Digital audio recorders?

[Douglas Spotted Eagle]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

Douglas, have you used it with an external mic, via mic input, for voice recording?

Many times. With the 4049 and 4051 on several occasions, and with the 4053 on fewer occasions. The preamps aren't the best, they sound good but at low input levels they're a touch noisy. I've also recorded some street performances with the very low-cost microphone included with the deck, and was very nicely surprised at the quality. Some of the street sounds I captured in Malaysia recently will definitely find themselves in my ambiences library and sound design library. Got some great monkeys screaching at the Bahtu caves, those will be great for making weird sound designs for animals and machinery.

[Bill Pryor]

I'm not sure what you mean by low input levels--when you have to crank the gain up?

What I'm trying to do is get a hand held device for recording v.o. interviews that will be used in a documentary. I have a couple of old Sennheiser wired lavs I'll be using. I thought I needed phantom power because the mics are so old they use the now-banned mercury oxide batteries. However, I recently discovered there is now a readily available silver oxide battery replacement. So the mics now have power. They also sound better than even our Countrymans.

Do you think the noise level of the Microtrack would be acceptable for normal conversational voice recording?

I tried out the Marantz PMD660, but it was way too noisy. I'm not looking for studio quality, just normal voice recording that would be as good as what I normally shoot mic-in with a DSR500 and 250. The Marantz wasn't even close to being acceptable, which was a big disappointment because everything else about it was great. In fact, after the 660 experience, I had decided to get the Tascam HD-P2...but I really would like to stick with a handheld for these upcoming interviews. I can live with the 1/4" inputs instead of XLR and I can live with the internal battery, but I can't live with huge mic level noise.

[Andreas Griesmayr]

you could check taperssection.com , you have to become member to see the forum though. People there are mostly into taping loud music, but still know a lot about recorders. The R-09 seems to be their prefered toy of lately.

[Bill Pryor]

That seems to be the major problem with these handheld recorders: most people want them for guerrilla taping of rock concerts. Mic input noise levels are not so relevant in that case. For recording quiet conversation, you need better noise specs. The Edirol's mini inputs bother me, but if it came out ahead of the Microtrack, I maybe could live with that.

[Andreas Griesmayr]

quote from http://www.sonicstudios.com/r-09revw.htm:

Additional good news is both mic/line R-09 inputs have tested adequately quiet and of sufficient bandwidth for at least 16bit depth recording requirements. However, audible improvement for 24 bit depth recording is likely with the addition of high quality external mic preamplifier for lowest noise/distortion requirements.

another quote from http://taperssection.com/index.php?t...5870#msg935870

from my tests on mic-low the noise went up 4 db when changing settings from 8 to 25, then another 4db from 25 to 30. So its not a linear function, looks more exponential.

[Bill Pryor]

Yeah, they (soncistudio) say about the same thing for Microtrack:

As-is, Microtrack 24/96 deck seems very good to excellent as an all-in-one recorder for at least self-[powered microphone input field recording,


It's difficult to compare specs on both units with their graphs. I wish the same guy had done both and we could line up each one side by side.

[Jeff Phelps]

Personlly I don't understand paying for a more expensive piece of equipment when a Hi-MD will do the job almost flawlessly. Nothing is perfect of course and I'm ready for the day when mobile recorders have better pre-amps but for now isn't the Hi-MD about as good as any other device on the market? And because it's older technology it's cheaper technology.

I know there are advantages of hard drive recorders and flash recorders but they aren't that great. When you can record 90 minute on a single disc there isn't too much that will be a problem for recording as far as times go. And MD is pretty robust so it takes a pretty hard lick to make one skip.

Needless to say I bought a Hi-MD when I bought a recorder. I hope someday technology will improve greatly and there are some signs of that. Multi-tracks are certainly a great thing for me. But I think MD is about as good as it gets now for stereo recording.

[Andreas Griesmayr]

my personal reasons why I'd prefer an R-09 over an Hi-MD are that there is no need for any special, in this case Sony software to upload and that it has inbuilt mics.
If to your use those are no advatages than I'd also say an Hi-MD is the better option because of being cheaper.

Hi-MD makes very good recordings, their A/C and preamp are very good, and from what I read so are the R-09's.

[Jeff Phelps]

I've heard the R-09's are excellent and the software is a pain on the Sony's. But still it can be done. I'm sure if money wasn't a concern I'd prefer the R-09's too just because of the software problem.

