Whats the best digital recording device to use for backup sound? I'm looking at purchasing something to use for backup sound as well as recording interveiws,with lav mic etc. I have heard many differant oppinions,Mini disc recorder, i river, i pod ,digital voice recorder etc.I have hired a Dat recorder on occations,but found it expensive and cumbersome .I am looking for something that's small,reliable and will record quality digital sound .What have you guys found works the best?

Whats the best digital recording device to use for backup sound? I'm looking at purchasing something to use for backup sound as well as recording interveiws,with lav mic etc. I have heard many differant oppinions,Mini disc recorder, i river, i pod ,digital voice recorder etc.I have hired a Dat recorder on occations,but found it expensive and cumbersome .I am looking for something that's small,reliable and will record quality digital sound .What have you guys found works the best?

I've been using a portable mini disc recorder for years and I'm very happy with it.

Edirol R-09. It's fantastic.

Bruce S. Yarock
www.yarock.com

I have a portable mini disc recorder but would like to know the best way of transferring the sound to a PC. I am currently using the XL2 for a digital pass through.

Thanks for the information guy's.

I use the HHB 500 minidisc and think it is great. I also have a Marantz 670 CF recorder that is nice. But I really want a http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=405341&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation

The latest generation of MD are able to upload to a computer in digital form. They also record in uncompressed format. They are called Hi-MD. The price of Hi-MD is lower than the Edirol and the quality is very hard to beat. IMO there is no competition for what you describe at this point.

The flash memory recorders that record in uncompressed format will likely eventually surpass the Hi-MD but at this point when you compare price and quality Hi-MD is the clear winner.

iRiver recorders are cheap when you can find them and they record pretty decent sound but they are not the quality of a Hi-MD. I have seen comments from people who own both and they say there is no comparison in quality.

I have a MD recorder. They are nice machines but they are very much inferior to Hi-MD. I expect to be getting a Hi-MD soon. I see Hi-MD recorders sell on eBay for under $100 on a regular basis. That deal is very sweet IMO.

I have a portable mini disc recorder but would like to know the best way of transferring the sound to a PC. I am currently using the XL2 for a digital pass through.

I use a Casablanca system and simply connect the mini disc via line out to the L-R audio input ports on the system. Presumably you could do the same if your PC audio card has phono/RCA inputs ?

for dialog, i use a Marantz PMD670, records to CF cards - love it. get em on ebay for decent price (got mine there almost brand new). when used with highest recording settings 48k/16bit/pcm/wav and a nice low self noise mic (recommend a good condensor), almost zero hiss... better recording this way than by using the same mic into the xlr's of the xl2 (which are still pretty decent)...

but there's a little trick when you set up the 670 - if you're interested - let me know and i'll eloborate...

good luck

but if your budget can allow for it the fostex fr2, sounddevices 722, are superior...

you could check out: http://taperssection.com/index.php ( must become member to view though. )

my view with minuses and pluses:

Hi-MD ( only Sony HiMD, don't even consider other MD recorders! ): very good quality recording (+), records to HiMD discs of 1 GB, must use Sony software for file transfer ( - )
iRiver H120/140 H320/340: with Rockbox firmware very useful recorder, live levels, life adjustment etc...but quality of analog/digital converter and preamp inferior to the HiMD (-), have inbuilt 20 or 40 GB (+)
Edirol R-09: the new love affair of the stealth recorders, very good quality recordings arguably same as HiMD ( + ), quite good inbuilt stereo mic ( + ), record to max 4 GB SD cards, prize high ( - )

You can probably find some good portable DAT recorders around, even on eBay.

I have had a nice Sony model for years. I use it a lot with my Sony parabolic microphone for bird recordings.

If you don't mind using another tape machine, they are fun to use and the sound quality is very good. I never liked the old 12-bit mini discs, but if they have a new higer quality version out now, that might be a way to go.

for dialog, i use a Marantz PMD670, but there's a little trick when you set up the 670 - if you're interested - let me know and i'll eloborate...




Please tell us more. I like my 670, but I find the menus, options and defaults a little complicated. Any tips to improve it's use in the field would be helpful.

hey Glen - been busy, but here it goes,
& some of this i'm sure you know, but i'll try and cover the bases...

i'm coming straight from my AKG into the xlr-in (L) on the PMD670...

