Early MicroTrack 24/96 Reviews...

Dave Largent · September 25th, 2005, 08:40 AM

Does the Edirol R1 have a limiter? Without a limiter
[on the M-Audio] I'll stick with my current field set-up
which, between the two pieces, gives me 3 hours of
48K WAV, smokin' preamps, adjustable limiters,
dual 48V phantom, 6 hours of run time on 2 AAs, and
a S/N of 90+, for $800. Bought this setup 3 years
ago and still, for the money, doesn't seem to be beat.

Douglas Spotted Eagle · September 25th, 2005, 08:47 AM

The R1 doesn't have a built in limiter, which is sorta stupid given all the other built in processors they have, like center canceling, loads of EQ presets, reverb, tuner, metronome, mic modeling...Oh, and noise reduction.

It's quite a nice device though. I had one, but bought an R4, even though it's much bigger.

Matt Gettemeier · September 25th, 2005, 02:43 PM

Douglas... are any of the effects in the R1 useful for recording dialog? My main interest in any of these recorders is for running double sound... so it's going to be primarily voice off a boom.

Any special reason to consider this (or some other recorder) for that?

Douglas Spotted Eagle · September 25th, 2005, 05:35 PM

I don't feel their useful at all. If I wanted FX on record, I'd carry a multichannel sound card and laptop everywhere.
I'm still sold on HDMD in PCM format for portability, but hoping the Microtrack does the trick for me...so far, it's not looking good, but I reserve judgement til I hold one and spend a day in the field with it.

Matt Gettemeier · September 26th, 2005, 01:15 AM

Well I have mixed feelings about this... 'cause portability is normally a big deal to me... but lately I'm running an independent sound guy anyway and I hope to continue that trend... soooo... I cancelled my MicroTrack and got a 671 on the way. We'll see what that's all about. Considering it's about 10x the size I hope it's at least 2x the performance... but the reason I went with that is I think it's probably about 20x the reliability.

I'll report back when I know what's the dillio.

Thanks for the input Douglas... you were fairly instrumental in my decision. I'd already decided to let everyone else try the MicroTrack... but I expected to move from that to the Edirol... but with your assessment of the effects I get the feeling that they weren't aiming that product squarely at professionals either.

Shawn Redford · September 26th, 2005, 11:24 PM

Quote from DSE: "I had one, but bought an R4, even though it's much bigger."

DSE: Do you have a review of the R4, or plan on doing one?

Mark A. Foley · September 27th, 2005, 03:19 AM

Not sure why everyone seems to be falling on their sword over the micro track...following other threads it appears it is just a firmware issue....Like to see any new product that don't have some issues out of the gate. Haven't seen to many items with firmware version only at 1.0 :-)

Matt Gettemeier · September 27th, 2005, 06:19 AM

Nobody wants to like the MicroTrack more then me... and I'm sure it will evolve into a decent product.

So far there's about 5 pages of bugs people are experiencing on taperssection.

That's why I went 671. This thing needs a generation to get the kinks out.

Plus they GOTTA' dump that internal battery, make the thing a half-inch longer... and go with replaceable AA.

Mark A. Foley · September 27th, 2005, 06:48 AM

I still stand by my original repsonse...I read all the "5 pages" of bug reports...most repsonses were of no value while others were wanting product enhancements. S/PDIF seems to be the predominate issue...however, appears a new firmware is about to be released to fix. Once again, this is a new item for a company that has a pretty good track record. Some bugs in pre-release...sure...are they trying to fix...yes.

Matt Gettemeier · September 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM

All I'm saying is the phrase "falling on their swords" implies stupid mistakes or self inflicted aggravation.

An internal battery that lasts 3 hours (at worst report) with NO phantom, NO display, NO headphones running... is VERY limiting... especially that you gotta' charge that thing for 8 hours to be up and running again. OR you could get an external battery pack and run it to the unit to prolong, but not replace, the internal run time. Some people have reported 4.5 hours record time which is getting better, but you still have to either double the size and complexity of the unit by having it tethered to a battery pack... or else you're DONE at whatever time the battery runs out. And even if you do run an external battery pack the unit still runs down it's internal battery at the same time... and once that charge is too low (even though it's prolonged by a couple hours) the unit dies... and can't be brought back to life with another battery pack. At THAT point the unit must be charged up again.

If you turn on phantom and then monitor with headphones what do you think will happen to that record time?

The other issue is everybody's only getting 30v instead of 48v on the mic-inputs.

So the freezes and other issues, like the unit's refusal to do 24/96 recordings, will hopefully get worked out by firmware... but right now it's a 16/48 or 24/44.1 recorder... just like the R1... only less reliable and predetermined running time which will be interrupted by 8 hour charge cycles.

I'm sure that some of these kinks will get worked out... but I doubt some of the other problems will be fixed by firmware.

