Edirol R-44 4 channel Portable Recorder announced

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Toenis Liivamaegi

Any thoughts on it's sound/preamp quality?
Really bad or acceptable with or without noise removal in post?
I mean for location sound, narratives and ambience/atmo.
I'll be using Senn MKH416 and Rode NTG3 on it plus some wired lavs and maybe a Oktava pair for stereo atmos.

I have been doing some research on the R44 and other better priced units, like the Tascam HD-P2, and these two at least have XLR inputs and 48v phantom.

The Tascam seems to have good mic preamps, but only two channels. It has TC capabilities, which I would need.

The Edirol R44 has 4 channels, even if the mic preamps do not seem to be as good as the Tascam's. No TC unfortunately. The R4Pro has 4 channels and TC, but records in HD only, which is not too reliable for over the shoulder applications, as most doc jobs are.

What I am trying is to make up my mind on how much I will need TC on my market here in Brazil, to see if should get an R44 or a Tascam.

A bit more on the R44 preamps. According to some users in the Taperssection forum, using Oktava mics, the unit's noise seems to quite low and lower than most location ambient noise. But maybe there are more quiet studios that would need quieter preamps. In my case I would mostly be going in through a mixer, only using the mic preamps on rare occasions and after tests to see how they sound.

[Toenis Liivamaegi]

We have a R44 here (thanks to pinknoise systems) and as described on the Oade bros page the onboard LCD makes some noise when the time ticks. But when balanced inputs are connected these sounds go away, even if I pug a bare cable or a lav power supply. I've not found a place quiet enough to test speech vs silence noisefloor but it seems quite ok and as the preamp noise can be prerecorded as the recorderspecific noiseprint it is easily removable in post. But I think it won't be used much if one turns the gain and level pots up 3/4 and not more.
Great little recorder, a colleague of mine even thought it was made of metal.
One good thing is that it has the option to tell the recorder that you are using rechargeables or a power source of your choice, variable voltage input to 24v if I'm not mistaken.

Feel free to ask any specific questions about it.

I only wish it would fit into the MX24 (larger) bag from Portabrace but I don't want to risk in blind ordering it. Porta Brace | MX-24 Audio Mixer Case with RM Pocket | MX-24

T

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Toenis Liivamaegi

We have a R44 here (thanks to pinknoise systems) and as described on the Oade bros page the onboard LCD makes some noise when the time ticks. But when balanced inputs are connected these sounds go away, even if I pug a bare cable or a lav power supply.

Where do I find that warning? Does Oade offer any cure for for this LCD noise? Any info on what level that noise is?

[Toenis Liivamaegi]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

Where do I find that warning? Does Oade offer any cure for for this LCD noise? Any info on what level that noise is?

The Oade supermod R44
"Improvements are also made to reduce the audible digital noise that contaminates the analog signal path with noise generated by the display."
Ordering for Oade Brothers Audio
I sure have ordered from them but they do not ship outside of USA.
Ordering for Oade Brothers Audio: Edirol R44 Super MOD

I really don't know if unbalanced inputs such as from wireless receiver would cut that ticking noise too but I'll find that out soon. At least unbalanced two-ring TRS pluged dynamic handheld mic ($20) was quite bad at full gain and the ticking noise didn't went away as it did with balanced ones.

I actually find it kind of disturbing ,that behavior of mine, to listen preamps without inputs connected at almost full gain, it completely ruins the reality. So don't worry too much.

Hope that helps,
T

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Toenis Liivamaegi

The Oade supermod R44
"Improvements are also made to reduce the audible digital noise that contaminates the analog signal path with noise generated by the display."

The problem can probably be quite diminished by increasing the bypassing close to the display. Quite likely what Oade does. That is adding more capacitance, like people did on the Zoom H4 and did work. Maybe doing that on the supply itself might solve it.

I sure have ordered from them but they do not ship outside of USA.

Nowadays it's become more difficult to have someone ship to Brazil. B&H does, so in spite of me liking the Oade mod, I can't use it.

I really don't know if unbalanced inputs such as from wireless receiver would cut that ticking noise too but I'll find that out soon. At least unbalanced two-ring TRS pluged dynamic handheld mic ($20) was quite bad at full gain and the ticking noise didn't went away as it did with balanced ones.

My idea for the R44 is to feed the three separate mics, already amplified, from a Shure FP33, sending the mix to the fourth channel. The mix will be unbalanced, but not the separate mics. I will have a look at the Shurre schematics, but I am pretty sure that mini-Switchcraft 3-pin output is unbalanced. Though it should be high level, so the ticking may not surface.

[Toenis Liivamaegi]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

Though it should be high level, so the ticking may not surface.

Absolutely no problem when using line level signals. I was talking about that ticking silence at almost full gain mic level.