Menu:
Algor/file:
Stereo/PCM/48/wav

Input Button Selections:
Input device and Channel:
to DLmono w/Mic input - DLmono records regular levels on the left
channel, and the right channel is reduced by -15db. this acts as a
safety, in case someone yells or levels get to high for channel one
(L).
Recording Parameters:
Stereo.

Here's the problem as i see it when people are reporting hiss... if you use DLmono, and use the "mono" setting (seems intuitive), regardless of whether you set it to record PCM/WAV/48, the recorder defaults to an MP3 (compressed) recording - more hiss... if you use "stereo" in conjunction with DLmono, it will record in the highest settings of PCM/WAV/48 (uncompressed) if you used these settings in the first place - hiss is almost non-existant...

and of course use a good condensor mic...

any q's, just ask,
Lonnie

Moved from XL2 to NHT.

How did M-Audio's microtrack 24/96 ever pan out? The ~$350 flash recorder? Might make for a nice little backup recorder if it is half decent.

Tim

How did M-Audio's microtrack 24/96 ever pan out? The ~$350 flash recorder? Might make for a nice little backup recorder if it is half decent.

Tim

Nice recorder with some problems - my biggest caveats are limited battery life and the batts can't be changed in the field - internal fixed batt only in other words. And the mic phantom power is only 30 volts, eliminating your abilty to use some of the better condenser mics that require the full 48v power.

The best recorder would probably be the Deva- http://www.zaxcom.com/audio/devas.shtml

He did ask what would be the best...

Thanks Lonnie. The fact that the recording mode defaults depending on input was confusing. I have always found the 670 to be clean on the input. I know the smaller Marantz (650?) has a reputation for noisey pre's.

Have you ever has a CF card lock up during record? I have. Not fun.

Thanks for you info.

hey Glenn,
no lock up yet - knock's on head - and no problem... yeah i discovered the default quite by accident, did some reading of others reporting hiss, and figured it out...

as clean as the xl2 is at audio, my 670 from a boom is cleaner...

good luck!

Nice recorder with some problems - my biggest caveats are limited battery life and the batts can't be changed in the field - internal fixed batt only in other words.

Boo. That really sucks. I wonder why they hamstrung such a potentially good recorder with that?

I record audio to my laptop thru an Edirol UA-1X USB interface. It has L+R RCA inputs from the mixer/amp, and then record onto the laptop using TotalRecorder. One leaves it running for the full duration of the event, and the files are in wav format and can be sliced and editted in Sound Forge later and brought into Vegas as needed.

I have thought of MD/flash but since I'd rather get a better camera (or 2), recording digital audio onto laptop is simple and can be "almost" forgotten. Just got to make sure laptop is not "grabbed" by persons unknown!

I have a bunch of voice over interviews to do for a documentary, and I bought a Marantz PMD660 from B&H. It was delivered Monday, and yesterday I brought it in to check it out in our audio booth.

It was a big disappointment. Major mic level input noise. I went back and found Lonnie's post about how he managed to reduce noise level in his 670, and I tried that. It did, indeed, reduce the noise level quite a bit.

Unfortunately, it didn't reduce the noise enough and it was still too high for me to use. I'm not one of those professional audio guys who needs totally clean pristine sound on everything. For my current project, I just need it to be as good as what I record with a DSR500 and a DSR250. The PMD660, unfortunately, didn't make it.

It was really annoying, because the recorder itself is perfect for what I need to do. Perfect except that the mic input noise makes it unusable for me. I'm not doubting Lonnie at all--I think the extra 5 db S/N ratio on the 670 must be what makes the difference between it and the 660.

B&H is very good about returns. I sent it back today and after they get it on Friday they'll send me a Tascam HD-P2. I went ahead and popped for the extra 500 bucks. I figure with the time code feature and XLR mic and line inputs, that will make it pretty easy to sell after this project is over if I don't need it anymore.

If anybody is in the market for a small handheld type CF recorder, I strongly advise waiting, if you can, until the end of the year. Fostex has one coming out in December, and Zaxcom has one that should be out soon too. It's a good guess that both of those would be perfect for my needs.

