Topic: Sony D50 vs M10 line-in comp

[dogmusic]

I did a test recording simultaneously to the line-in of both a D50 and an M10.

Beyer MC 930 mics > Audient Mico preamp > D50 & M10,  both @ 24 bit / 96 kHz, both with recording level set at 4.

Wav files normalized in Audacity and exported as 24 bit FLAC files.

I was wondering if folks hear much difference between them, or prefer one more than the other. Any opinions would be much appreciated.

RECORDER A: http://www.box.net/shared/s6yhf3x2rh5s3urtlgtc

RECORDER B: http://www.box.net/shared/invb03a6s05sie4cmvrs

Thanks,

Phillip

[Napo]

B may have more headroom (unless it is a normalizing factor in post)

[dogmusic]

B may have more headroom (unless it is a normalizing factor in post)

Not sure what normalizing does to it for headroom.

Thanks for your input.

[jbell]

I have owned both recorders and haven't noticed a difference in sound quality!!  Both great decks, but if you need a digi input go with the D50

[hi and lo]

I listened to both last night in my DAW for about 15 minutes. Setup was an M902 w/ HD650s and I can honestly say I wasn't able to identify a single difference between the two. Not to say they don't exist (I probably didn't listen carefully for enough time), but for all intents and purpose i would say they both sound excellent and are identical in performance.

I did notice a slight visual difference in the heights of the two files, but a waveform analysis showed the Avg RMS to be only about 0.01 dB difference.

[Javier Cinakowski]

I notice the D50 has SBM dithering option for 16bit, I don't think the M10 has that feature.  No one would care if they are running 24bit, but I suspect the D50 would make better 16bit recordings... That also makes me wonder if the ADC chip is different, or they just left the SBM option off the M10, but using the same chip...

[jbell]

why would you want to record at 16bit when you can do 24bit??  You can dither it to 16bit in the post.

[Javier Cinakowski]

Some people don't like to post process or if you had a production deadline it could come in handy... also I really like the sound of the sbm circuit...    super bit mapping rocks, especially for the most of us listening on car stereos and ipod

[jbell]

I never used it when I ran a D50

Some people don't like to post process or if you had a production deadline it could come in handy... also I really like the sound of the sbm circuit...    super bit mapping rocks, especially for the most of us listening on car stereos and ipod

[page]

I listened to both last night in my DAW for about 15 minutes. Setup was an M902 w/ HD650s and I can honestly say I wasn't able to identify a single difference between the two. Not to say they don't exist (I probably didn't listen carefully for enough time), but for all intents and purpose i would say they both sound excellent and are identical in performance.

I did notice a slight visual difference in the heights of the two files, but a waveform analysis showed the Avg RMS to be only about 0.01 dB difference.

Yeah, I checked that too, The DC off set is better in one than the other, but 4db, when you're messing around at >190db isn't worth writing home about... The two odd things I noticed were that the RMS is that it's off by a touch in one channel, but spot on in the other. Second, the DC off set changes channels, but the channels themselves don't change. I also couldn't hear a difference. Even picked the decay of a note to start listening at noise floor and after amping it about 35db still couldn't get a good difference to pinpoint. I guess it's a question of "do you want an optical in or not." So it may be that they use different circuitry on the inbound or even a sister AD chip, but sonically I couldn't pick out which was which (in what is basically an ideal room).

Thanks for posting the comp. 

[Belexes]

Thanks for posting this. I have both decks and with this feel I am safe in using either without a noticeable difference.

[dogmusic]

Thanks for all your input.

Although it doesn't seem to matter too much, I'll post which file is which recorder tomorrow. I'd be interested to know which had the better DC offset.

[page]

Thanks for all your input.

Although it doesn't seem to matter too much, I'll post which file is which recorder tomorrow. I'd be interested to know which had the better DC offset.

This is what I wrote down. RMS values on top (L/R), DC off set second:

B
RMS -28.88/-30.85
DC -194/Inf

A
RMS -28.85/-30.85
DC Inf/-198

[dogmusic]

The recorders were as follows:

RECORDER A: M10

RECORDER B: D50

Thanks again for your feedback.

[hi and lo]

Thanks for all your input.

Although it doesn't seem to matter too much, I'll post which file is which recorder tomorrow. I'd be interested to know which had the better DC offset.

This is what I wrote down. RMS values on top (L/R), DC off set second:

B
RMS -28.88/-30.85
DC -194/Inf

A
RMS -28.85/-30.85
DC Inf/-198

I got different Avg RMS numbers and neither showed any dc offset. Hmmm...