Topic: R-44 Oade Mod vs. Busman Mod (opinions sought)

[acidjack]

Just got an R-44 as a very generous xmas gift and hoping to try it out soon.  Before I go any further I should preface this by saying I have read some of the posts in "Retail Space" on this issue, in particular the "Problems with Doug Oade" thread.  I'm not trying to solicit comments bashing anyone here; I just want to make an informed decision about whether (a) to get a mod at all and (b) if so, which one.  To the extent that you have particular negative feedback about a retailer that is germane to the decision, please send me a PM. 

I have been borrowing an Oade Concert Modded PMD660, and it sounds great.  I understand that Doug will mod an R-44 that wasn't purchased from him.  I know Busman only mods decks bought from other retailers, so not an issue. I've dealt with Chris (but not Doug) and know Chris has a reputation for great work. 

Has anyone ever done an A/B between a modded/unmodded R-44, and between the Oade/Busman mods? 

Barring having that available, what are people's opinions as to the effect of these mods on the sound of recordings?  Mics used will be DPA 4021.

Also, in deciding whether to get the mods at all, what did people not like about the stock R-44 pre that made them upgrade?  Most of my shows are loud/amplified. so noise floor is not an issue for me. 

[rastasean]

We do NOT service decks that were not sold by Oade Brothers Audio, any deck sent in for an upgrade MUST be in good working order or it is not eligible for the upgrade.

http://www.oade.com/digital_recorders/hard_disc_recorders/upgrades.html



Edirol R-44
4 channels of transparency modifications $250.00 USD

http://busmanaudio.com/mods.html

I think you may have the two mixed up.

[page]

We do NOT service decks that were not sold by Oade Brothers Audio, any deck sent in for an upgrade MUST be in good working order or it is not eligible for the upgrade.

http://www.oade.com/digital_recorders/hard_disc_recorders/upgrades.html



Edirol R-44
4 channels of transparency modifications $250.00 USD

http://busmanaudio.com/mods.html

I think you may have the two mixed up.

Someone reported here a bit ago that Doug would *now* mod some models that didn't come from him with some stipulations (e.g. everything worked, there was no warranty, something like that). He won't do *any* model (still no on old UA-5s for example), but the word on the street was that he would do some new stuff from 3rd party vendors. He is correct in that Chris will only do mods on decks from others, mostly cause he doesn't sell decks so you have to get it elsewhere.

Has anyone ever done an A/B between a modded/unmodded R-44, and between the Oade/Busman mods?

I don't think an A/B has ever been done. I toyed with the idea of getting an R-44 a while ago, but turned elsewhere so I don't have a complete knowledge base on that one.

[aaronji]

We do NOT service decks that were not sold by Oade Brothers Audio, any deck sent in for an upgrade MUST be in good working order or it is not eligible for the upgrade.

http://www.oade.com/digital_recorders/hard_disc_recorders/upgrades.html

The way I read the above link, Oade will upgrade recorders bought from a third party:

Oade Brothers Audio now offering upgrades for your digital recorder.

Please e-mail Doug Oade to obtain an RMA number. Turn around time is approximately 10 to 12 business days plus shipping time. We do NOT service decks that were not sold by Oade Brothers Audio, any deck sent in for an upgrade MUST be in good working order or it is not eligible for the upgrade.

All PMD 620 are available only on machines we sell, sorry but no exceptions

The following Upgrades are available for any Digital Recorders in good working order. Please note, our upgrade voids the factory warranty. We warranty only the parts we put in, not the entire machine.
You must contact Doug Oade via E-mail to obtain shipping and payment instructions.

[DSatz]

Until recently I didn't entirely trust the analog electronics of the R44 and assumed that I should use an outboard preamp and A/D converter, and just treat the R44 (at least its first two channels) as a "bit bucket." I've made maybe 20-30 live recordings that way.

Yesterday, though, I recorded two full-length opera performances with an using a pair of good microphones connected directly to the R44's XLR inputs with no outboard preamp, phantom power supply or A/D converter. Since then I've listened at some length to the playbacks, and so far, I really don't hear anything wrong with the recorder that would make me want to have it modified.

If I get time soon, I'll make some comprehensive measurements of the analog electronics since maybe there's something about noise or distortion or dither or frequency response that my ears haven't caught onto yet. But what I'm hearing seems good enough in terms of fidelity (output = input), and that's all that I really want from a recorder--besides practical usability, which the R44 certainly has.

--best regards

[Will_S]

I don't think an A/B has ever been done.

And this would give me pause about paying $250 to void my warranty, especially in light of DSatz' comments above.

It's not directly germane to the R44, but you might want to look at the A/B tests that have been done for the FR2LE.  Which suggest to me that by now even mid-level consumer gear is competent enough to not really need modifications...and that a lot of people who swear up and down that they hear obvious improvements from modded gear can't distinguish stock from modded in a blind test...even though they think they can, happily providing answers that turn out to be no better than random guesses.  That doesn't rule out the possibility that there would be clearly audible differences in some circumstances, but it also suggests that people often "hear" differences just because they want to.

