Topic: Edirol R4 review

[Nick's Picks]

HI all...
www.nickspicks.com

come n get it!

please lmk of typos, un-truths or anything dis-agreeable that I can address.
I just posted it, and i'm still sort of proofing it, so things will change.  but i'd appreciate some feedback.  areas I should elaborate on..etc.

Thanks a +Ton

[bhtoque]

Hey Nick,

Not bad overall, but I disagree with you on the headphone part. It might be due to the ety's, but I have no problem monitoring on the R-4, and the headphone amp is almost twice as powerfull as the UA-5's. I'm sure a big pair of cans won't yeild the same results, but I've been able to drown out everything, to the point of discomfort, with the R-4's headphone out.

JAson

[Nick's Picks]

Hey Nick,

Not bad overall, but I disagree with you on the headphone part. It might be due to the ety's, but I have no problem monitoring on the R-4, and the headphone amp is almost twice as powerfull as the UA-5's. I'm sure a big pair of cans won't yeild the same results, but I've been able to drown out everything, to the point of discomfort, with the R-4's headphone out.

JAson

its the Etys Jason.  They make all headphone jacks sound great.
Using several pairs of phones, i've put it up against the FR-2, DAP1 and a MME and it sucks...just like the Ua5 jack.  same exact POS.

Hey...where are your contributing comments?
I need a BIG PM from you!

[Genghis Cougar Mellen Khan]

HI all...
www.nickspicks.com

come n get it!

please lmk of typos, un-truths or anything dis-agreeable that I can address.
I just posted it, and i'm still sort of proofing it, so things will change.  but i'd appreciate some feedback.  areas I should elaborate on..etc.

Thanks a +Ton

+ Thanks for the review Nick!

[dgodwin]

Thanks.. I think I know what recorder I want to get next.  Anyone want to buy a sbm-1 ps-2 and a jb3?     +t

[kgreener]

+T Nick, nice job.

[bhtoque]

Hey...where are your contributing comments?
I need a BIG PM from you!

I'd posted my thoughts in the other r-4 thread, and in reading the review, I thought you had incorporated my comments already. If you want me to put it all together I can, but the headphone part was my only comment about what you wrote. Oh, and that the limiter seems kinda steep to me.

JAson

[Nick's Picks]

ok then..
a big +T to you Jason for "helping" me out.  i'm sure it was your pleasure.


the limiter...who uses that any way?
I see it handy for the rare occasion i'm recording something very quite that I have to crank to get levels, and then to be burried by the crowd applause.  that would be a good place for it.

what intriges me, is using the 6-band EQ for recording purposes.  hmmmm.....
the only way it would work out would be if you could monitor the recording *exactly perfect*, which means Ety's.  I"ll have to pick up a pair for myself.

Regarding the headphone amp (again).  If you say its better than the UA-5, then you would know best as you have both.  But with any other headphone, it sucks.  I'll revise my comments on that to reflect more accurately.

[kgreener]

So I've been corresponding with Doug recently regarding the R-4, and here are a couple of selected thoughts from him:

"We will offer MODs to it at some time in the future. We will wait until they become easier to get! Right now, like the FR-2, you need to run it line in for PAs and that way it can be a bit noisy. Once they get easy to keep in stock, I will work out a MOD like what I did for the UA5s and then they will be damn nice"

"What would you think of a T/W MOD R4, that is 2 channels of each?"

"yes, I am only going to do MODs to the units we sell and I want to wait a bit to be sure they get all the kinks out BEFORE, I MOD it!"

So, I'm like really anxious to go out and get one of these, but wondering if I should wait for Doug to start modding them before I buy one, cuz I won't be able to get it modded after the fact.  But from reading Nick and Jason's reviews, it sounds like they're pretty good right out of the box.  But who knows, Doug might not start modding these until next fall for all I know, and I don't know if I want to wait that long.

Anyone have any thoughts on this "dilemma"?  Mucho gracias.

