Topic: Sony PCM-M10 or the Olympus LS-11

[MikeMannZ]

I'm not a technical person, so can't provide frequency courves. But what I can say from the LS-10 and the LS-11, first hand, is this:

- Sound of the LS-10 was thin, good for speech, music had to be equalized.
- Sound of the LS-11 is full and has wonderful bass, but is also nice in the highs, both from internal mics, and mic-in. speech is clear and deep, music doesn't have to be post processed. It's the deciding difference to the LS-10. But I understand if you don't believe, and wait until somebody can provide the graphs to prove... it's just my ears :-)

I guess it's just hard for me to accept Olympus as a pro audio company.  There are a ton of audiophiles here and not a whole lot about the ls-11.  I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like it's an option for most serious recorders.

[Ozpeter]

The M10 mics tend to cause mid to low frequencies to "clump" in the middle - it cannot produce a stereo image of those frequencies as the mics are omnidirectional down there (thus the angle of the mics in the recorder casing makes no difference) and the spacing between them isn't enough to produce a image based on time-of-arrival clues for the ear.  At higher frequencies, the mics are more cardioid and thus there's more of a stereo image up there.  Personally I'll be routinely post-processing my M10 recordings along the lines I've posted with samples in the other thread.

All of which doesn't really help with comparing with the LS-11 as I haven't got one!

I suspect that almost any of these small recorders' built-in-mic recordings would sound better with a bit of post production.

[MikeMannZ]

The M10 mics tend to cause mid to low frequencies to "clump" in the middle - it cannot produce a stereo image of those frequencies as the mics are omnidirectional down there (thus the angle of the mics in the recorder casing makes no difference) and the spacing between them isn't enough to produce a image based on time-of-arrival clues for the ear.  At higher frequencies, the mics are more cardioid and thus there's more of a stereo image up there.  Personally I'll be routinely post-processing my M10 recordings along the lines I've posted with samples in the other thread.

All of which doesn't really help with comparing with the LS-11 as I haven't got one!

I suspect that almost any of these small recorders' built-in-mic recordings would sound better with a bit of post production.

I'm actually OK with mid to low frequencies to "clumped" in the middle as long as there present and accounted for.  If I ever want to achieve better stereo separation I'll use better microphones.  I guess I'm just mainly concerned with good bass response and a solid reliable recorder which is sounding more an more like the m10.   

[jboyzh]

I guess it's just hard for me to accept Olympus as a pro audio company.  There are a ton of audiophiles here and not a whole lot about the ls-11.  I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like it's an option for most serious recorders.

Olympus is strong in other sectors (medical stuff, optics...), right, but not having a name in pro audio doesn't mean they're not capable of building something that delivers in this sector as well.

If tons of audiophiles would come up with good arguments against the LS-11, I'd probably have to agree, but as long as the arguments simply are missing, I keep trusting my own ears, which are not too shabby either.

My actual view from all I've read, and heard, is that the M10 and the LS-11 are much closer sound wise than what this forums post count would make me believe.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

My actual view from all I've read, and heard, is that the M10 and the LS-11 are much closer sound wise than what this forums post count would make me believe.

Good sounding internal mics are neat, but not important to a lot of us here.

I'm sure a lot of us are waiting for an actual live source comp with great mics and a great pre-amp.   A comp with the v3's a/d is excellent because it solves a lot of problems that come up with other comps, and a lot of us are familiar with it.

[rjp]

I have an LS-10, and I feel they missed the mark with the internal mics - they definitely need a bass boost in post. If the LS-11 really fixes that, great - but if I run out and buy a new recorder, it's probably going to be something that provides P48 and XLR mic inputs like a PMD-661.

Considering guysonic's report of the bass rolloff on the LS-10 mic-in, my pair of SP-TFB-2 binaurals must be obnoxiously bass-heavy with a flat-response input. With the LS-10, however, they sound just right (provided I take care to avoid the EMI from the display, but that's a different rant). Maybe my ears have just the right shape for the mics. I haven't managed to test another LS-10 to see if the EMI problem is unique to my recorder or not.