Unfortunately, I can't wait. I was supposed to start recording interviews this weekend, and I can't push it beyong another week. So the Tascam it is.

I considered the M-audio also, but it had too many weaknesses, which have been discussed already (internal battery, lack of 48v phantom power, etc.) The other similar units only have mini jack inputs, which I can't use with any confidence.

I would gladly have paid a little more money for a better quality hand held recorder. I'm not too thrilled with having to go with a bigger one, but the quality tradeout wasn't do-able. And, now that I think about it, everything is going into an old canvas briefcase anyway--the recorder, extra batteries, the mic (an older wired Sennheiser lav) which lives in a box about a foot long, with all its attachments, extra audio cables, notepad, second 2 gig CF card in its box, etc.--so as long as the recorder fits into the bag, I guess it doesn't make much difference that it is bigger.

In considering a recorder, I surfed all the boards and got some positive as well as seriously negative feedback on the 660. I don't doubt that some people find it acceptable for their use, but in my case it wouldn't work. The negative feedback was useful in that, although I had to try it out for myself, it made me wary enough so that I unpacked everything very carefully and was able to return the package in perfect shape. If you rip up your packing materials and the item comes back looking used, then B&H isn't quite so friendly about the return.

I guess the moral of this story is that you really do need to check out things for yourself. If you have to buy something sight unseen, then always go with a reputable dealer like B&H or the other appropriate ones who are sponsors on this board. And, be sure to look at their return policy. On professional audio gear, for example, you only have 7 days with B&H.

I would not over look using a dv camcorder as a field audio recorder.
Consider you get 48khz 16bit WITH TIMECODE and the ability to transfer via firewire a digital file. For years we have used a back up camcorder for field audio recording and at the prices these days it is hard to beat. A G DV300 for instance with the Beachtek 10 preamps/phantom power to line box makes an excellent alternative. A camcorder, again with the Beachtek in VCR MODE, give you recording, timecode and allows you to have line level in , by pass the usually poor on board mic preamps.

Just a thought

Sharyn

I would not over look using a dv camcorder as a field audio recorder.
Consider you get 48khz 16bit WITH TIMECODE and the ability to transfer via firewire a digital file. ...

The Tascam recorder does all that with better preamps than most camcorders, plus you don't accumuilate headwear time on your camera if you're only recording sound.

I would probably do this if I had a small camera, but the only ones I have are full size.

My suggestion was to get a small dedicated camera for the audio. I think the whole issue of heads wearing out is overblown. I would be interested to see how many people on this forum have had to get rid of a camcorder based on heads wearing out. The advantage of using the camcorder is that it is recorded in the same format as your dv recording, it has firewire for transfer, it has time code and since you use it in vcr mode you can use it with any mic preamps you want. Again just a suggetion, but from a size, weight and cost stand point, there is some attraction. IMO it is certainly a better quality suggestion than mini disk. Dat's at the low end have proven to be pretty unreliable, memory card storage is great, but not cheap.

SHARYN

The Marantz CD recorder sounds interesting, and costs just under $700. It is only 2 channel, but has phantom powered XLR jacks. Even has a 4Pin DC power connection for gel pack batteries. http://www.zzounds.com/item--MARCDR300

..The advantage of using the camcorder is that it is recorded in the same format as your dv recording, it has firewire for transfer, it has time code and since you use it in vcr mode you can use it with any mic preamps you want. ...

True, but the Tascam has all that and more.
File Format: BWF Broadcast Wave File
Sample Rates: 44.1/48/88.2/96/176.4/192 kHz
Sample Clock refs: S/PDIF, Video (NTSC or PAL), LTC, WORD
Quantization: 16/24 bit
Pre-record buffer: Up to 10 seconds
Time code types: 23.976,24,25,29,29.97 DF/NDF, 30 DF/NDF

The mic level S/N on that CD recorder is 60db, so it would be in the same category as the 660 which I found lacking.

One thing that was awesome about the 660 was that everytime you stop and start it starts a new file. You plug it into a usb port and just drag and drop the folder, which contains all the individual files and even an Avid edit list. I'm assuming the Tascam will also do the individual file thing.