T

[Toenis Liivamaegi]

I just used the Edirol R44 for a day and got 4:30 continuous recording time (from 2600mah NIMh rechargeables) with one phantom powered shotgun (NTH 3) attached that is even better than with the Sony PCM D50 which died at about 4h after putting in those same NiMh betteries, but two channels and no phantom of course. It's a well known fact that recargeables have about 1/3 to 1/2 less capacity/runtime than regular alkalines.
Another interesting phenomenon was that it started a new file autonomously 28 minutes before shutting down because of depleted batteries and even that interrupted file was usable.
Another good thing to say about the recorder is that you can use the setup menu while recording, at least you can dim down the display and such.

Cheers,
T

[Carlos E. Martinez]

It seems more and more as if the Edirol R-44 should be the recorder for me to get back into location film recording.

Pity it has no time-code capabilities, which should be a demand on my local job market.

So I might have to pick a Tascam HD-P2, which does have TC but only two channels.

It's been a tough job making up my mind on one or the other. Just when I think the R44 is the way to go I read good things on the Tascam, and viceversa.

The R4 Pro, which does have TC, only records in hard disk, which is not a reliable option for on the move shootings.

If just there was an R44 Pro...

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

It seems more and more as if the Edirol R-44 should be the recorder for me to get back into location film recording.

Pity it has no time-code capabilities, which should be a demand on my local job market.

So I might have to pick a Tascam HD-P2, which does have TC but only two channels.

It's been a tough job making up my mind on one or the other. Just when I think the R44 is the way to go I read good things on the Tascam, and viceversa.

The R4 Pro, which does have TC, only records in hard disk, which is not a reliable option for on the move shootings.

If just there was an R44 Pro...

Just bear in mind that the Tascam is a timecode READER, and while it also can generate code for its own use, it doesn't have the ability to output its code for external uses such as jamming a smart slate or camera. Consider the SD702T.

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Steve House

Just bear in mind that the Tascam is a timecode READER, and while it also can generate code for its own use, it doesn't have the ability to output its code for external uses such as jamming a smart slate or camera. Consider the SD702T.

Don't want to spend as much at this stage, as on the 702T.

In my case I would be inputing TC from my Denecke SB1 generator, which allows jamming and else.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

Don't want to spend as much at this stage, as on the 702T.

In my case I would be inputing TC from my Denecke SB1 generator, which allows jamming and else.

That would work fine

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Steve House

That would work fine

Yes, but it still leaves me two-channels down.

It's interesting how I recently started seeing the benefits of recording the mix and the mics on individual/separate channels. Both to give an option in post and to correct eventual problems that might turn up, like a noise on some wireless or any other problem that would ruin the mix.

But in Brazil, particularly in advertising, people seem to prefer using the Indaw system the lab provides for syncing dailies and sound, and for that you need the TC. That seems not to be a problem in features, probably because of the high cost.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

Yes, but it still leaves me two-channels down.

It's interesting how I recently started seeing the benefits of recording the mix and the mics on individual/separate channels. Both to give an option in post and to correct eventual problems that might turn up, like a noise on some wireless or any other problem that would ruin the mix.

But in Brazil, particularly in advertising, people seem to prefer using the Indaw system the lab provides for syncing dailies and sound, and for that you need the TC. That seems not to be a problem in features, probably because of the high cost.

I'm not familiar with Indaw but I gave it a quick lookup on the web and doesn't it need linear timecode for sync-up? Remember that file based recorders such as the Tascam or SoundDevices do not record LTC alongside the audio that can be read by a playback device in the same way LTC recorded on an analog or DAT tape can be read. The only time reference in the audio file is the timestamp of the first sample that has been recorded in the file header. There is no code in the file itself.

[Carlos E. Martinez]

Originally Posted by Steve House

I'm not familiar with Indaw but I gave it a quick lookup on the web and doesn't it need linear timecode for sync-up? Remember that file based recorders such as the Tascam or SoundDevices do not record LTC alongside the audio that can be read by a playback device in the same way LTC recorded on an analog or DAT tape can be read. The only time reference in the audio file is the timestamp of the first sample that has been recorded in the file header. There is no code in the file itself.

Good point. As a matter of fact I don't know. It's quite recently that I was told by a friend about the Indaw service at the film lab, but in fact this friend has both DAT and SD machines.

So I am not sure what's the deal with non-LTC machines and how does the machine sync with them. But the Indaw was created by Aaton, who makes a non-LTC audio recorder (VERY expensive, BTW), so there should be an interface for it and other machines, like SD, Deva, Fostex, etc.

[Steve House]

Originally Posted by Carlos E. Martinez

Good point. As a matter of fact I don't know. It's quite recently that I was told by a friend about the Indaw service at the film lab, but in fact this friend has both DAT and SD machines.

So I am not sure what's the deal with non-LTC machines and how does the machine sync with them. But the Indaw was created by Aaton, who makes a non-LTC audio recorder (VERY expensive, BTW), so there should be an interface for it and other machines, like SD, Deva, Fostex, etc.

Every once in a while I go to the Aatom site and drool over a Cantaar. Now where did I put that application to mortgage my soul?