[Nick's Picks]

I think that out of the box it is much nicer sounding than the stock UA5, but not quite as nice as the + mods that Doug does.  The preamp can be noise when running cranked up, but you'll never need to crank it to the point of it becoming noisey, IMO.  I know I wont.  When I last used mine w/the Pelusos, I ran the -10db on the mics themselves as well as line in on the R4.  I still never pushed the gain plast 12 o'clock.  If I had left the mics un-padded, then I would have used barely any gain at all.  that would eliminate the noise part, had it been an issue.

One of these w/the mods would be the sickest rig alive.  Especially if they are the same caliber of the UA-5 upgrades. 

[Tim]

I'd be pretty leary of eqing in a live situation where you can only listen over headphones and have no access to monitors

[Genghis Cougar Mellen Khan]

I'd be pretty leary of eqing in a live situation where you can only listen over headphones and have no access to monitors

Seriously, what's the point?  I could see it being a gripe for playback after a show, but live?

[bhtoque]

ok then..
a big +T to you Jason for "helping" me out.  i'm sure it was your pleasure.

Yeah, it was a real burden to have a month of free use of a $1500 24/96 hard drive recorder. I wish everybody on TS.com would put me through the hardships you have Nick.

the limiter...who uses that any way?
I see it handy for the rare occasion i'm recording something very quite that I have to crank to get levels, and then to be burried by the crowd applause.  that would be a good place for it.

That's where you would need it. But it kicks in @ -10db at 1:3 ratio. A little too steep, and not adjustable.

what intriges me, is using the 6-band EQ for recording purposes.  hmmmm.....
the only way it would work out would be if you could monitor the recording *exactly perfect*, which means Ety's.  I"ll have to pick up a pair for myself.

I'd try it out, especially to fix a boomy room, but you could just eq in post, so I don't think it would see much use.

Regarding the headphone amp (again).  If you say its better than the UA-5, then you would know best as you have both.  But with any other headphone, it sucks.  I'll revise my comments on that to reflect more accurately.

I can't remember if Jason and I plugged his Grados into it, but all I used in the field were the er-6's.

JAson

[Colin Liston]

Is this thing the same as a 4 track recorder?  My buddy is seriously considering getting one of these, and if he does I will be able to use it, out at shows which will be mighy nice!....
But he wants a 4 track 24/96 machine.  I'm not sure I know exactly what "4-track" means, but if this records 4 individual tracks, is that the same as "4 track"?

colin

[JasonSobel]

I can't remember if Jason and I plugged his Grados into it, but all I used in the field were the er-6's.

when you first brought it over to my place, I think we just went digi-out to the grace 901 and then to the grado's.  I don't think we listened through the headphones straight from the r4.

[Nick's Picks]

yes, its a 4 track 24/96 recorder.

[Flarnet]

Can it be used for 4-track recording in the "porta studio" sense? I.e. can it play back any of the 4 channels while recording on the remaining one(s)?

[Nick's Picks]

hmm....good question.
probably not, but I dont know for sure.  a good question for edirol, imo.

[bhtoque]

Can it be used for 4-track recording in the "porta studio" sense? I.e. can it play back any of the 4 channels while recording on the remaining one(s)?

Nope. When in 4 channel mode, all 4 channels are recorded as 1 wave file. So a) you need software than can deal w/ a 4ch .wav file and b) even without 4 input sources, you get a 4 ch .wav with silence in the empty tracks.

JAson

[Nick's Picks]

see Jason....these are the things you should have been writing up for me.

[bhtoque]

see Jason....these are the things you should have been writing up for me.

You need a PDF of the manual. I just read the section on 4ch mode.

BTW, I'll bring it back to you Thursday night. I forgot it was in my hard case when I gave John the R-4

JAson

[Nick Graham]

I do have one comment/question...

In the review you state you've had no problems running 24/96, but didn't you get multiple errors at one point (a Derek Trucks show I think?) from being too close to the PA?

Am I imagining this? Was this somebody else?

Not trying to call you out at all, just seeing if I remember correctly.

[wbrisette]

Nope. When in 4 channel mode, all 4 channels are recorded as 1 wave file. So a) you need software than can deal w/ a 4ch .wav file and b) even without 4 input sources, you get a 4 ch .wav with silence in the empty tracks.