It was a big disappointment. Major mic level input noise.


What, specifically, was the problem noise
with the 660? Hiss?

There are mods available that improve the Marantz 660 hiss problem.

Yep. It sounded like the air conditioner blower was on in the audio booth. I followed Lonnie's advice from his experience with the 670 and switched to stereo input mode in the menu, even though I was recording mono, and that did reduce the noise, but it wasn't enough.

The major difference (other than size) between the 660 and the 670 is that the 670 has an extra 5db in S/N over the 660. That 5db is quite a bit. I probably would have been happy with the 670, but since I had to go with a larger unit, I decided to go all the way and get the Tascam.

True, but I didn't want to buy a new recorder and then have to have a modification made that also voids the warranty. Better, in my opinion, to just return it and buy something else.

True, but I didn't want to buy a new recorder and then have to have a modification made that also voids the warranty. Better, in my opinion, to just return it and buy something else.

Yea, I agree. I was thinking about others who have had theirs for awhile. I am happy with my Marantz 670, but that Tascam looks sweet.

There are mods available that improve the Marantz 660 hiss problem.


I just think it's not acceptable to pay that much
money for a digital recorder and end up with
it having a lot of hiss.

I sent it back today and after they get it on Friday they'll send me a Tascam HD-P2.

You should let us know what you find about
mic-in hiss with the Tascam.

I'll be checking out thoroughly. B&H should get my package tomorrow. I'd guess they won't send out the Tascam till probably Tuesday. I'm hoping to get it before the end of the week.

FWIW I've been doing research on what field recorder to buy for about a year. I'm thinking about buying a multi-track recorder for work with a band that I record. What I've found is that the models being offered change faster than I can keep up. The bottom line is you can get hard drive based, simultaneous multi-track recorder for not a lot of money that will burn CD's and transfer to a computer via USB or firewire.

At first the Roland / Boss line was probably the best because they were the only ones offering true simultaneous multi-track recording in a stand alone unit. But that has changed.

Now there are several models from different companies that will record multi-tracks. Tascam is a big player in this field. So are Korg and Foxtex with Edirol and Marantz offering more portable units.

At this point it all boils down to exactly what you're looking for in a recorder. There are models that have time code as a feature. There are models that are smaller and more suitable for stealth recording (a popular option BTW - recording concerts isn't exactly kosher so there is a big niche that wants a recorder than can be hidden easily).

The times they are a changing for sure when it comes to portable recorders and it's all for the best. The only thing I worry about is a Ipod type phenomenon where mp3 recorders become tres popular and companies start making trendy models instead of quality models.

Personally being on a tight budget I'm looking at anything that is a real bargain. That means Hi-MD IMO. They record at very high quality (uncompressed and digital transfers to a computer) especially if you get a quality pre-amp for your mic. Battery life is excellent and most models can run on AA batteries if needed. And since they are being phased out by newer technologies the price is dropping. That means great deals on equipment that records great quality. Yes they are limited to two channels and they have other limitations too but if you're looking for a great deal on great quality you probably won't do any better. I see Hi-MD recorders sell on eBay for around $100 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Sony-MZ-NH700-Silver-Hi-MD-Minidisc-Player-Recorder-NEW_W0QQitemZ230016888832QQihZ013QQcategoryZ15062QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem) all the time. That's just very hard to beat.

I've got a non-Hi minidisc recorder that isn't bad for
hiss on the mic in.

Jeff- unless you have a lot of cash to play with, pretty much all of the good multi tracks are AC powered only. Not very portable, and you had better have a very reliable power source.

Steve brings up some interesting points re the Tascam

I understand that it has timecode via the smpte input, but how well will this work in a dv environment where you don't typically have a source of timecode from the dv camera.

broadcast wave files have tc in them but which of the nle's support the import and display of the timecode?

In addition on capture of the audio, which of DV the nle's have the ability to do a capture based on SMPTE timecode that is being presented on a tc feed.

I think the TASCAM is a great unit certainly drops the price for the typical tc dat market. The issue that I see is that most of the dv orientated nle's don't really support audio import with external timecord AFAIK, don't have an easy way to display it, so I wonder if many of the attractive features really have been designed out from dv nle systems based on their lack on practical products for so long.

