Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Ask The Tapers => Topic started by: capnhook on July 12, 2016, 07:24:06 PM
-
What are some small 24bit recorders that have 1/8" line in?
Doesn't even have to have mics.....a headphone out would be nice.
What are y'all thoughts about what's available in 2016.......hardware, or phones and apps?
Thanks
-
My first choice would be an M10 while you can still get them.
Next I'd go for the smaller Tascams - they all have a 1/8" in: DR-05, 40, 100, 22WL, 44WL.
If you need smaller than that, maybe you're into the realm of "voice recorders" from Sony or Olympus, but I don't know if any of them do 24bit or if they have external inputs.
Nice timely avatar switch. I'll always associate you with "Young Bernie" though. ;D
-
I personally like the Tascam DR-2D. Its discontinued but they appear on EBay frequently. Battery life not great but using Lithium AA's its fine. Someone has a 22WL in YS
-
Thanks for the fine list, guys. Got a CA-Ugly 2 in the mail the other month....been waiting to make a small rig with CAFS omnis.
-
I've been very happy with my recordings using CAFS -> UGLY II -> M10 (line in)
-
Roland R-05
I know the Sony M-10 seems to be favourite of this board but I really prefer the roland.
-
Nagra SD or the smallOlympus recorders.
-
Roland R-05
I know the Sony M-10 seems to be favourite of this board but I really prefer the roland.
Same here.
-
The R05 is smaller than an M10! DR-2d is larger than both of them
-
DR-2d also has a lot of metal, which can be both good and bad. I think the M-10 and Roland units have much less metal.
-
http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/10/31/tascam-launches-dr-10c-micro-stand-alone-pcm-48khz24-bit-audio-recorder-for-lav-mics/
-
http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/10/31/tascam-launches-dr-10c-micro-stand-alone-pcm-48khz24-bit-audio-recorder-for-lav-mics/
mono recording and no line in. useful for my needs.
-
http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/10/31/tascam-launches-dr-10c-micro-stand-alone-pcm-48khz24-bit-audio-recorder-for-lav-mics/
Interesting - but designed for video with only a 48kHz samling frequency.
-
Marantz PMD 620MKII and Roland R-05 both about the same size and both are well designed.
-
http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/10/31/tascam-launches-dr-10c-micro-stand-alone-pcm-48khz24-bit-audio-recorder-for-lav-mics/
Interesting - but designed for video with only a 48kHz samling frequency.
I've kept an eye on these recorders. The super small size, no non-sense recording-only feature-set, and single battery powering is attractive. And that they only run at a 24bit/48kHz recording rate is fine by me. It's that they only record one input channel which is the deal killer. It's unfortunate they don't offer a stereo input version, as these are capable of writing stereo files to the memory card - the second channel being used for recording a lower level "dual recording" safety copy of the mono input.
-
http://www.4kshooters.net/2014/10/31/tascam-launches-dr-10c-micro-stand-alone-pcm-48khz24-bit-audio-recorder-for-lav-mics/
Interesting - but designed for video with only a 48kHz samling frequency.
I've kept an eye on these recorders. The super small size, no non-sense recording-only feature-set, and single battery powering is attractive. And that they only run at a 24bit/48kHz recording rate is fine by me. It's that they only record one input channel which is the deal killer. It's unfortunate they don't offer a stereo input version, as these are capable of writing stereo files to the memory card - the second channel being used for recording a lower level "dual recording" safety copy of the mono input.
I'd even wager that whatever DAC on the chip that runs this thing is stereo capable. It's just the mic powering and input section in front of it is going to we wired for single-channel like a bodypack transmitter.
-
Yes, I imagine so.
BTW, these Tascam DR-10C recorders have not been available for purchase in the US anyway, due to patent infringement allegations by Zaxcom (apparently based upon the suggested use of these with wireless systems). Tascam does sell the DR-10X (http://tascam.com/product/dr-10x/overview/) variant in the US which uses the identical inner recorder component case and interface, but features a single XLR input designed to be plugged directly into a full-sized XLR terminated body, rather than being intended for use between a lavalier and wireless transmitter.
BTW, we discussed these previously in another thread here at TS maybe a year or so ago, but I can't recall which thread that was.
-
Yes, I imagine so.
BTW, these Tascam DR-10C recorders have not been available for purchase in the US anyway, due to patent infringement allegations by Zaxcom (apparently based upon the suggested use of these with wireless systems). Tascam does sell the DR-10X (http://tascam.com/product/dr-10x/overview/) variant in the US which uses the identical inner recorder component case and interface, but features a single XLR input designed to be plugged directly into a full-sized XLR terminated body, rather than being intended for use between a lavalier and wireless transmitter.
Yes, I remember reading about that in JWSound.
BTW, we discussed these previously in another thread here at TS maybe a year or so ago, but I can't recall which thread that was.
I think I remember floating a crackpot idea where these recorders could be made to supply phantom power, while at the same time having wireless Tx/Rx to create a mesh network for timecode sync while each unit recorded just that mic's channel. That way you could have large multi-mic arrays on stands far apart (think of an orchestra and choir setup) but no wires. Pretty silly, but maybe in 50 years something like that would be reliable.
-
Went with a Tascam DR-22WL
-
Let us know what you think of the wireless level controls. Seems interesting...
-
Congrats on the decision, Kevin.
I think I remember floating a crackpot idea where these recorders could be made to supply phantom power, while at the same time having wireless Tx/Rx to create a mesh network for timecode sync while each unit recorded just that mic's channel. That way you could have large multi-mic arrays on stands far apart (think of an orchestra and choir setup) but no wires. Pretty silly, but maybe in 50 years something like that would be reliable.
Not silly at all, it's what I've been thinking of as an optimal solution for the past 10+ years. I imagine it far easier to transmit just time code and control signals rather than audio data - far more robust, way less data, no worries about short-term drop-outs or intermittency. I think you can do this with the Zaxcom stuff now. They do wirelessly transmit the audio data as well as sync timecode, but the audio and time data is also stored locally on each device as a safety backup. So it actually does more than we are talking about. Not sure if they offer phantom however. Zaxcom is top-dog costly stuff.
-
I've wondered about leveraging other unintended wireless signals for the clock sync'n, without having to broadcast it. Like cell-phone data communication or whatever. GPS would certainly work, as it has far greater time-resolution accuracy than required for this, but probably isn't available indoors. (I'm still a dumb-phone user so pardon my ignorance if this is duh stuff these days). I imagine that how long separate recorders could remain in sync without access to the distributed clock signal would be based upon a trade off between cost and the accuracy of the oscillators used in each recorder. With accurate enough clocks, one could sync them all before hand before distributing them and they'd stay in sync for the duration of the recording.
-
Okay, link all individual recording devices beforehand, have each device determine and apply a correction factor so that all clocks are calibrated to the same external standard within a certain degree of accuracy over a given period of time before drift causes them to fall out of tolerance. You then have a known time-period during which the clocks will remain in close enough sync without communication with each other. Each recorder stores it's own time-stamped BWAV files locally, so you can start and stop recording on each device at any time within that period, yet all files will remain in sync and fall into the appropriate place when imported into editing software.
No wireless communication required.
If pushing a physical button on each device and staggered start/stop times are a bummer, use some sort of 'wireless' signal for transport control - click the tuned dog-clicker, flash the IR beacon, pull up the smartphone app, key the CB radio transmitter or whatever.. that aspect of the system is no longer required, but simply a convenience.