Topic: Sony PCM-M10 (Part 4)

[Artstar]

What's the genral consensus on the M10/D50?

Is the M10 good enough by itself, or so most people use it with offboard pre-amps? Is the D50 good enough by itself?

That's the equivalent of asking how long is a piece of string. Having both units, I can say that their internal pre-amps are just fine in my opinion and do an excellent job with my CSB cardioid mics via a 9V battery box (M10/D50 plug-in power switched off, naturally). I was thinking of designing my own external preamp when I got the cardioids but after extensive testing came to the conclusion that the performance of the internal preamps are exceptional, even in extremely quiet passages of classical performances recorded at 96kHz/24 bit resolution.

In the end, it all boils down to what you're recording and what sounds good to you but for me, it's extremely versatile and clean without any need for anything beyond external mics and a battery box to suit.

[andromedanwarmachine]

Thankyou Artstar, that's great info...

whilst recently trying to record striplight (tubes) startup sounds for a film project, I did a group test of all combinations of all the recording gear I own and came up with a Symetrix 302 pre-amp running into my Tascam DA-20 DAT deck to produce the lowest noise floor possible. This and the use of phantom powered mics, which a cursory measurement revealed a gain increase of 6dB alone, produced a result.

It's something I've never really thought about until trying to gather this footage recently but there was no way my standard rig had to the performance to get the result...

JimP

[Artstar]

Interesting application! In which case, I'd dare say that the D50/M10 probably won't have a sufficiently low noise floor for such a recording in which case, you'd want to go for an outboard preamp for sure.

[andromedanwarmachine]

Oh- sorry- that is not illustrated as being indicative of the kind of thing I record every week- more something I was trying to do after replicating perhaps some of your own experiments to quantifyably establish performance...

what's your take on the Fostex FR2-LE?

[Artstar]

Keep in mind my purposes are somewhat more limited in that it's mostly live performances that I record with my unit. Generally, it's loud stuff as in metal gigs which allows me a little leeway in the S/N ratio but occasionally, I like to go to a classical performance or occasionally record a comedy act. The classical gigs obviously put the gear to the test in terms of the dynamic range. What I'd like to do is get my hands on the anechoic lab that my friend's university has and just perform some standalone recordings with the internal and external mics I have to see just how low the noise floor really is. From practical experience, the unit holds its own with the onboard preamps and sounds fantastic but so far, I've been pretty fortunate with my estimated recording level setting before the performance begins.

I'd like to hopefully account for perhaps having been a little too conservative on the recording levels and see if the noise floor would exceed a quiet passage in such a scenario but I don't want to find out the hard way either! Given on paper the S/N ratio is 87dB or greater as opposed to the PCM-D50's 93dB or greater (line levels, +4dBu reference), I can't imagine it would be that great a result if something like that did happen. In which case, push may come to shove and I would have to consider using the PCM-D50 in that situation instead if one approximates about a 10dB raise in the noise floor for mic inputs. Again, it's an extreme circumstance which I may never have to face but it's nice to know that I do have at least one recorder that could hold its own in that situation.

Perhaps one day some physicist will find the means to develop electronic components which have a guaranteed S/N ratio of 130dB to match human hearing along with the mics to suit! Until then, we electrical engineers will have to make do with whatever we can get from chopper stabilised amplifiers as far as ultimate performance goes.

The Fostex you mention is a nice unit and I have had a chance to play with one for a bit. On paper, it looks the goods and seems to be very much similar to the PCM-D50 in terms of its specs. Having listened to WAV's from both units, the difference is indiscernible. In which case, I'd rather go with the PCM-D50 because the unit isn't as bulky and runs for much longer on 4xAA's than the Fostex. The one thing that would sway me to the Fostex would be the balanced inputs as far as an all-in-one unit solution goes. Otherwise, I'd just get an outboard preamp for the PCM-D50 instead because either way, I'm no longer really portable in terms of stealthiness anyway.