Granted vegas 6 supports broadcast wave files, but a lot of the automatic lineup functions are dependant on having the timecodes of the video and the audio in sync. In addition if you are in HDV world, as mentioned on other threads the whole issue of even bringing in tc to the nle's is problematic based on the non standard way that tc is imbedded into the various hd formats.

If we had a simpy way say to get the tc out of the typical dv camera, and into the tascam, if the nle had an autoconform which supported capture with external time code, if most of the nle's had the ability to display the tc in the broadcast wave file it would certainly be attractive.

$999 for a high quality recorder with tc is really abreak through. I just wish the rest of the parts of the solution would support it

Sharyn

Jeff- unless you have a lot of cash to play with, pretty much all of the good multi tracks are AC powered only. Not very portable, and you had better have a very reliable power source.

That's true Keith. As I pointed out before it's a matter of what you're really looking for in a recorder right now. The market is in a heavy state of flux as exemplified by the lack of ability on the part of NLE's to import tc's from anything but video at present. I think these things will all work themselves out at some point or at least I hope they do. Again my big fear is that we will see a big push to make something along the lowest common denominator way of thinking ie the Ipod. Things could be great or they could all become the "SUV's" of the audio world where they look sorta like audio recorders but don't expect them to actually take you to the top of Kilimanjaro in climate controlled luxury.

There are truly portable recorders around and there are semi-portable recorders with lots of functions. Let's just hope both markets mature well and the NLE's keep up with the technology.

...

I understand that it has timecode via the smpte input, but how well will this work in a dv environment where you don't typically have a source of timecode from the dv camera.

broadcast wave files have tc in them but which of the nle's support the import and display of the timecode?

In addition on capture of the audio, which of DV the nle's have the ability to do a capture based on SMPTE timecode that is being presented on a tc feed.

...

If we had a simpy way say to get the tc out of the typical dv camera, and into the tascam, if the nle had an autoconform which supported capture with external time code, if most of the nle's had the ability to display the tc in the broadcast wave file it would certainly be attractive.



BWF files have a TC-based timestamp in the header rather than imbedded TC. When you import them into an NLE that supports them, the software lines up the start of file with the same timecode point on the timeline.

Getting that furshluginner code OUT of the camera to jam to the rcorder on set is a definite hangup, whether we're talking about the Tascam, or other records like the Sound Devices 744T or 702T, etc. I've heard there are devices that can read the code present on the LANC terminal but they're hard to locate and very expensive. The Canon XLH1 is the only prosumer camera I'm aware of that actually has TC in and out and genlock - got to move up into the >10-25 kilobuck ENG cameras to get it otherwise. A practical workflow for the Tascam with the cameras most DV Info users have is to get a TC-aware smartslate such as a Denke and jam-sync the recorder's TC to the slate's master. Meanwhile run video from the camera to the video in on the recorder so the recorders sample clock is slaved to the camera's -that doesn't sync timecode but it does sync the camera and recorder's so the files are at the exact same speed and won't drift out of alignment.

A couple of questions about the Tascam have come up:
1. Does it make a new file each time you press the record button?
Yes unless it is in the retake mode in which case it rewinds to the begining of the last file recorded and over writes it or it is in the append mode in which case it keeps going at the end of the last file recorded.
2. How does one get the time code out of the file and into the NLE? As has been pointed out there is a time code stamp in the header. One can open the file with almost any text editor and locate the stamp pretty quickly. It is in samples from 00:00:00:00, the data are in hex and are byte reversed so there is a little labor to turn them into samples, then seconds, then frames. One then opens the file in FCP and adds a timecode track with the given starting time. Or one obtains a copy of the Sebsky Tools which does all this automatically.
3. How are the preamps? I don't have the full story here but if one records in 16 bit width with the preamp inputs terminated (by the 20 dB pads) the resulting file is all zeros. Thus the preamp noise floor is well below the quantizing noise in 16 bit mode. I can't see what goes on in 24 bit mode because I can't figure out how to open 24 bit sound files in the application I use without truncating them to 16. Maybe I'll figure that out eventually.
4.Where can you get timecode? All the high end Canon cameras (don't know about the consumer models) put time code out on the LANC port (and since LANC is a Sony thing I assume Sony cameras do too) but a format conversion is required to get SMPTE from this. It's a simple conversion (I think the LANC is serial data which only needs to be modulated on a carrier) and there used to be a small, portable gadget (Sweet Pea LTO) which did it but it isn't made anymore. One can buy a relatively inexpensive device to convert LANC timecode to MMC timecode and there are lots of boxes that generate SMPTE time from MIDI timecode but at this point the kit is getting cumbersome. I'm hoping that with the migration of timecode to the prosumer world the LANC to SMPTE converter box will be resurrected.