Also the links below only looked at "transparent" mods, the "warm"/"vintage" mods may have a bigger effect, for good or for ill.

field A/B of FR2LE stock vs Busman transparency mod:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=111772.0;all

home stereo test:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=113128.0;all
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=113482.0;all

[datmike]

I don't think an A/B has ever been done.

And this would give me pause about paying $250 to void my warranty, especially in light of DSatz' comments above.

It's not directly germane to the R44, but you might want to look at the A/B tests that have been done for the FR2LE.  Which suggest to me that by now even mid-level consumer gear is competent enough to not really need modifications...and that a lot of people who swear up and down that they hear obvious improvements from modded gear can't distinguish stock from modded in a blind test...even though they think they can, happily providing answers that turn out to be no better than random guesses.  That doesn't rule out the possibility that there would be clearly audible differences in some circumstances, but it also suggests that people often "hear" differences just because they want to.

Also the links below only looked at "transparent" mods, the "warm"/"vintage" mods may have a bigger effect, for good or for ill.

field A/B of FR2LE stock vs Busman transparency mod:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=111772.0;all

home stereo test:
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=113128.0;all
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=113482.0;all

Very interesting...I'm about ready to pick a unit up and may not have the mod done.  It would be nice to have an a/b done in a concert setting, though.

[DSatz]

Will_S, I don't doubt that some circuit modifications can cause audible changes to a recorder's performance. People who want to hear differences between "A" and "B" will tend to hear differences whether they exist or not--but it is equally true that people who don't want to hear a difference will tend not to hear one even if it is there to be heard.

Listening requires an open mind, and for me at least, any desire to prove anything one way or the other spoils that. I have a personal policy of not discounting whatever someone else thinks they've heard--though if they start attributing what they think they've heard to a cause that doesn't make sense, I might quibble with them at that point.

That definitely comes into this picture, because one of the strongest justifications that seems to be given for op-amp and other part substitutions is "improved transient response"--increasing the "speed" of the circuitry in responding to rapidly changing signal voltages. And unfortunately, some very basic beliefs in this area, that are widely propagated and accepted in the audiophile community, are completely mistaken. Faster is not always better; there's something more like an optimal "speed" for a circuit stage, but it's not always simple to determine.

As I said, I don't want to discount what someone hears simply because their beliefs about why they're hearing it are objectively false. But I also don't want to assume that something which sounds better to someone else (or even to me) is a better thing for me to use in my recordings, if I don't know why it sounds the way it does in the first place.

Maybe the apparent sonic improvement depends on circumstances that were true only in one situation--as a crude example, if you're going to play a recording back over loudspeakers that have rolled-off treble response, it helps if you record with microphones that have a high-frequency elevation--but the result of that same response elevation might sound awful on better speakers. Looking at only one piece of the puzzle at a time can lead to some very wrong conclusions about the larger picture.

--best regards

[Will_S]

Will_S, I don't doubt that some circuit modifications can cause audible changes to a recorder's performance. People who want to hear differences between "A" and "B" will tend to hear differences whether they exist or not--but it is equally true that people who don't want to hear a difference will tend not to hear one even if it is there to be heard.

I don't think this applies to the comparisons posted...many of the respondents were proud owners of various modded gear.  Also note that most people weren't recording not hearing differences, they were reporting "differences" that didn't pan out in terms of consistently picking out stock vs modded.  So it's not as if most respondents didn't want to hear a difference.

But I agree the mods may well be audible in certain situations (and the warm/vintage rather than transparent mods are probably more audible), but people who insist that they make night and day, clearly audible differences have some 'splaining to do.

[dgale]

This is why there are things like double blind studies in the scientific research world - you need to design an experiment (which in this case is a comparison) that bypasses the various biases that virtually everyone has one way or the other.  For starters, you can't know which version you are listening to when you make the comparision - think of the ol' Coke vs. Pepsi blind taste test. 

You also need to set things up so that all other potentially confounding variables are the same, so you are sure you have narrowed any perceived difference down to what it is you are trying to compare.  And then you need to make sure to repeat this comparison similarly under a wide range of conditions - in this case different bands/music types, different venues, different locations, mic patterns etc. to decide if the perceived difference is consistent or varies under these changing conditions. 

It's pretty rare, if ever, that such a comparison has ever occurred.  I frequently see opinions lobbed around about this gear vs that gear, this technique vs that etc., and rarely have I ever seen a situation where I felt there was enough control to make an objective comparison...and even then, of course, we're talking about what our ears hear, which is is anything but objective.

Suppose I want to compare a set of KM140s vs. Schoeps cardiods at a certain venue/band - unless they are on the same stand, in the same pattern, and using the same, pre, A/D etc., how valid is the comparison?  Same deal if you wanted to compare the sound of a MiniMe to a V3 - all other parameters need to be exactly the same.  And then you have to guage opinions on which sounds best without the listeners knowing which is which, as everyone likely has an opinion already on which they like better.  I hate to see someone listen to one recording from a show and compare it to another made by someone else under a variety of varying conditions and then decide which gear or technique is best...sorry but it's the research scientist in me that cringes at this. 