Download the Fostex Broadcast Wave utility (from Fostex's site) and it will split a broadcast wav file into separate tracks. This works on both Windows and Mac OS computers.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

I do have one comment/question...

In the review you state you've had no problems running 24/96, but didn't you get multiple errors at one point (a Derek Trucks show I think?) from being too close to the PA?

Am I imagining this? Was this somebody else?

Not trying to call you out at all, just seeing if I remember correctly.

you talkin' to ME !

that was w/the FR2.  I've had zero problemw w/the R4.  Jason?  Youve used it more than anyone probably.

[Brian]

Nope. When in 4 channel mode, all 4 channels are recorded as 1 wave file. So a) you need software than can deal w/ a 4ch .wav file and b) even without 4 input sources, you get a 4 ch .wav with silence in the empty tracks.

Download the Fostex Broadcast Wave utility (from Fostex's site) and it will split a broadcast wav file into separate tracks. This works on both Windows and Mac OS computers.

Wayne

whoa...cool!  I wonder if it puts together to seperate mono .bwf files to form an interleaved stereo .bwf file.  thanks for the heads up wayne.

[bhtoque]

I do have one comment/question...

In the review you state you've had no problems running 24/96, but didn't you get multiple errors at one point (a Derek Trucks show I think?) from being too close to the PA?

Am I imagining this? Was this somebody else?

Not trying to call you out at all, just seeing if I remember correctly.

you talkin' to ME !

that was w/the FR2.  I've had zero problemw w/the R4.  Jason?  Youve used it more than anyone probably.

Yeah, I've seen a couple shows were vibration killed nick or carl's FR-2. No problem with the R-4 though.

The only problem I had with the R-4 was I brickwalled the crap out of my first recording with it because mic in was too sensitive for the Oktava's and Mofro. Well, that and having to give it back 

JAson

[kgreener]

man, the way y'all keep talking about this unit, i'm ready to go get one right now.  but with a reminder about the line-in deal you and nick have mentioned, i think i might wait it out for a Doug mod before taking the plunge.  then again, i've heard some of your (jason's) recordings and they sound great.  but i hate waiting!

what to do, what to do...

[Nick Graham]

I do have one comment/question...

In the review you state you've had no problems running 24/96, but didn't you get multiple errors at one point (a Derek Trucks show I think?) from being too close to the PA?

Am I imagining this? Was this somebody else?

Not trying to call you out at all, just seeing if I remember correctly.

Gotcha...

You've been the "guinea pig" for so much new gear, I couldn't keep straght which was which.

+T

you talkin' to ME !

that was w/the FR2. I've had zero problemw w/the R4. Jason? Youve used it more than anyone probably.

[Nick's Picks]

Doug sounds like he plans to offer mods.  And i'm sure they will be the same ones he always offers.  This box is capable of having two mods, one of each flavor on the different stereo pair inputs.  now THAT would be cool.

There is no doubt that it would improve with these modifications, or by running a nice preamp in front of it.  I still maintain that it is not a necessity, but is favorable.  It sounds good stock.  I hve not found myself wishing for anything in front of it.  But I could see picking up a V2 for the front end.  Extra baggage, but probably the same price as the extra mods will be.

I dont know what Doug sells these for.  But add probably $400+ for mods.  that puts it in the 722 price range?  I dont know what those cost either.
I bet a W+ or T+ mod R4 would blow the doors off of any other hdd recorder under $8k.

[boa]

Nevermind. Ya think I'd learn learn something from the wealth ofknowledge here...D'oh!

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=38945.msg521872#msg521872

When running low on battery power you have to stop recording and power down before switching to the Walwart, otherwise your recording and settings you might lose.

I was using a 8xAA Powercell 2300mah to power the R4 and was running Stereox02 with MG SMS210 (DINA) and DPA4061 (spaced 36").
Second time I had used the Powercell units and noticed their quick decline on the meter throughout the first 5 minutes of TBC @ Little Rock, AR. At the end of the first song, I grabbed the power adapter and plugged in and the R4 turned off. Completely. Then I powered it up, and it recorded fine the rest of the night.

