blue folder?”
Answer: “On Tuesday morning, before the maintenance visit.”
Question: “Was the window open when you arrived?”
Answer: “No. I opened it after I put the folder on the table.”
First, use the distinctive mask and room identifiers from the setup test. Second, have the helper read the exchange while the writer follows the assigned voice-writing method. Third, reopen the completed recording and select one source at a time. Find the color distinction, the timing answer and the final clarification on each recording. Keep the task small enough that the meaning remains easy to check.
Record what each source contributes. The room recording should let you hear the helper's question and answer. The mask recording should let you hear the writer's corresponding speech. If the writer omitted a word, treat that as a practice observation. If the recording captured the wrong input, treat it as a setup observation. If the saved speech is clear but recognition differs, preserve a short example for the appropriate software or instructional review.
If the room helper sounds distant, adjust the supported room placement and repeat the same exchange from the same location. If the mask speech is the issue, review its position and input route, then repeat that part. Keep the original test available while making the next practice recording. A small change with a recognizable sample gives you a clearer comparison than changing devices, levels and application settings all at once.
Finish by explaining the setup to the helper in plain language: which track is the writer, which track is the room, how to hear each one, and where the files are saved. If that explanation is difficult, improve the labels or notes. The exercise is complete when the saved result and the description agree, giving you a routine you can repeat with your actual supported equipment.
The examples below are planning scenarios written for this guide. They describe useful questions and checks rather than a tested equipment bundle or a promise that particular software will accept every listed device. Start with the arrangement that resembles your work, then have its complete connections confirmed. The source map remains the same: writer speech belongs to MASK, participant speech belongs to ROOM, and the saved result must preserve whatever separation you need for review.
A voice writer already has a supported USB mask workflow and wants a separate recording of participants around a deposition table. The first task is to establish how the actual recording software handles the room input alongside the mask. The HGM-USB is a room-microphone option to discuss when a USB computer path fits the supported configuration. Its placement should be tested against the people who will speak around the table.
The writer maps the USB mask input, the room input and the saved destinations. A helper reads the fictional exchange from each required seat, then the writer and helper complete a combined practice recording. During review, the writer selects the room source to hear the original exchange and switches to the corresponding mask speech. If the far seat is unclear, the next question concerns room placement or expanded pickup, while the already verified mask route remains documented.
A larger space has separated witness, bench and attorney positions. The reporter evaluates a distributed room arrangement such as the HGMUSB3 three-microphone package, SKU 2037, or the four-microphone mixer package, SKU 12. The decision begins with where the pickup points need to go and which receiving connections the existing system supports. The writer's mask remains its own source in the routing plan.
Each required room location receives a saved sample test. The reporter then identifies whether the room microphones feed a combined ROOM recording or remain separately saved through the actual configured system. When the room is combined, toggling MASK and ROOM still gives access to the writer and participants as two source types. When individual room tracks are a requirement, the purchase conversation needs to address documented multichannel capture rather than assume it from the microphone count.
A recording assignment needs individual room-area playback choices. A documented multichannel package such as DM4 provides an example to evaluate around that requirement. The reporter identifies the actual room-channel assignments and tests each independently. The intended addition or parallel use of a mask must be confirmed as part of the complete setup, including its receiving connection and any separate writer recording.
The review routine can then follow a specific question. The reporter might begin with the witness-area room track, hear the surrounding exchange through the appropriate room channels, and consult the saved mask speech where that source is part of the approved workflow. Track names should describe locations and sources. “Four-channel recording” becomes useful when the person reviewing it knows which sound each track contains and how to select it in the supported player.
A student follows the school's equipment requirements and uses a short practice passage. The instructor wants the student to hear both the source material and the student's captured mask speech. If a separate room or practice-source recording is included, the arrangement should preserve identifiable sources and make their timing relationship clear. The student first learns where the files are saved and how to reopen them before using a long lesson for review.
The learning goal is a specific observation. The student may discover an omission in their own repetition, an incorrect microphone selection, or a recognition result that differs from clear mask speech. These call for different next steps. The Stenomask guide for voice writing students provides additional equipment-planning and practice tools. The instructor's current method and requirements determine how those tools are used in the course.