Just on the battery issue ALONE I think it's safe to say that if anybody fell on their sword it was M-Audio.

Mark A. Foley · September 27th, 2005, 05:38 PM

Ok...I'm not trying to start anything here...just that I believe the issues can be worked out....realy depends on what application you plan on using it for. For me it will fit a niche and have it run on battey power is not an issue :-)

Tim Le · September 28th, 2005, 08:56 PM

I also brought up this battery issue in another thread. In my opinion this is a huge deal breaker. I can't image having a portable electronic device that does not allow you to change out the battery. Well, I can understand in some cases like the Ipod because of design aesthetics, but geez, this is an audio recorder. How could it not have user replaceable power?! Crazy, I tell you.

Matt Gettemeier · September 28th, 2005, 09:27 PM

Tim I should have credited you with pointing out the obvious... when you said that in the other thread I wanted to jump on you for the negative thought on the MT... after I thought about it... and the battery life has turned out to be fairly short... that made more sense then anything I'd read anywhere.

It's a pretty common aggravation with everybody... why NOT make the thing SLIGHTLY bigger and have replaceable AA?

Had you never said that I might not have changed my mind about the thing. (or looked into the issues surrounding that battery limitation)

Nothing against M-Audio... I like their stuff, but it would be scary to take that thing to a paid shoot figuring you could count on it if you needed to... and NOT be sure.

Tim Le · September 28th, 2005, 10:50 PM

No worries Matt. I understand you were just excited about this product. But like you said, it would be real scary to a go to a paid shoot with this thing. The battery is the only thing that makes it work and having no way to replace it is bad news. It's like driving around in your car with your tires and rims welded to your suspension and no way to replace a flat tire. IMO, this internal battery is one of the most bone-headed design decisions I've ever seen on a device that is suppose to be professional tool.

Mark A. Foley · September 29th, 2005, 05:37 AM

Matt,
Do you know if you can run the MT from the AC power supply for indefinate time? I realize for a majority of the folks who were planning on using this thing in a "stealth" mode the battery issue is big. For me, in my wedding and event business, it would be used for short periods of time...where having an internal/rechargable battery would be a plus :-)

September 25th, 2005, 08:47 AM	#17
Douglas Spotted Eagle VASST Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Stockton, UT Posts: 5,648	The R1 doesn't have a built in limiter, which is sorta stupid given all the other built in processors they have, like center canceling, loads of EQ presets, reverb, tuner, metronome, mic modeling...Oh, and noise reduction. It's quite a nice device though. I had one, but bought an R4, even though it's much bigger. __________________ Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com

September 25th, 2005, 05:35 PM	#19
Douglas Spotted Eagle VASST Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Stockton, UT Posts: 5,648	I don't feel their useful at all. If I wanted FX on record, I'd carry a multichannel sound card and laptop everywhere. I'm still sold on HDMD in PCM format for portability, but hoping the Microtrack does the trick for me...so far, it's not looking good, but I reserve judgement til I hold one and spend a day in the field with it. __________________ Douglas Spotted Eagle/Spot Author, producer, composer Certified Sony Vegas Trainer http://www.vasst.com

September 25th, 2005, 08:40 AM	#16
Dave Largent Trustee Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 1,483	Does the Edirol R1 have a limiter? Without a limiter [on the M-Audio] I'll stick with my current field set-up which, between the two pieces, gives me 3 hours of 48K WAV, smokin' preamps, adjustable limiters, dual 48V phantom, 6 hours of run time on 2 AAs, and a S/N of 90+, for $800. Bought this setup 3 years ago and still, for the money, doesn't seem to be beat.

September 25th, 2005, 02:43 PM	#18
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Douglas... are any of the effects in the R1 useful for recording dialog? My main interest in any of these recorders is for running double sound... so it's going to be primarily voice off a boom. Any special reason to consider this (or some other recorder) for that?

September 26th, 2005, 01:15 AM	#20
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Well I have mixed feelings about this... 'cause portability is normally a big deal to me... but lately I'm running an independent sound guy anyway and I hope to continue that trend... soooo... I cancelled my MicroTrack and got a 671 on the way. We'll see what that's all about. Considering it's about 10x the size I hope it's at least 2x the performance... but the reason I went with that is I think it's probably about 20x the reliability. I'll report back when I know what's the dillio. Thanks for the input Douglas... you were fairly instrumental in my decision. I'd already decided to let everyone else try the MicroTrack... but I expected to move from that to the Edirol... but with your assessment of the effects I get the feeling that they weren't aiming that product squarely at professionals either.

September 26th, 2005, 11:24 PM	#21
Shawn Redford Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 158	Quote from DSE: "I had one, but bought an R4, even though it's much bigger." DSE: Do you have a review of the R4, or plan on doing one?