[andromedanwarmachine]

Yes- that's how I think about it as well in that the relevance of the S/N really depends on the type of footage you are gathering. However when I think back to the types of scenario I like to try and gather, they are more often than not, pretty quiet already!

It's something I've never really considered until that striplight thing recently- I was going to have to gate the footage in postproduction to get a useable result. I've never really thought "technically" about gear performance relative to a desired result. I've always been driven more emotively by trying to get what I want.

That's the figures I've got also for the M10 & D50 and at that point in the gain structure I think 6dB IS ALOT although that is at 24bit. I'm not sure given the amount of footage I tend to gather that I'd be using 24bit all the time. With my own current gear I think I was shaving 1.5/2.0 dB to establish a winning combination. However I see the FR2-LE has a quoted 95dB!!- I wouldn't mind the size of the FR2 actually; I quite like the reassuring solidity of serious location recorders. (unless they are made by Marantz)
It just seems a bit more professional- I could mabey work something out on the power side to keep it going.

Do you know what the largest flash-card it can handle is? and whether CF is generically regarded as a more stable format than Micro SD/Memory Stick?

JimP

[Artstar]

Keep in mind that's 95dB for the line in which is not far off the PCM-D50 sitting at 93dB. Again, the major benefit is the balanced connectivity that's built-in as opposed to requiring outboard preamps to do the same with the PCM-D50.

In terms of memory cards, largest I've seen so far is 64GB from Sandisk, Kingston and possibly Lexar. Not cheap but I do have a Sandisk one myself (Extreme Pro) for my dSLR camera as I tend to shoot in RAW and take a lot of shots before I get back to my laptop to pick out the keepers from the bunch.

For audio, unless you're doing multitrack work with it or don't have access to a laptop for days on end, I don't see the point in getting something so large. I use a Sandisk 16GB microSD in my PCM-M10 and the PCM-D50 got the Sandisk 8GB MS Pro Duo HG. Both serve me very well and far exceed my actual storage requirements for the purpose as I'm never without a computer whether it's out on the road or back home. I'm not sure what the maximum size is that the Fostex supports but I can't imagine 16GB being a problem for it considering I recall someone with the FR2 (not FR2-LE) using an 8GB card with it back in the day. That said, it would be wise to check with Fostex themselves for the latest list on tested and supported media for the recorder.

Is one format more reliable than the other? Not in my opinion. CF cards have the benefit of being easy to find in a stack of stuff given their size, compared to looking for a microSD-needle in a haystack. CF cards are indeed more robust as their contacts are deeply recessed into their housing. But with a little care (as has been the argument regarding audio connectors in this thread), there's no reason why any of the memory card formats should have any problem in the long term. CF cards also handle much faster transfer speeds which can only really be seen as advantageous by photo/video applications given the copious amounts of data being transferred with each shot/frame. Audio is a little more forgiving in that sense and even recording 192kHz/24bit samples on a microSD card would be just fine as the bitrate is about 8.8Mb/sec (about 1.1MB/sec) which fits within the lowest specification (level 2 - 2MB/sec write speeds). A Canon 5D Mk II dSLR camera can achieve write speeds of approximately 32MB/sec with a high end CF card.

My belief is the primary reason why professional market recorders use CF over other formats is purely for the fact that it is established as a professional media standard. With that standard in place, you have simplified the interoperability amongst other devices. As an example, suppose I'm shooting video with my dSLR (as a few models can nowadays) and I desperately need to record something on my audio recorder but being unprofessional as I am, I forgot to pack in a card for it. I could grab the CF card out of my camera and whack it straight into the recorder thereby saving my butt. Beyond that, I can't see any other benefits in having a CF-based audio recorder over anything else. Of course, if anyone else has any idea as to why this is so, I'm all ears and/or stand to be corrected.