Outside of that lesson learned the hard way, the rest of the show smokes and I cant wait to run it again in June, provided I can stealth the R4 for the Crowes/Petty tour...

[bhtoque]

You won't even be allowed to make an archive recording for the band?

That sucks.

JAson

[jkoch]

sounds impressive....

few spelling errors for ya

For the taper folks:

recording quite acoustic music

quiet

General use:

I prefer the segmented metes vs. the R4s "bar"

meters

Since there have been coments by other users

comMents

[Nick's Picks]

fixed.
thanks!

[boa]

Could you elaborate, comment more on the meters? 

Here is a photo showing the metering: 48 - 24 - 12 - 6 - 3 - C (clip), a second with Stereox02 pairs at a good level and the last shows a clip on the master meter.

[Massive Dynamic]

I know the 40gb hard drive makes this ideal for festivals, but I wonder about heat issues.  Anyone got plans to run this at an outdoor summer festival?  The one I attend usually has temps of 90-100° with humidity to match.

[boa]

I know the 40gb hard drive makes this ideal for festivals, but I wonder about heat issues.  Anyone got plans to run this at an outdoor summer festival?  The one I attend usually has temps of 90-100° with humidity to match.

I ran it outside yesterday here is StL, MO (90 degrees and god-awful humidity) for a couple of 75 minute sets and saw no issues.

[joemango]

OK... a question about the sensitivity issue...  can I still run Phantom 48v if the XLR inputs are set to line level?  I'm thinking of selling my Wmod ua-5 and JB3 to raise funds for one of these bitches, and I'd prefer to not run an external pre.

I'm prolly going to buy one from Oade so I can send it back and get it modded when Doug figgers it out, but I'd like to use it right out of the box.

[joemango]

cool thanks.  I guess that locks it in for me.

[Nick's Picks]

thats the only way i've been able to run it.
MIC in is too sensitive, and it will distort.  you have to run LINE in, which is just a switch per pair.  Its a 28db pad I believe.

[kgreener]

thats the only way i've been able to run it.
MIC in is too sensitive, and it will distort.  you have to run LINE in, which is just a switch per pair.  Its a 28db pad I believe.

might be a dumb question, but do you lose any quality or detail in your recording when a pad like this is running?  is the pad strictly for SPL's?  and what advantage does mic-in have over line-in, if any?

thanks.

[wbrisette]

Here is a photo showing the metering: 48 - 24 - 12 - 6 - 3 - C (clip), a second with Stereox02 pairs at a good level and the last shows a clip on the master meter.

It's too bad they couldn't make the LCD panel just a tad bigger. They really had to cram stuff into the current screen design.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

this box is not built with concert recording in mind.  That is why the mic input is so sensitive.  It was intended to record quiet sources...not rock concerts.

do you loose any detail?
I dont know.  Can't test it because you can't run mic in at a concert.  It is what it is.  And it sounds good line in.  the pad is attenuation.  Its to deal with hot signals.  MIC in is a very hot signal...especialy when the mics are recording a loud environment that the preamp can't handle.  Which is the case with the R4 as well as the Fostex FR2.
It doesn't mean you can't compensate w/the gain knobs...which will bring the levels up to where you need them when running LINE in.

the LCD panel is fine, imo.  plenty of info and easy to read.  I dont find it cramped or confusing. YMMV

[kgreener]

this box is not built with concert recording in mind.  That is why the mic input is so sensitive.  It was intended to record quiet sources...not rock concerts. do you loose any detail? I dont know.  Can't test it because you can't run mic in at a concert.  It is what it is.  And it sounds good line in.  the pad is attenuation.  Its to deal with hot signals.  MIC in is a very hot signal...especialy when the mics are recording a loud environment that the preamp can't handle.  Which is the case with the R4 as well as the Fostex FR2. It doesn't mean you can't compensate w/the gain knobs...which will bring the levels up to where you need them when running LINE in. the LCD panel is fine, imo.  plenty of info and easy to read.  I dont find it cramped or confusing. YMMV

thanks Nick...+T

[wbrisette]

the LCD panel is fine, imo.  plenty of info and easy to read.  I dont find it cramped or confusing. YMMV

I think this is because we've all grown accustomed to reading cell phones! As a technical communicator, I'm constantly appalled by the human interface placed on electronic devices. But, that's my opinion, and I'll have to admit I've been spoiled by the large color screen on the DEVA.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

well shit...
I would be to!