A writer uses a compatible additional recording destination alongside the primary computer. If the additional recorder receives another mask output, label it MASK COPY. If it receives a room output from a supported microphone or mixer, label it ROOM COPY. A Double Dragon 2 or MM-ST1 output arrangement can be evaluated for the writer's additional path, with the exact receiving input confirmed.
The reporter checks each destination independently and records the segment names and start relationship. During later review, a copy should be identifiable by both source and device. This prevents a common confusion: opening a second writer recording and expecting it to contain the participants' original room voices. The additional destination is valuable when its actual content and the continuity it provides are understood.
A hybrid deposition can contain local participants, remote participants, the writer's mask speech and audio played by the meeting computer. Begin by identifying how the remote speech reaches the authorized recording workflow. A room microphone hears sound in the physical room; it does not automatically receive a separate clean feed of the meeting application's output. Write that remote route explicitly rather than treating “room audio” as a description of every sound on the computer.
Use a practice meeting with nonconfidential material. Have a local helper speak from the actual room position, then have a remote helper speak through the intended meeting arrangement. Reopen the saved recording and identify both passages. If the room microphone is hearing remote speech from room speakers, evaluate the saved result under that exact condition. Headphones may change what the room microphone can hear, so include the actual listening arrangement in the test.
Then include the mask and the reporting applications. Confirm that the meeting application's microphone selection does not unintentionally use the writer's mask when another input was intended, and that the recording application's choices still match the source map. These are application-specific routing questions. Have the supported arrangement confirmed and avoid assuming that selecting a device in one program also configures every other program that is open.
The room recording and the sound sent into the meeting can follow different routes. Check the intended meeting microphone independently from the saved MASK and ROOM channels. Ask the remote helper to identify which local speech they hear in the practice session. Keep this check purposeful: you are establishing the expected microphone route, not using a casual conversation as proof that every recording source is correct.
Headphone and speaker choices also affect the physical room. A room speaker can make remote speech available to the local participants and to the room microphone, while a headphone feed may be heard only by its wearer. Supported direct routing can have different behavior again. Record the actual arrangement and verify the saved result. When the configuration becomes complex, give Martel the complete equipment list and the software roles before choosing another microphone.
If the recording system preserves local room and remote meeting audio separately, label them accordingly. If they are combined into ROOM, document that fact. The writer should be able to tell what a playback choice contains before using it to review an exchange. The room-microphone category can help with physical pickup choices, while the complete hybrid routing still needs confirmation in the actual applications.
A recording is easier to use when its names and accompanying notes identify its source. Choose a consistent session identifier and add a source label where your software permits it. Keep the original recording, any required project information and the input map together through your normal file-handling process. The purpose is to make the material findable without relying on the person who happened to connect the equipment that day.
For a fictional practice session, names such as Practice-A_MASK, Practice-A_ROOM and Practice-A_ROUTING-NOTE communicate the relationship immediately. If a recording has several parts, add the segment identifier consistently. Within an application-managed case, use the software's supported naming and storage features. Avoid renaming or relocating underlying audio in a way that breaks the project's links to it.
Separate a listening copy from the retained source recording through its name and storage location. A file called Practice-A_ROOM-REVIEW tells the next person more than final-audio-new. Include any necessary note about a selected track or combined mix. When the recipient needs source switching, verify that the shared format supports it and that the recipient can actually open the channels using their available tools.
After copying or exporting a recording, open the copied or exported item and check its beginning, a useful middle passage and its end. For a source-preserving version, confirm that MASK and ROOM remain independently accessible as intended. For a listening copy, confirm the source it is meant to contain. These checks answer different questions, so keep the description of each file specific.
Follow the recording and file-handling process required for the assignment, including the approved storage and sharing destinations. A convenient transfer method does not change what the recording contains. Confirm both the destination and the saved-source format before treating the handoff as complete. Clear names, intact originals and a small routing note make future review substantially easier to reconstruct.
Describe the observed problem before changing equipment. Identify the source, the application or device, the saved recording and the specific passage that demonstrates the issue. Then determine whether the problem concerns captured sound, saved content, playback selection or recognition output. This simple separation gives you a better starting point than describing every unexpected result as a microphone failure.
