Topic: A little vocabulary help for the newbie

[Music is alive]

All right, I feel dumb asking this question, but there's no dumb question, right   

I have read a decent amount at this site, and several suggestions via email/PM's from taper friends regarding what equipment (stealth only) I should get.

But one crucial term occurs frequently and I cannot determine its meaning in context.

It's things like "line-in", "digital-in", "mic in", "analog in", etc.  What do these relate to?  Do they relate to taking the mic directly into a recording device vs. running it through something else (a bass rolloff?  something else?)  first?  Or is that not really the right context?

And which of them is "good" and why?  For example, whatever line-in is, is it good?  Why is it good or why is it not good?

I appreciate the help...still putting the pieces together...everyone has to start somewhere 

[bagtagsell]

mic in- typically powers mics, and has a lower sensitivity, good
line in- no power, higher sensitivty, higher signal, better
digital in- no power, no analog stage, no loss, best

all of these are differant inputs on a recorder or preamp.  For example a minidisc recorder will power core sounds mics through the mic input.  However, if you switch to line input you will need to provide power, but you will be much happier with the sound.  These are bouth analog inputs.

[Music is alive]

However, if you switch to line input you will need to provide power, but you will be much happier with the sound.  These are bouth analog inputs.

So mics > battery box > line in, for example,  is that right?  Are these (mic in, line in) two different, physically distinct inputs on the recording device? 

Why is the line in better than mic in?  Because the mics pick up a better, fuller signal?

And what is the "digital line in"?  What kind of input is that, how does it differ from an input from, say, a battery box?

[bagtagsell]

So mics > battery box > line in, for example,  is that right?

yes

Are these (mic in, line in) two different, physically distinct inputs on the recording device?

yes

Why is the line in better than mic in?  Because the mics pick up a better, fuller signal?

basically yes.  it involves how many dbs before overloading.  the line in takes a "hotter" signal

digital lin in is an input that accepts a digital signal.  A digital signal is sent to it from another device.   This is read as 1 or 0.  It provides perfect reproduction of the original signal.  There are differant types of digital signals.  Optical/coax.
Everytime you run through an analog stage you loose a "generation".  It reduces the quality.  A digital signal will never loose a "generation".

[hexyjones]

Lets not give this guy the wrong idea...

There is no good, better, best...each is a specific format that does a certain job...

Mic - mic signals are very weak compared to line level signals and require some extra amplification to get them up to line level (which they must be to record) Most mic inputs on the small portable devices we use are not well suited for loud, live recording without some attenuation(signal strength reduction).

Line - line is the most familiar way of moving an audio signal from one device to another...Your tape deck, CD player and Hi-Fi VCR all produce line level output signals...(the little red and white RCA jacks) Its a standard that makes it possible to connect different pieces of gear together in one system.

Digital - When it comes to storing(recording) an audio signal - we have decided that the digital format is the best. So we have put the premium on devices that have a digital input.

A line level signal is fed into a device called an "Analog to Digital Converter" (shorthand = A/D, ADC, A>D) - The A/D chops up each second of sound into 44,000 little slices...the information about each slice is saved as data, 1s and 0s. - That data stream is what is fed into a digital input...in either Coax or Optical format...

Many devices have suitable A/D converters built-in...so you can feed them an analog signal...and let the device handle the A/D conversion....

But, many of us use outboard A/D converters - and then feed the digital signal to our recorder...

So - each signal format has its place in the chain....

[JasonSobel]

However, if you switch to line input you will need to provide power, but you will be much happier with the sound.  These are bouth analog inputs.

So mics > battery box > line in, for example,  is that right?  Are these (mic in, line in) two different, physically distinct inputs on the recording device? 

Why is the line in better than mic in?  Because the mics pick up a better, fuller signal?