[oniontaper]

first off +t nick

1. is it possible to throw a svu-1 or two in the mix to help w/ monitoring levels?
2. say i was running some LD's ORTF w/ spaced omni's, would this come out as two track's or one? do you have the option to merge and split, or does this all have to be done post?

[bhtoque]

first off +t nick

1. is it possible to throw a svu-1 or two in the mix to help w/ monitoring levels?
2. say i was running some LD's ORTF w/ spaced omni's, would this come out as two track's or one? do you have the option to merge and split, or does this all have to be done post?

It is possible, since the R-4 has rca outs, but would not be much help. Granted the R-4's meters are not as good as the 722's or the Deva's but they are not hard to use. After the first couple shows I did with it I was quite comfortable with them. Even got used to switching between channels without having to divert my focus from the music.

You need to set it to record as 2x stereo, and you get 2 sepperate files, as if you taped the same show with 2 different rigs. If you set it to mono, you would get 1 file with 4 mono tracks.

JAson

[wbrisette]

You need to set it to record as 2x stereo, and you get 2 sepperate files, as if you taped the same show with 2 different rigs. If you set it to mono, you would get 1 file with 4 mono tracks.

I'm assuming by placing the four mono tracks into a single file, it's building a broadcast wav file. Is that right?

If this is correct, then if you use a multi-track sound application, this is how you want to record the four channels. This way you have total control over each individual track in post.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

you guys got it.

the meters on the R4 are *very workable*.  no need to augment them at all. 

4 channel stuff...yea, you need a multi-channel application to open the broadcast .wav and then you can do whatever you need to do from there.

[wbrisette]

the meters on the R4 are *very workable*.  no need to augment them at all. 

I wasn't implying they weren't workable. Simply I wish there was a bit more room on the screen. That's a personal preference that's all.

Wayne

[Nick's Picks]

no, it was oniontaper who asked if the SUV-1 would be a good thing for it.  that was what I responding to.

[bhtoque]

the meters on the R4 are *very workable*.  no need to augment them at all. 

I wasn't implying they weren't workable. Simply I wish there was a bit more room on the screen. That's a personal preference that's all.

Wayne

Wayne, I think you should float me the Deva for a month, like Nick did with the R-4 that way I can really compare the displays and useability of both devices. 

JAson

[wbrisette]

Wayne, I think you should float me the Deva for a month, like Nick did with the R-4 that way I can really compare the displays and useability of both devices. 

Sure thing. I just require a 10K deposit. 


FYI, just got an email from one of the resellers. Apparently the price of both the Deva IV and Deva V is going up $1,000 in July. However, as he pointed out, it's really not that bad because now included in that price is a 80 GB hard drive. (yep, you spend 10K and don't get a hard drive to go in it).

Wayne

[Genghis Cougar Mellen Khan]

thats the only way i've been able to run it.
MIC in is too sensitive, and it will distort.  you have to run LINE in, which is just a switch per pair.  Its a 28db pad I believe.

might be a dumb question, but do you lose any quality or detail in your recording when a pad like this is running?  is the pad strictly for SPL's?  and what advantage does mic-in have over line-in, if any?

thanks.

By using a pad you lower the input signal strength, the pre-amp will then have to apply more gain to the signal, the signal to noise ratio would be a little worse running the pad.  Now if the signal is too strong for the mic input, the pre-amp shouldn't have to apply much gain, so the inherent noise would probably be very minimal.  Using a pad is the easy way out of actually creating a separate circuit for the line and mic inputs, even on the PCM-M1 the line input bypasses the pre-amp, the mic input is sent through the pre-amp.

