Topic: small mp3 players that record?

[Unitmonster]

Ok, my girlfriend wants to do soundscape recordings with a mini Sony stereo mic>? . I was thinking she should grab an mp3 player that records to kill 2 birds with one stone (replace her shitty discman).  Now, the JB3 is not what she needs. She doesnt' care about dropped samples and resampling, etc.  Just the ability to record something (probably doesn't even have to be in .wav format) and dump it onto her Mac easily, plus do a good job of regular mp3 playback.

I know the new IPod can record stereo, and the Archos Gmini. Any others? Thanks

[mfoley]

Try looking at the IFP 700 Series iRivers..... or the iAudio U2 series.....

[pgoelz]

Not sure what the model was, but I tried a recent iRiver that recorded.  Not too bad a machine.... it even had an undocumented feature that provided a plug-in-power mic input.  But you had to use their stupid software to talk to it and recordings got transferred to the PC with a .REC file extension.  Not a big deal.... they could be "converted" by the software to either WAV or MP3 (I forget which).   And it turned out that it was just the file extension that got changed, not the file itself. 

My current MP3 player is a Samsung YP-T6Z.  It records, and does not need software to talk to a PC.  Only trouble is that with a mic input the encoder apparently can't keep up with the incoming data and there are occasional pops and fuzz sounds.  Seems OK on a line in transfer.  Oh, and it runs for more than 40 hours on one AA alkaline cell. 

[Unitmonster]

thanks guys!

[BayTaynt3d]

Yeah, there's a ton of amateur wedding videographers using the iRiver 700 and 800 series super-portable mp3 players as substitutes for wireless lavs. I believe they can handle line or mic level inputs, have adjustable levels (not gain, probably attenuation), and encode to mp3 on the fly up to decent bit rates. Don't quote me on all of that, especially mic in, but I'm pretty sure. Also, my wife has a Creative Nano which is iPod shuffle-like small, but it only takes line-in and has no level control. Anyway, just some more ideas...

[mfoley]

I would take exception to the word "amateur"...as many of us "professional" wedding videographers use the 700 series irivers. :-)

Unitmonster,
Here is a quick primer we put together on our wedding and event forum for the use of the iriver: http://videouniversity.com/iriver.shtml

BTW, the new microtrack, although it may have some issues with the taper crowd, appears to be a welcome addtion to "our" world

[udovdh]

Archos Gmini 220.
Had a 2GB issue when I checked (a year ago or so).
The support could not believe someone would record that long (at 44.100/16)...
There was a Rockbox port going on. Slowly.

[Unitmonster]

Yeah, there's a guy selling an 80GB! 220 on ebay right now.  Might be the most affordable option. Will definately check out the Iriver line as well. Thanks again.

[BayTaynt3d]

I would take exception to the word "amateur"...as many of us "professional" wedding videographers use the 700 series irivers. :-)

Unitmonster,
Here is a quick primer we put together on our wedding and event forum for the use of the iriver: http://videouniversity.com/iriver.shtml

BTW, the new microtrack, although it may have some issues with the taper crowd, appears to be a welcome addtion to "our" world

Oops! So sorry... I hate these damn buckets we group people and tech into like consumer, prosumer, pro, and amateur.I guess I was just trying to distinguish between using iRivers and using a bunch of high end (aka expensive) wireless lavs, etc. But at the end of the day, that doesn't really distinguish between pro and amatuer -- as I'm sure people can get some great audio with the iRivers, while others could get crap audio with a $5K wireless rig. So, point taken. 

[Unitmonster]

It looks like it'll come down to the Archos 220 or the Iriver mini mp3s.  +Ts down the line.