And what is the "digital line in"?  What kind of input is that, how does it differ from an input from, say, a battery box?

here's a few more answers for you.
"Line-in" and "mic-in" are both analog.
"Digi-in", "Digital Line-in", "optical", "dig-coax", "S/PDIF" are all digital in.  S/PDIF is a format to send digital information development by Sony and Phillips.  This digital signal can be sent via a wire (coaxial cable) or via an optical cable.

on some recorders, the "mic-in" and the "line-in" share the same physical input jack.  For example, on the Sony D8 DAT recorder, the mic-in and line-in are both via the same 1/8" jack, and there is a switch that let's you choose between mic and line-in.  on other units, sometimes the mic-in is via XLR jacks, and line-in is via RCA jacks.  so that depends on the unit.

generally, it is "better" to run line-in, because people don't like the way the pre-amp in the D8 sounds.  it overloads easily, and is not very "clean".  So, if you use an external pre-amp and run line-in, you can bypass the crappy internal preamp in the D8.  You can buy very high quality outboard preamps, and these are generally better than the preamps contained within the recorder device.

The reason why digital-in is "better" is the same logic.  If you are recording digitally, the signal must be converted from the analog realm > digital signal at some point before the data is recorded.  generally speaking, an outboard A/D converter will be of higher quality than the internal A/D converter within the recording deck.  i.e. if you have a very high quality A/D converter, and then send the digital signal to the recorder and the only thing the recorder is used for is to write the data.  if you go analog into the recorder, you are relying on the A/D converter of the recording, which generally speaking, is not as good.

However, it is important to rely on what you think is "good."   This is all just general info.  the internal pre-amps and A/D converters in some decks are better than others.  For example, if you have a Sony D100 or m1, you might be happy with the internal A/D converter, and then there is no need for you to get an external A/D converter.  If you have a new Sound Devices 722, chances are, you could be very happy with both the internal preamp and the internal A/D converter.  and then run your mics straight into it.  or you might like the sound of a Lunatec V3 better, and choose to run digi-in from the V3.

[hexyjones]

Again - lets just stick to the concepts - forget the equipment for a while...

None is any better than the other - they all have a job...

Now - the way some of these concepts are implemented on equipment can leave something to be desired...

So - yeah - the Sony Mic inputs aren't so great...so many of us use an outboard device to do that job...but its the manufacturer - not the spec or technology that is wrong...

[Music is alive]

Again I thank you guys for your help, you have clarified a lot.

Is a battery box the same thing as a preamp box?

Are there devices that serve the purpose of powering, preamping, bass rolloff, and A>D all at once?  Such that, even with all 3 of those "additional" concerns covered, a reasonable path is mics > device X > recorder?

Is an NJB3's (I am leaning slightly toward an NJB3) onboard A>D considered generally good, or not so good? 

[~ Dan]

Is an NJB3's (I am leaning slightly toward an NJB3) onboard A>D considered generally good, or not so good? 

It's considered fine.  If you ask multiple people, you will come up with many different opinions.  Some say it's really not that great, some say that it's just as good as DAT.  Of course it does depend on what DAT make you are comparing it to.  I have a JB3 and it's worked fine, you can always buy and external A/D if you're not satisified with the one onboard.

[Brian Skalinder]

Is a battery box the same thing as a preamp box?

Nope.  Preamps typically provide [1] phantom power, [2] gain, and [3] bass rolloff (aka HPF, high pass filter).  But not always all three.  Battery boxes provide bias power.  A bit more info on phantom v. bias power, though it gets a little technical fairly quickly.  The key here:  they're not the same thing.

Are there devices that serve the purpose of powering, preamping, bass rolloff, and A>D all at once? Such that, even with all 3 of those "additional" concerns covered, a reasonable path is mics > device X > recorder?

Yup.  Check out the Where to Begin section and read the Start Here and I have $NNN... for starters.

Is an NJB3's (I am leaning slightly toward an NJB3) onboard A>D considered generally good, or not so good?

Different people have different opinions.  I hosted a line-in/ADC comp of the NJB3 and the D100, a well-respected portable DAT recorder, a while back and most people either preferred the NJB3 or couldn't tell the difference.  Bottom line - trust your own ears.  I can re-host the comp if you like.

[pfife]

Also, take into account that the JB3 has many other benefits as well... like firewire transfers!   

EDIT:  and also take into account benefits of DAT too, like archivable media.

[nelsorp]

thanks for asking all of these questions. i have been looking through this site for weeks, and this 1 post covers several unanswered questions i have had. thanks again.

[sweatboard]

If I go ua-5>jb3.  Can I go digital in and if so, what do i need to purchase?  I want to get the ua-5, should I go with the warm?

[sweatboard]

I do believe I got the last one. 

[admkrk]

+t  but there goes my extra t/mod