[rastasean]

As far as audio recorders are concerned, I don't see any difference in CF and SD or microsd. For photography, perhaps CF cards are able to write much faster for those cameras like the nikon d3s (at only $5200 for the body) which have a very large buffer. as for audio, CF is probably the common style card simply because it was around first. It was the first one to the dinner table so it gets to be called professional.

there are three types of CF cards at 64GB to choose from on b&h and there are also the same number for SD but they cost a bundle.

averaged out, those six CF and SD Cards came to $341 so I would look into get a combination of memory cards adding up to that much. For example, on SD, you could get three of the best rated 16 gig cards for $348 yielding nearly 48 gigs of recording data. These specific cards have a rebate right now so you would get money mailed back to you.

My bottom line would be not to concern yourself with the largest available card and buy a number of multiple smaller cards.

[andromedanwarmachine]

Yes- your right-

I'm not really imagining myself going for 64Gb CF cards and doing a weeks worth of recording on them and thinking it would transfer no problem; I'm just interested in the upper limits of file-size performance as a means to establishing a safe ceiling lower down. Even without ANY computer knowledge I can see the sense in many smaller capacity pieces of media. Having said that- I would be travelling without a computer.

That's interesting about the cost actually although it wouldn't sway me- I've been sticking my neck out for years to get the recording gear I want in the face of adversity!- My first full-size MD recorder was nearly £1000 back in '93!!!

I wonder which of the two formats is more widely available now in terms of being at the end of the road whilst travelling and trying to source more media? I spent a hilarious afternoon in Jaipur once trying to source MDs.
I think there's a 1U rackmount piece of Tascam gear that reads CF cards to transfer them to disc... Hmmm...

Thanks

JimP

[rastasean]

I think you're just as likely to find a CF card as you are a SD card, or said another way--if you can't find a CF card, don't waste too much time on a SD card.

Seriously, if you're afraid of running out of media, buy many various sizes ahead of time online.

[fobstl]

B&H has the M10 for $199 shipped again. Just ordered one with a 16 gb card 

[ArchivalAudio]

B&H has the M10 for $199 shipped again. Just ordered one with a 16 gb card 

Awesome deal!
thanx for the tip & update

[wmacky1]

New to the forum!


Whew! 8 hours later, I've just completed reading all 4 parts to this thread non stop. Now I really want a Sony recorder, and I know I want the M10 or d50. But, I'm still stuck on which way to go.

Some background: I won't be doing concerts or clubs, so stealthness won't be  an issue! I do like the idea of a hand-held unit though, and both fit that description. My use will include personal recording of my electric, and acoustic guitar, and I'm digging this ambient recording thing such as recording Florida thunder storms.

If you didn't have the need to conceal the unit, would most here go ahead with a D-50 purchase instead? I'm still unclear on any SQ differences between the two? I really like that $199 price, but the D50 keeps calling!

The things that have me looking hard @ the D 50:

1. The better all metal sturdy construction. I really appreciate that big time. Perhaps this isn't so inportant if it's going to be obsolete in a few years anyway??
2. The metal Line and mike jacks. How big a concern is the plastic connectors on the M10?
3. Possible better internals / SQ

What I don't like:

1.The price, but I can deal with that
2.  The Sony Mem stick
3.The fact that it's been out for a while. I would hate to buy it just as a new model was released!!!!!!

Guy's I know most here record bands, but there is barely any info on other types of field recordings. I'll have to ask here! So for non concert taping, and mainly ambient recording, whats your pick?  D- 50 pricing is my limit, buy Mics, and accessories will come later.

[Belexes]

I own both as I am slutty. However, I mainly concert record with external mics and have very little experience with the internals on each unit.  The battery life on the M10 is amazing!  The D50 takes 4 AA's and doesn't have the sustain like the M10 does on 2.

I prefer the A/D on the D50 over the M10, but don't think it's worth the extra dollars.

I can't see the M10 being better than the D50 at half the price, but Sony may have outdone themselves.

[aosone]

So for non concert taping, and mainly ambient recording, whats your pick?  D- 50 pricing is my limit, buy Mics, and accessories will come later.

I heard you about what you're willing to pay, just consider that if you're truly serious about recording, the PCM-D1 is worth every penny and you don't need any extras with it, except maybe a windsock. That said, you will be making an excellent choice with the M10.