Check the source assignments in the saved session. The application may have recorded the mask input twice, or the two displayed sides may contain the same mono source. Return to the distinctive room and mask identifiers from the test. Select each channel independently and listen for the expected content. If the room identifier is absent from every saved source, examine the room input selection and recording configuration.
Also check whether you opened an exported copy that includes only the writer. Compare it with the complete original session through the supported application. Keep the investigation tied to a known test before changing microphone hardware. The key observation is which sound was saved in which track, and whether the original recording contains a room source that the current player is failing to expose.
Identify the participant's position and compare it with the room test. Check whether the microphone moved, became obstructed or was placed beside a new source of noise. Review the supported input controls and listen to the saved passage at an ordinary playback level. If the near positions are clear while the far position is weak, placement and additional pickup points deserve attention.
A distributed arrangement such as HGMUSB3 or the four-microphone mixer package is relevant when the room needs more pickup locations. Have the exact system and connections confirmed. Repeat the seat test after the change and evaluate understandable speech across the required locations. Adding microphones should address an identified room need rather than serve as a substitute for checking the resulting recording.
Preserve a short practice example containing the saved mask speech and the resulting text. Confirm that the recognition application was actually using the intended mask input at the time. Then follow the application's supported microphone, profile or correction process with the appropriate instructional or product support. The useful evidence is a clear statement of what was spoken, what was captured and what the software produced.
The room recording can help locate the original exchange and its context, while the mask recording lets you hear the writer's rendition. Keep those observations distinct. If the writer's own speech differs from the room source, that is a different situation from recognition changing clear writer speech. A concise example supports a more focused conversation than repeatedly changing the room microphone to investigate a writer-recognition issue.
First distinguish a silent saved track from a muted playback track. Check the supported source selector, mute state and headphone output. Find the source identifier in the original test if it is available. If the actual saved source is silent, review whether its input was selected and recording at the time. Check its connection, power requirements and the application route one stage at a time.
For a battery-powered room microphone, include its battery check. For USB equipment, confirm that the intended device is recognized and selected. For an analog microphone, confirm the supported receiving input and required power arrangement. Avoid enabling unfamiliar power settings simply to see whether they help. Provide the exact model combination when requesting assistance so that the connection recommendation fits the equipment.
Check the player's audible-source state. Several tracks may remain selected or soloed, or the file may already contain a combined mix. Use the saved test to learn whether one control selects a single source or adds it to the existing listening selection. If the recording preserved the sources separately, the supported playback method should make their individual contents accessible.
Some overlapping sound can also be acoustic: the room microphone may have captured a little of the writer, or the mask may have received surrounding speech. Compare the recognizable identifiers and the relative character of the recordings. If separation is poor, review both input routing and physical placement. Track selection can choose among saved sources, but it cannot reverse a recording that combined them before they were saved.
Identify the playback output and headphone connection separately from the microphone input. The correct recording can exist while the player sends it to another output. Confirm that the supported monitoring or playback route matches the headset you are using. Begin at a comfortable volume and play the known test passage, rather than changing recording input gain to investigate a listening-output problem.
Write the working headphone route in the setup note after resolving it. If live monitoring and saved playback use different connections or modes, describe both. That small detail can prevent repeated confusion when the same equipment is reconnected later. A complete setup note covers where sound enters, where it is saved and how the reviewer hears it again.
Check whether the sources were captured by separate devices or whether one route was paused, restarted or segmented. Compare identifiable phrases near the later passage. Separate device clocks and different start times can affect the relationship between elapsed-time displays. The writer's speaking delay can vary as well, so do not treat a single offset as a universal word alignment.
Use the review application's supported comparison method and preserve the original recordings. Keep a note of the segment relationship and any alignment used on a working copy. If the setup is intended to provide synchronized source selection in one session, ask support to confirm the recording configuration and inspect a short reproducible example of the timing problem.
