Topic: Sony M10 Memory Card Error

[RAQnasty]

Steve - do you use the M10?  If so, can you comment on your experience?

Leaning toward the M10 to replace my Edirol which has a dying OLED display...

have you ever had any file writing issues or file corruption issues with the M10?  I just dont want a recorder that opens the door to lost file at the end of the show.

[earmonger]

I have done more shows than I can remember with a PCM-M10. You will have the show when you are done. 

I had one problem with one 4GB card in connecting to the PCM-M10 via a cord....but putting the card in the computer itself (with adapter/slot) gave me the show, so I think it was a Windows glitch.  Really, the PCM-M10 is rock solid.

[Scooter123]

I prefer to record directly to the hard drive as opposed to the card.  It is faster and less likely of card write error from RF transmissions

[kleiner Rainer]

I prefer to record directly to the hard drive as opposed to the card.  It is faster and less likely of card write error from RF transmissions

Wrong. RF Immunity is tested when applying for CE and FCC certification. So unless you use a homebrew recorder, thats not an issue.

In fact, the probability of a harddisc failure is higher than a card error, because the HDD is a mechanical system with lots of moving parts. I already had a defective HDD, the only defective flash USB memory I ever saw was obviously a fake and could be detected with a test program before any real data was written. Unless you buy from obscure sources, the memory card is the better solution: reliability, power consumption, access times and robustness all speak for memory cards.

My motto for HDDs: backup, backup, backup. And avoid mechanical shock... thats hard to do for a portable recording system.
BTW a flash card as OS drive for a computer is muuuch faster than a HDD: my workstation at work has a SSD as boot drive
and a HDD for data that is mirrored by our company server to avoid data loss, so I know from own experience how fast that machine boots compared to my old HDD-only workstation.

If given the option, I would replace a HDD with a flash based memory in an audio recorder without thinking twice - the advantages (and my experience with Flash based embedded systems from an engineers viewpoint) far outweigh the risks.

Greetings,

Rainer

[larrysellers]

The only problem I have experienced with the M10 was forgetting to format the memory card using the M10 before recording. Like clockwork, it would produce a bunch of audible errors in the recording after about 70 minutes. I almost always use the built in storage unless I actually need the extra space.

[beatkilla]

I don't think the M-10 has an internal hard drive,im sure it is internal flash.

[hi and lo]

I don't think the M-10 has an internal hard drive,im sure it is internal flash.

Correct.

Nevertheless, Kleiner is absolutely right. When I read "card write error from RF transmission" this morning all I could do was go "huh?" I have never heard of such a thing and after some searching, Google hasn't either. You should record to whatever medium you prefer and not over complicate things.

[hoserama]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

[hi and lo]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

I highly doubt it, mostly because scooter has integrity unlike a scumbag that would record an ALD or IEM.

[hoserama]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

I highly doubt it, mostly because scooter has integrity unlike a scumbag that would record an ALD or IEM.

This post is funny on so many levels.

[Sloan Simpson]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

I highly doubt it, mostly because scooter has integrity unlike a scumbag that would record an ALD or IEM.

This post is funny on so many levels.

How many?

[hoserama]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

I highly doubt it, mostly because scooter has integrity unlike a scumbag that would record an ALD or IEM.

This post is funny on so many levels.

How many?

I can think of at least three, but I'm sure there's more. One has to do with scooter having too much integrity to do iems/alds, another has to do with taperssection's (generally speaking) condescension of wireless taping in general, and then the third of the absurdity of scooter's original post if it's not my reasonable explanation.

Not trying to get into the morals and ethics of RF taping (which is off-topic), just saying it's an amusing comment by hi and low.

That said, scooter is more than able to explain what he actually meant by his comment, and I'm not trying to put words in his mouth.

[hi and lo]

I can think of at least three, but I'm sure there's more. One has to do with scooter having too much integrity to do iems/alds

I don't see how this is at all funny. Archiving a concert as it was intended to be heard from the audience is entirely different than stealing a private signal that was never meant to be public.

another has to do with taperssection's (generally speaking) condescension of wireless taping in general

We're opposed to this because it jeopardizes everyone's stake in live concert recordings, legitimate or otherwise. If you think this is condescending, it's merely reflects your lack of respect for those that appreciate unfettered access to archival recordings. Even a single IEM recording jeopardizes everything that live concert recordists have worked for decades to achieve.

and then the third of the absurdity of scooter's original post if it's not my reasonable explanation.

There's was nothing absurd about Scooter's original post. We're not radio-frequency engineers and it was an interesting comment that I had to Google to get a definitive answer. If it was a common problem, I wouldn't have been surprised, but personally I've never heard of such an issue.

[hoserama]

First part--PM'ed you privately hi & lo about this.

Second part--this is not the thread to debate the morals/ethics of wireless taping (and if you start a thread, I would have no problem politely debating it), so I'm just going to drop that for now.

Third part--I can almost guarantee (but I could be wrong of course) that the post was in relation to the recorder affecting RF receivers, and not RF transmission affecting the card. Nobody here has ever had issues with RF (like a cell phone) affecting a card right. Unbalanced cables? Sure. But not the card. However, SD cards can and do cause interference for RF receivers if nearby. Obviously this wouldn't affect you or most tapers, so just take it as a useless bit of trivia for now.

[Sloan Simpson]

I think scooter123 means the RF interference which results when you're using an SD-card based recorder and you're recorder from a low-level RF signal signal, such as an ALD or IEM recording. I can concur that such interference exists with SD cards. Not so much that any RF would affect a regular action of recording onto a SD card of a recorder.

I highly doubt it, mostly because scooter has integrity unlike a scumbag that would record an ALD or IEM.

This post is funny on so many levels.

How many?

I can think of at least three, but I'm sure there's more. One has to do with scooter having too much integrity to do iems/alds, another has to do with taperssection's (generally speaking) condescension of wireless taping in general, and then the third of the absurdity of scooter's original post if it's not my reasonable explanation.

Not trying to get into the morals and ethics of RF taping (which is off-topic), just saying it's an amusing comment by hi and low.

That said, scooter is more than able to explain what he actually meant by his comment, and I'm not trying to put words in his mouth.

I asked because usually when people say "so many levels", they mean one or two. I guess three could be considered "many."