...One can buy a relatively inexpensive device to convert LANC timecode to MMC timecode and there are lots of boxes that generate SMPTE time from MIDI timecode but at this point the kit is getting cumbersome. I'm hoping that with the migration of timecode to the prosumer world the LANC to SMPTE converter box will be resurrected.

One would think a sub-$100 LANC to SMPTE converter about the size and shape of an inline mic pad or impedance transformer or perhaps something like a Beachtech's form factor with cables to plug into the LANC on one side and output SMPTE via BNC on the other would be easy to do and a big seller. Any manufacturers out there listening - hello, is this thing on? <grin>

Sharyn, the Tascam has a standard BNC connector for time code sync. It's just like syncing up 2 cameas, genlock out to in, having set both to real time. As long as you don't power down, sync should hold. For people using cameas without genlock, obviously that wouldn't work without one of those Horita gadgets.

Just to clarify a bit: the BNC is a word clock or genlock input. The time code input is an XLR. If the BNC is given word clock the samples are taken synchronously with that clock. If given video or blackburst the sample clocks are generated from and synchronous with the video. This is ongoing i.e. the sample clock follows the reference source. The timecode, on the other hand, is sampled at the beginning of the recording and it is the time of the first sample that is recorded in the header. The ability to reconstruct time code from this stamp depends on a constant number of samples per frame. With video sync coming into the machine this is realized.

Thanks for all the comments. For the user that does not have access to a time code slate, or a box that converts land tc to smpte or an external genloc/tc adaptor, here is what can work.

XL1 is the camera capturing the video, and Sony gv d900 for an example is the unit capturing the audio. (Could be any camcorder in vcr mode with line in) and a mic preamp in my example Beachtek 10, but could be any mixer which is battery powered and has line out.

you take the video out from the xl1, using the remote to turn on data dispaly so that the timecode is displayed on the video out, you feed this into the gv d900, now you have a video feed from the main camera that has time code dispalyed being recorded, you then have the audio input to the gv d900 being recorded.

When you import the audio into the nle via firewire, you then have a video guide track with the timecode being shown in its video from the primary video source.

It is not a perfect solution, but for some people who do not have access to the more elegant time code componants, it offers an alternative.

SHARYN

Steve writes of the MicroTrack, Nice recorder with some problems - my biggest caveats are limited battery life and the batts can't be changed in the field - internal fixed batt only in other words. And the mic phantom power is only 30 volts, eliminating your abilty to use some of the better condenser mics that require the full 48v power. Yes, this little critter has some problems, but as an owner of one who uses it quite often for audio interviews, double system sound with video, and as a backup recorder attached to my Sound Devices 302 mixer, I'd say it's a pretty versatile and useful tool. And in a pinch the stereo T-Mic that comes with it is surprizingly good.

The limitations of the built-in battery can be overcome: you can feed it external power from a battery via the USB port. But this is not a portable solution.

Yes, the ultimate MicroTrack would use AA batteries or a field replacable Lithium Ion battery. Why not design the recorder to use a widely available Sony Lithium Ion battery (Sound Devices did this with their (much more expensive) digital recorders)?

No limiter is a problem (though I hear the chip they use has a limiter function, so mabe a future firmware upgrade will make use of it? one can only home).

But all in all I use it once or twice a week and I'm very pleased, dollar for dollar. Compact Flash for media rocks, and drag and drop of audio files to the Mac is very sleek indeed.

One thumbs up, one thumbs neutral on the Microtrack. Fix battery, limiter, and phantom power issue, and it would be two thumbs up!

The phantom power issue was the deal-killer for me.