It is true that Sony has just released a new model that has fewer software restrictions but still too many IMO. It will probably be the last incarnation of MD because of the competition around now. It still forces you to use their software though. What a shame. But it has definite advantages over the old models. But the price is $300. Maybe when it costs $100 I'll buy one.

[Dave Largent]

I think some of the newer HiMDs might even
have individual control of the channels, which
can come in handy for using it as a
two-track recorder and not just a stereo
recorder.

[Bruce S. Yarock]

I bought the R-09 to be able to mic the officiant at weddings( in addition to a wireless on the groom). I've also been using it as a songwriting tool-set it on the table,hit record, and start playing.The on board mics are surprisingly good. I did location sound on a 3 day video shoot this weekend on radiology(zzzzzz), and the R-09 was simple to use, and performed almost flawlessly. There were a couple of times when it wouldn't go from pause-record (blinking red) to record (solid red), but after a few clicks, it eventually went to record.
I bought a couple of addl 2 gig sd cards form B+H ($65 each),but only needed one card per day. At the end of each day we transferred to some kind of s l o o ow mac, and it still only took 29 minutes to transfer 1.7 gigs.
The sound was excellent. I recorded in 16 bit 48, out of a sounddevices 302 mixer.
When you consider size, cost,sound quality, ease of use and ease of transfer, there's nothing out there now that compares. I also look forward to using it in the field to capture interesting sounds.
Bruce S. Yarock
www.yarock.com
P.S. And then there's the R-04..... (Only kidding...can't afford it now).

[Stu Holmes]

Originally Posted by Jeff Phelps

I've heard the R-09's are excellent and the software is a pain on the Sony's. But still it can be done. I'm sure if money wasn't a concern I'd prefer the R-09's too just because of the software problem.

It is true that Sony has just released a new model that has fewer software restrictions but still too many IMO. It will probably be the last incarnation of MD because of the competition around now. It still forces you to use their software though. What a shame. But it has definite advantages over the old models. But the price is $300. Maybe when it costs $100 I'll buy one.

Hi Jeff - is the new sony one you're referring to the MZ-R1 ?
i.e. this one :
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

curious as i might get a Hi-MD soon.

thanks

[Bill Pryor]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

There is a USB device sold on Comprehensive (listed along with the Microtrack on their site) that holds AA batteries and will power the recorder. It's only about 20 bucks. Problem is, you start adding these extra things, you sort of lose the reason for having a small, compact unit.

Oops--mea culpa--I meant this one, not Comprehensive. Sorry 'bout that. http://www.fullcompass.com/product/320587.html

[Michael Liebergot]

Just to add more confusion to the mix...
Samson is releasing a new recorder that looks promissing also the Zoom H4:
http://www.samsontech.com/products/p...1901&brandID=4

I already own the Microtrack (bought it when it first came out), and the Edirol R-09.
And preffer the R-09 for eases of use (all functions you need are on the recorder, no digging through menus), better built pre amps, better firmware.
Also the MT was designed with the 1/8 and 10db too hot. Why I don't know, but they are.

The Microtrack does have balanced 1//4 TRS inputs, but I am not doing long cable runs with the recoder, so this isn't a worry to me. if I am doing a long cable run then I would be using my Promix 3 field mixer, fed into my camera and recorder.
Also, the MT, as the ability to do digital pass through, so you canrecord to flash card and also send a signal out via the units RCA's to a wireless or something like that. So that's a nice option if you need it.

I have a pre-order on the H4 unit with sweetwater.com and it should be out sometime in sept. I'm told.

If the H4 performs like I think it might, then my Microtrack will probably being going bye bye.

[Andreas Griesmayr]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

There is a USB device sold on Comprehensive (listed along with the Microtrack on their site) that holds AA batteries and will power the recorder. It's only about 20 bucks.]

'only' 20 bucks??...my external battery pack for mt iRiver ( holding 4 AAs ) cost me abt. 50 Cents...( can't tell you any source though, was in a DIY shop in Japan, and I had to solder the plug myself, another 50 Cents there. But cheap and good solutions should be available )

The Sony RH1 is the latest model, display the side of the body only with separate channel level indicators. Earlier models, e.g the RH10, or DH710 and DH910 ( not sure abt. their exact model name ) might do same quality recordings and come with an external battery pack included.