When I first used the SP-TFB-2 mics, I was using the same EQ that I used for the internals. I didn't realize that was a bad idea until I switched my main listening headphones from Grado SR-60 to Beyerdynamic DT 770 Pro/80. Then I realized that the bass boost was a really bad idea, especially with pipe organs. I went back and remastered the recording without the EQ, and the problem was solved.

I'd love to try the LS-10 with a Littlebox preamp. I've used my E-MU 0404 USB audio interface as an impromptu analog preamp with a set of AKG Perception 170 cardioids and the line input, and the sound is great - but a Littlebox would be better from the portability standpoint. A Littlebox with a 1/4"-20 camera mounting stud would rock - I could just attach the LS-10 to it.

[chrise]

I guess it's just hard for me to accept Olympus as a pro audio company.  There are a ton of audiophiles here and not a whole lot about the ls-11.  I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like it's an option for most serious recorders.

Are you specifically searching for LS-11 ?  I have a feeling many people bought the LS-10, which is an excellent piece of kit.  The new LS-11 is similar, and offers little incentive to upgrade, which may partly explain why you don't find much LS-11 stuff on the net. 

If you want to know how the LS-11 might perform in real usage, you may want to search for LS-10, as most of the same applies.  I suspect there's a lot of people out there that like it.

[MikeMannZ]

Olympus is strong in other sectors (medical stuff, optics...), right, but not having a name in pro audio doesn't mean they're not capable of building something that delivers in this sector as well.

If tons of audiophiles would come up with good arguments against the LS-11, I'd probably have to agree, but as long as the arguments simply are missing, I keep trusting my own ears, which are not too shabby either.

My actual view from all I've read, and heard, is that the M10 and the LS-11 are much closer sound wise than what this forums post count would make me believe.

Olympus is a strong company, but this is their first endeavor at a pro audio piece of gear.  Sony has been at the game for years.  I'm not looking for arguments against the LS-11, I'm looking for the better machine of the two.  I was actually hoping someone here would bring a strong case for the Olympus besides the basic features.  My personal opinion from listening to samples from both units is that the Sony and Olympus sound very different.  How couldn't they?  The use different microphones.

Good sounding internal mics are neat, but not important to a lot of us here.

I'm sure a lot of us are waiting for an actual live source comp with great mics and a great pre-amp.   A comp with the v3's a/d is excellent because it solves a lot of problems that come up with other comps, and a lot of us are familiar with it.

If you call Sony or Olympus and ask them what was their target market with both of these products (which I did) the answer....Musicians.  A musician like myself is always going to be interested in the best sound quality from the unit as a stand alone device.  Most musicians already have way to much to carry around.  Being able to get a quality recording by pulling out the recorder and hitting rec is going to make the difference between buying one unit or another.  Do I have an interest in bringing this out into the field for recording other bands?  Definitely !, But first and foremost I want it to work well just as a standalone unit.

Are you specifically searching for LS-11 ?  I have a feeling many people bought the LS-10, which is an excellent piece of kit.  The new LS-11 is similar, and offers little incentive to upgrade, which may partly explain why you don't find much LS-11 stuff on the net. 

If you want to know how the LS-11 might perform in real usage, you may want to search for LS-10, as most of the same applies.  I suspect there's a lot of people out there that like it.

I've searched for ls10 and 11.  There is a lot of examples and reviews on the net for the 10.  The 11 not so much.  One repeating comment is the thinness of the sound.  I know there are tons of folks that are very happy with their Olympus, I just think that it may not have anything on the Sony.  I really believe after reading multiple theads here that the Sony is a better machine and I actually think most people would opt for the Sony.

Mike

[fmaderjr]

I know there are tons of folks that are very happy with their Olympus, I just think that it may not have anything on the Sony.  I really believe after reading multiple theads here that the Sony is a better machine and I actually think most people would opt for the Sony.