September 27th, 2005, 03:19 AM	#22
Mark A. Foley Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bonaire, Ga. Posts: 356	Not sure why everyone seems to be falling on their sword over the micro track...following other threads it appears it is just a firmware issue....Like to see any new product that don't have some issues out of the gate. Haven't seen to many items with firmware version only at 1.0 :-)

September 27th, 2005, 06:19 AM	#23
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Nobody wants to like the MicroTrack more then me... and I'm sure it will evolve into a decent product. So far there's about 5 pages of bugs people are experiencing on taperssection. That's why I went 671. This thing needs a generation to get the kinks out. Plus they GOTTA' dump that internal battery, make the thing a half-inch longer... and go with replaceable AA.

September 27th, 2005, 06:48 AM	#24
Mark A. Foley Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bonaire, Ga. Posts: 356	I still stand by my original repsonse...I read all the "5 pages" of bug reports...most repsonses were of no value while others were wanting product enhancements. S/PDIF seems to be the predominate issue...however, appears a new firmware is about to be released to fix. Once again, this is a new item for a company that has a pretty good track record. Some bugs in pre-release...sure...are they trying to fix...yes.

September 27th, 2005, 05:12 PM	#25
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	All I'm saying is the phrase "falling on their swords" implies stupid mistakes or self inflicted aggravation. An internal battery that lasts 3 hours (at worst report) with NO phantom, NO display, NO headphones running... is VERY limiting... especially that you gotta' charge that thing for 8 hours to be up and running again. OR you could get an external battery pack and run it to the unit to prolong, but not replace, the internal run time. Some people have reported 4.5 hours record time which is getting better, but you still have to either double the size and complexity of the unit by having it tethered to a battery pack... or else you're DONE at whatever time the battery runs out. And even if you do run an external battery pack the unit still runs down it's internal battery at the same time... and once that charge is too low (even though it's prolonged by a couple hours) the unit dies... and can't be brought back to life with another battery pack. At THAT point the unit must be charged up again. If you turn on phantom and then monitor with headphones what do you think will happen to that record time? The other issue is everybody's only getting 30v instead of 48v on the mic-inputs. So the freezes and other issues, like the unit's refusal to do 24/96 recordings, will hopefully get worked out by firmware... but right now it's a 16/48 or 24/44.1 recorder... just like the R1... only less reliable and predetermined running time which will be interrupted by 8 hour charge cycles. I'm sure that some of these kinks will get worked out... but I doubt some of the other problems will be fixed by firmware. Just on the battery issue ALONE I think it's safe to say that if anybody fell on their sword it was M-Audio.

September 27th, 2005, 05:38 PM	#26
Mark A. Foley Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bonaire, Ga. Posts: 356	Ok...I'm not trying to start anything here...just that I believe the issues can be worked out....realy depends on what application you plan on using it for. For me it will fit a niche and have it run on battey power is not an issue :-)

September 28th, 2005, 08:56 PM	#27
Tim Le Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 350	I also brought up this battery issue in another thread. In my opinion this is a huge deal breaker. I can't image having a portable electronic device that does not allow you to change out the battery. Well, I can understand in some cases like the Ipod because of design aesthetics, but geez, this is an audio recorder. How could it not have user replaceable power?! Crazy, I tell you.

September 28th, 2005, 09:27 PM	#28
Matt Gettemeier Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: St. Louis, Missouri Posts: 936	Tim I should have credited you with pointing out the obvious... when you said that in the other thread I wanted to jump on you for the negative thought on the MT... after I thought about it... and the battery life has turned out to be fairly short... that made more sense then anything I'd read anywhere. It's a pretty common aggravation with everybody... why NOT make the thing SLIGHTLY bigger and have replaceable AA? Had you never said that I might not have changed my mind about the thing. (or looked into the issues surrounding that battery limitation) Nothing against M-Audio... I like their stuff, but it would be scary to take that thing to a paid shoot figuring you could count on it if you needed to... and NOT be sure.

September 28th, 2005, 10:50 PM	#29
Tim Le Major Player Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 350	No worries Matt. I understand you were just excited about this product. But like you said, it would be real scary to a go to a paid shoot with this thing. The battery is the only thing that makes it work and having no way to replace it is bad news. It's like driving around in your car with your tires and rims welded to your suspension and no way to replace a flat tire. IMO, this internal battery is one of the most bone-headed design decisions I've ever seen on a device that is suppose to be professional tool.

September 29th, 2005, 05:37 AM	#30
Mark A. Foley Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Bonaire, Ga. Posts: 356	Matt, Do you know if you can run the MT from the AC power supply for indefinate time? I realize for a majority of the folks who were planning on using this thing in a "stealth" mode the battery issue is big. For me, in my wedding and event business, it would be used for short periods of time...where having an internal/rechargable battery would be a plus :-)