Start the equipment list with what you already own and what the saved recording must allow you to do. A reporter with a working mask path may need a room microphone and a confirmed simultaneous recording arrangement. Another reporter may need distributed room pickup, a recording interface or a different software edition. Decide what is missing from the complete path before treating a microphone price as the cost of the entire solution.
| Your requirement | Martel options to discuss | Result to confirm |
|---|---|---|
| Writer microphone connection | Dragon, Double Dragon 2, MM-ST1 or MM-18 | Supported mask input and retained writer audio |
| USB room pickup | HGM-USB or USB Miracle Mic | Understandable participant audio in the configured room path |
| Several room positions | HGMUSB3, SKU 2037 or four-microphone mixer package, SKU 12 | Coverage at the required positions and documented output behavior |
| Analog room microphone | HGM-2 or compatible Audio Grabber arrangement | Correct receiving input, microphone power and saved result |
| Individually selectable room tracks | Documented DM4 multichannel package | Supported independent capture and playback for each planned track |
Include the required microphone or mask, supported receiving interface, compatible computer, recording software, cables, headphones and any additional destination that belongs in the plan. Check package contents so that included items are not counted twice. Review the exact supplied microphone configuration when a package offers several options. The two package prices shown earlier are reference listing prices, not totals for every possible mask-and-room setup.
Stock and delivery information can change, so use each product's current order controls when planning a purchase. Have the connection and software questions resolved alongside the equipment decision. The relevant success measure is a configuration that saves the required sources and lets you review them as intended. That is more useful than collecting individually capable products without establishing how they work together.
Give Martel your mask model, room microphone or package, receiving equipment, computer system, recording application and intended source separation. Explain whether you need MASK and ROOM as two separately selectable sources, additional individual room tracks, an independent recording copy, or a combination. Include the relevant school or workplace equipment requirements when they apply. This lets the discussion address the complete arrangement rather than a single connector in isolation.
For an existing problem, add the short test result: which identifier appears on each saved track, what can be heard through headphones, and where the actual result differs from the plan. Avoid sending real assignment audio unless the appropriate handling process permits it; fictional setup samples can often demonstrate a connection issue. Use Martel product and setup support to discuss the equipment combination and the next useful check.
Yes, when the complete recording configuration preserves the two sources separately and the playback application supports selecting them. Record the intended sources during the session, then use the supported playback selector, solo or mute method to hear MASK or ROOM. Prove the result by reopening a saved test and finding the distinct identifiers on the appropriate recordings.
Both internal mask microphones receive the writer's speech. Their additional outputs provide writer-voice paths to compatible destinations. A separately positioned room microphone captures the participants. Keep those source roles clear even when your recording application numbers the saved tracks in a different order.
They serve different source roles in this setup. The HGM-USB is a room microphone with a USB computer connection. A Stenomask places its microphone near the writer's mouth inside an enclosure that helps contain the writer's speech. Choose and test each around the source it is intended to supply.
Check the documented recording architecture. Additional microphones can improve distributed pickup while feeding a combined room output. The HGMUSB3 and four-microphone mixer packages should be evaluated around their actual receiving connections and saved output. A requirement for individual room-track selection calls for a system explicitly configured to preserve those tracks.
A room microphone is intended to receive participant speech around its pickup area. Whether one position gives usable coverage throughout your particular room depends on the speakers, distances, placement and conditions. Test each required speaking location in the saved recording. Add supported pickup points when the observed coverage calls for them.
Live listening confirms the monitoring route you are hearing. A saved-recording check confirms what was retained. Use both: monitor the intended source through the supported connection, then reopen a completed test and hear the appropriate source independently. A light or moving meter can support the check without replacing the saved result.
The writer speaks after hearing the participant, and that speaking delay can vary. Separate devices can also start at different times or develop timing differences. Find matching phrases and account for the actual segment relationship. Exact timestamp equality is not a reliable substitute for identifying the same exchange.
Begin with the program's current equipment and software requirements. Establish the mask input, saved recording and playback routine first, then include the room or practice-source route the program requires. Use the student Stenomask guide for preparation and the instructor's method for the actual reporting instruction.
Choose the mask for the writer's voice, choose the room microphone arrangement for the participants, and confirm how the system preserves each recording. Then practise finding the same exchange on both sources. Clear labels, a saved test and a known playback routine give you a practical way to move between MASK and ROOM whenever your supported review workflow calls for it.
Continue with the Stenomask buyer's guide, the mask model comparison, or help planning your complete recording setup.