Basically the line input on the Edirol is a mic input with a pad to achieve the same charactaristics as a line input.

[Nick Graham]

Quick question, as my R4 is at home waiting on me (just delivered by UPS 15 minutes ago!!!), and I wanna get a head start on some of this stuff.

When running all 4 channels (2 pairs of mics or 2 x mic/2 x board), what are your options? In other words, I know you can you have 2 totally seperate recordings, but can you do all 4 into a single mix - i.e. "on the fly" matrix? Is that where you run into the 4 channel BWF problems? When you convert a 4 channel BWF into a regular 2 channel WAV file, does to basically just mix both left/right channels into one left/right channel file?

Any help would be much appeciated. Granted, I could just wait a few hours and figure all this out my self, but thought I'd probe the minds of those who've already run one.

[wbrisette]

When running all 4 channels (2 pairs of mics or 2 x mic/2 x board), what are your options? In other words, I know you can you have 2 totally seperate recordings, but can you do all 4 into a single mix - i.e. "on the fly" matrix? Is that where you run into the 4 channel BWF problems? When you convert a 4 channel BWF into a regular 2 channel WAV file, does to basically just mix both left/right channels into one left/right channel file?

I don't the specifics of the R4. However, BWF is BWF. There are two versions a poly format (i.e. multiple tracks inside one file) and a mono format (i.e. one track per file). If you create a poly-BWF file, and your DAW software doesn't support it, you can download the BWF Manager software from Fostex <http://www.fostexdvd.net/fxdvd_route/docs/techsup/bwf_manager_1.htm> , which converts the poly file into individual tracks.

So how do you mix? That really is the $1000 dollar question. I have found there are no hard and fast rules to mixing. Over in the multi-track team board area, you'll see folks who prefer to run the board at 80-90% and only include 10-20% of the audience mics. Because I use a multi-track recorder and multi-track DAW software, I use the console and my ears to figure out what the mix is. I LIKE audience tapes. That said, I'm not in the 80-90% camp (except when I'm told to run that way by the folks who ask me to record).

My methodology for mixing is mix the mics (I know this doesn't really apply to the R4 since you'll only ever have 4 channels, but still this might come in handy) until they sound like I want the mix to sound. Slowly start bringing in the board mix until it truly starts adding or subtracting to the sound. If I've added too much, then I back off and keep playing with the mix until I get it where I want it. From there, I generate a two track stereo file that I can mark for a CD.

I would be very careful about how you blend your sources. Also make sure you keep copies of the original BWF file somewhere so if you end up with something you don't like, you can always go back and start over.

Welcome to the world of multi-track! You'll never go back.... 

Wayne

[johnw]

Will this thing fit into a Nova 5? The specs on the Nova5 say it is 8.5" tall and the specs on the R4 state it is 8.7" tall. I guess you could always remove the 1" pad on the bottom to make it work.

What bag are people using to hold this, mics, cables, etc?

[OFOTD]

Will this thing fit into a Nova 5? The specs on the Nova5 say it is 8.5" tall and the specs on the R4 state it is 8.7" tall. I guess you could always remove the 1" pad on the bottom to make it work.

What bag are people using to hold this, mics, cables, etc?

Don't forget though that you have at least an inch to an inch and a half extra height with the Nova 5 with the lid on.  The 8.5" measurement is with the bag open and flush against the top of the main wall of the bag.  I have taken out the bottom 1" of padding and kinda cut it up a little to sink my SLA's down in there.  Mostly it's down there to keep the bottom of the bag stiff as I just replace that cut out piece with a pice of cardboard from a FedEx box.  No sagging at all.

+T for the Nova 5  the bag just rocks!

[johnw]

Good to know. In a few months I think I may try to sell the MiniMe and JB3 to go to this. Looks like I could get the R4, pelican 1060, cables and shocks in a Nova 5 without too much hassle.  +T

[Nick Graham]

The R4 will fit in the Nova 5 height wise...it's sitting in mine right now

FWIW though, without right angle XLRs, you'll have to run the R4 outside of the bag, as it's not wide enough.