I agree 100%. I think from all that's been written that it should be fairly obvious to anyone that the M10 is a better machine than the LS-10 and almost surely will be proven to be a better machine than the LS-11. In addition it costs significantly less than the LS-11. That's not to say that someone with an LS-10 or LS-11 will be unhappy with it, but if I were buying one now, I wouldn't even consider the Olympus machines.

[earmonger]

Using the PCM-M10, I recorded a rock band rehearsing in a small rehearsal room with the internal mics, probably about 110dB (or higher).  Bass, drums and everything else are clear and present, and there's a nice physical thud from the bass drum.

If you saved the extra $100 you'd spend for the LS-11 you'd be on your way to getting a nice pair of external mics, too.

Cardioids are directional, and inexpensive ones do lack bass. Omnis are...omni. If your band rehearses all facing in one direction, like a stage setup,  cardioids will work for you, but if you are set up in a small room facing one another, directional mics are going to change the mix. 

That said, I find Wingfield Audio very trustworthy, and their very high rating of the LS-11 is something to consider. If you listen to the noise-floor recordings at

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portable-recorder-noise.html#samples

the Sony sounds a little more natural to me (and quieter), while the LS-11 emphasizes the mids a bit more.  But they both sound good just for speech.

[MikeMannZ]

Using the PCM-M10, I recorded a rock band rehearsing in a small rehearsal room with the internal mics, probably about 110dB (or higher).  Bass, drums and everything else are clear and present, and there's a nice physical thud from the bass drum.

If you saved the extra $100 you'd spend for the LS-11 you'd be on your way to getting a nice pair of external mics, too.

Cardioids are directional, and inexpensive ones do lack bass. Omnis are...omni. If your band rehearses all facing in one direction, like a stage setup,  cardioids will work for you, but if you are set up in a small room facing one another, directional mics are going to change the mix. 

That said, I find Wingfield Audio very trustworthy, and their very high rating of the LS-11 is something to consider. If you listen to the noise-floor recordings at

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portable-recorder-noise.html#samples

the Sony sounds a little more natural to me (and quieter), while the LS-11 emphasizes the mids a bit more.  But they both sound good just for speech.

Thanks for the info on the M10.  I've spent many hours at wingfieldaudio and I agree with you on the noise floor.  Here's the thing.  The whole reason I started looking at the LS-11 is because I can get it for 300 (US dollars).  So the sony is a bit less...274.00.

Mike

[fmaderjr]

I don't get the value of the Wingfield audio test for those of us who record music and don't care much about recording speach. I wouldn't waste 5 minutes comparing mics on it. I'd rather hear samples and other tapers' opinions of these mics recording music, particularly loud music.

[MikeMannZ]

I don't get the value of the Wingfield audio test for those of us who record music and don't care much about recording speach. I wouldn't waste 5 minutes comparing mics on it. I'd rather hear samples and other tapers' opinions of these mics recording music, particularly loud music.

agreed

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I don't get the value of the Wingfield audio test for those of us who record music and don't care much about recording speach.

And on top of that, their methodology is poor.  As an example, they don't even disclose the gain settings.

And those other tests where they compare recorders with the gain set at max?  Those are a huge joke.

[Ozpeter]

And on top of that, their methodology is poor.  As an example, they don't even disclose the gain settings.

And those other tests where they compare recorders with the gain set at max?  Those are a huge joke.

Formal noise tests are usually made with max gain.  With most preamp designs, full gain is where you get the best signal to noise ratio.  That seems to run counter to our everyday experience, because when you turn up the gain of a preamp, you hear the most noise.  But for each dB of gain you add, you'll add more gain than noise.  So, in crude terms, if you measure S/N with gain half way up, then with the gain full up, you'll hear (say) twice as much noise at full gain, but the actual signal will be (say) 2.5 times louder - a better signal to noise ratio.