[kirk97132]

I run an R-44, stock.  I do have a Busman modded UA-5 and have had Busman mod a set of mics.  The way I look at it is....not better or worse but different.  A mod (can?)will make it sound different.  What is harder is to get a mod undone.  For example, if I sent my R-44 out to get modded and once it was done I either didn't like it or wanted to change it, when then it is problematic.  I run separate preamps in front of my R-44.  It does not bother me to pack the extra gear.  I have also used the stock preamps in the R-44 and have been happy with the results.  By using outboard preamps I can easily try others or even change the ones I use.  With an all in one box you can't......well you can technically if you use the digi in from a preamp to channels 1&2 on the deck.  In the last two years it has allowed me to run many different combination's.   Now if it were modded I would in essence be running two different style preamps together and that might not be the best choice.   I've stuck with it stock.  And if you try to resell I don't think you get a good return on the investment of having it modded.  As for what I hear....I think it all sound good, with the preamps can sound better.  It also allows me to run what preamp I want on what channel I want.  I am not limited to IE: warm on 1&2, transparent on 3&4.  IN that set up I have to run all 4 channels if I want to use the transparent part of the mod.   I am not sure exactly what the mods cost now but for close to the same price of a mod you can buy a decent used preamp or even a new one like the little box.  Of course everyone uses their decks to suit their needs and what works for me may not work for you, kirk

[datmike]

I think I'm going to run my new R-44 stock with a 3 year full-coverage warranty.  I can decide after 2 years whether or not I need a mod done......best of both worlds perhaps!!

[illconditioned]

Personally, I would not have a unit modded unless I'm told what chips are replaced.  It is crazy to let someone get "under the hood", and make some potentially useless changes, and then not tell you what they did!

I did my own mods, and I believe they are better, but I don't have any way of knowing.  Well, I have anecdotal evidence.  In particualr, for the R4, I remember what it sounded like before and after.  I also have a modded unit (mine) and an unmodded unit (a friend's) with the same mics (fixed) in the same room.  Different show, but I'm pretty convinced, for the R4 at least, that the mod makes it more detailed.  This was with Countryman B3 lav mics hanging in front of the stage.

I guess if I wanted to be systematic, I would mod one channel.  Then feed both channels with a small omni (like Countryman B3), and do some *ambient* recordings with mics side-by-side.  Unfortunately, I was too impatient when I did my mods.  I just ripped the unit apart and modded both channels!  For me, the cost was minimal, just $20 or so in parts.

Finally, I expect our mods to have more effect on portable gear, where the rail voltages are lower.  For example Edirol UA5 and R4 have +/-5V, and the Fostex FR-2LE has something like 8V (single sided).  In these cases getting a good "low voltage" opamp in there should really help.  At least that is my belief.

  Richard

[digifish_music]

Listening requires an open mind, and for me at least, any desire to prove anything one way or the other spoils that. I have a personal policy of not discounting whatever someone else thinks they've heard--though if they start attributing what they think they've heard to a cause that doesn't make sense, I might quibble with them at that point.

I disagree. What listening requires is an objective response indicator, that way the bias or mind of the individual is irrelevant, and that is what I think Will_S was getting at.

An objective response indicator is simply one where you can get it right or wrong. In this case identify which of a pair is the modded or non-modded unit. Here your biases are irrelevant, you can either do it or you can't. You also get the luxury of using any subjective method to distinguish them. That is you can listen out for whatever you think is better about it, perhaps not even listen, perhaps its a sense of euphoria you believe the mod creates in you, doesn't matter.

If you can't reliably identify the modded unit in a statistically meaningful number of forced-choice, blind comparisons (preferably double blind), then the mod is crock (for you). If no-one can do it, then it's just global crock.

This is a post I made about this area a while back, looking to define a gold standard for such comparisons.

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=113862.0

This is a great read...

http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/

It's interesting to still see people claiming that they can hear SACD (~20 bit @ 196 kHz) is 'clearly' better than CD standard, it's not.

digifish

 

[stevetoney]

Regarding mods, the bottom line is that a mod makes a unit sound different...but objectively speaking different can be better or worse.  It depends on your subjective likes and dislikes. 

Here on ts.com, many members are like minded and most I think are live music location recordists.  So, it's likely that certain mods are going to receive a better reception from this group than others.  It's like modding a recipe to add more sugar...many or most might like sweeter, but a few people like unsweetened. 

So, if you're unfamiliar with the sound of a mod, you really need to do your own research (for example, on Live Music Archive) and decide for yourself.  Even then it can be a difficult decision, because as others have pointed out, unless the recording was made in a controlled setting specifically for performing a A vs. B test, there are usually other subjective factors that influence the sound on recording versus the other.  I do think that, if you're an experienced listener of gear, you can get a general feel for the sound of a mod if you have several samples to listen to against several samples unmodded.

Having said this, most mods claim to use higher quality, lower noise components that lowers the noise floor from the stock model.  Again, proof of this claim should be verified, but assuming it's true and you do alot of recording where the lowest noise is needed, like nature sounds, then it's probably likely that a mod will help you out.