[mmmatt]

I don't the specifics of the R4. However, BWF is BWF. There are two versions a poly format (i.e. multiple tracks inside one file) and a mono format (i.e. one track per file). If you create a poly-BWF file, and your DAW software doesn't support it, you can download the BWF Manager software from Fostex <http://www.fostexdvd.net/fxdvd_route/docs/techsup/bwf_manager_1.htm> , which converts the poly file into individual tracks.



Wayne

Does anyone know of another bwf converter.  This one doesn't work for r4 files.
     Man... I had a tough night last night!  Board + stage mics > r4.  Opening band (Andrias Kapsalis Trio) I decide to go cards x/y center stage and split omni's for the main act (goran ivanovic group).  So to start I don't bring enough xlr... I had enother 300+ft at home, but was trying to keep my bag light and forgot 2 so I borrowed from the house!  Then for the opener I set my mics up in x/'y and forget to switch out the caps.  Anyone want a sample of omni x/y?  Then after the first set of Goaran, the drummer comes down and I'm professing my musical love to him when I dump 1/2  my full beer at his feet (Thanks for the beer Brian!),  then my batt is looking too low to make the 2nd set (thanks for the backup loaner brian!) THEN to top it off, in my brilliant attempt to record 4@mono, I record 1@4 in a bwf!  This converter that wayne reccomended doesn't work, my basic wavelab reads it as mono, and my multi program (traction2) doesn't read it at all.  Audacity is doing it but a one clic converter would be much better.
     Any help on another converter would be appreciated!  Oh... and BTW, the moral of the story is that I should never have more than 2 beers, I should just bring everything I own to every show, an the best advice to myself is possibly just stay home on Friday nights!  Just to let you know I was in good company though... mattD's "opening set" battery crapped out mid opener, and Brian... well, brian managed to handle all sets without a hitch!  Bastard!

Matt

[sleepypedro]

Audacity is doing it but a one clic converter would be much better.

just set the r4 properly to write two stereo pairs and you won't have a need for a one-click converter!   

[mmmatt]

Audacity is doing it but a one clic converter would be much better.

just set the r4 properly to write two stereo pairs and you won't have a need for a one-click converter!   

actually I prefer 4 mono, and that is what I was going for... 2 stereo would have definately been better though! 

     For the record:  Audacity does open the files and there is a way to save at 32bit float mono.  Just one great big extra step, that is all!

Matt

[marisa]

Hi all-
I'm looking to replace my Sony D10 DAT with an Edirol R4. I have a friend who insists that I need to go with the Pro, but in all my research, I can't see why. I don't need time code, or AES/EBU (that I know of) and sure, and 80G HD would be nice, but I think I can live with 40G. Doug's mod of the R4 is $1000, and of the pro is $2000. Can anyone out there make an argument for the pro? I want to run Nak 300s straight into the machine with no pre, possible/hopefully runing 3 or 4 mics. I'm pretty old school with my rig- I'm not much of a computer person, but have been able to learn what I need to know fairly easily. Nick's review of the R4 solidifies my research, but I just want to be sure that I'm not missing some awesome feature of the pro.
Thanks in advance,
Marisa

[BayTaynt3d]

I'd call doug. I think I've actually heard him say he prefers the sound of his modded R4 vs. his modded R4 Pro, but don't quote me on that, call him. If you don't need any of those other features, as a stock R4 owner, I think you'd be fine. The sens knobs on the pro vs. the mic/line switch on the R4 might be one difference worth noting. You've essentially got more adjustment on the pro in that regard (vs. a 20db pad that's either on/off on the R4), and you've got that control on a per-channel basis I think (on the R4 chans 1+2 and 3+4 are linked, so two chans padded or not at a time). Not sure about phantom either, but on the R4 phantom is linked for 1/2 and 3/4. On the R44, phantom is selectable individually on each channel, not sure about the Pro in that regard though.

[spcyrfc]

if your not much of a computer person (and you dont need the software in the r4) you might want to consider the R-44.  the newer, smaller version of the R4.