Topic: Microtracker vs Edirol R-1

[pfife]

I hear the difference between 16 and 24 bit.   I don't hear the difference between 44.1 and 48 when in 16 bit.   People have stated here before though that there is an audible difference between 44.1 and 48 when in 24 bit.

[WiFiJeff]

Here a some size comparisons:

Jeff

[silentmark]

Don't you have to upsample the R1's 24/44.1 to 48 for listening purposes ? I know nothing about the 24 bit world, but will in the future, another reason I am still torn between the MT and the R1. As of right now I am leaning towards the R1 ...

[zowie]

 No way an R1 could pass as an mp3 player, except maybe [. . .] an audiophile tube mp3 player! 

Hilarous.  Play compromised compressed files through a glass bottle and charge $1400 for the player and you open up a whole new market. Sam Telig can write that he bought five of them.

[MattinSTL]

+T Blackmikito... you layed it out pretty good there. I'm an oddball on this forum 'cause I'll never go stealth even one time... I'm looking at this stuff to do audio for video and it'll be right on my hip, so size isn't really an issue for me.

I'm a total loss as to why it won't do 48 though? Is that harder to engineer? Even 16/48 seems normal...

EDIT: Could one of you give me an experienced opinion on choosing either an MixPre>R1 or else the ACM 660? I'm talking absolute sound quality. The R1 can even be 24bit. Which do you think will result in the cleanest recording of voice?

[blackmikito]

I'm pretty sure that the reason the Edirol lacks 48khz is because it's not at all intended for any kind of "pro" market, much less tapers. It's more intended for musicians and the general home studio buyer. Which probably explains why it's so user-friendly.

I'm guessing the 24bit inclusion is because most things are running or promoting 24 bit these days, especially Edirol products, whereas the average consumer isn't really looking at anything higher than 44.1khz (not to mention most probably don't even know what that means, besides the phrase "Cd quality").  In this day and age of mp3s, I think plenty of people are only becoming somewhat more aware of bitrates and how they affect the quality of the sound.  But apart from audiophiles and pro video/audio guys, I think 48khz is a ways off from being the mainstream (dvd-a is just beginning to takeoff).  Not to mention that it seems to have been overshadowed by the 96khz bug everyone seems to have, which I think is simply because everyone now has the idea of it being "the best".  Not too long ago 24 bit was "the best", but now that goal has already been achieved, we've all pretty much forgotten it. 

For anyone who's been going over this whole MT vs. R-1 vs. Marantz thing, don't lose track of how far this technology has come and how much farther it will likely be going: Something better will be coming along just around the corner.  Unlike the Sony DATs or the MDs, this technology has SO much more potential. Not just from a size perspective, but from a quality perspective. Whereas Tascam and Sony were the original makers of some of the most common units back in the day, today we have Edirol (Roland), M-Audio, Digidesign, Grace, and tons of other "new guys" who have yet to even step up to the plate with their own products.  This technology will just keep getting better and better. As for now, I think I find it premature to blow $400 on a product that doesn't work. Why not save the money and wait 9 months for the next piece of gear to come along, or instead buy a product that works. 

My current thought is that the price of these things is only going to stay so low for so long. Now that the R-1 and MT have started at the $400 range, I'm not so sure we'll be seeing too many more recorders at this price point.  I assume that they can only go up from here. We already know the Sonosax is going to be priced outrageous, but I'm betting you're going to start seeing the development of palm-sized multitrack recorders with way more features and much higher quality design.  Perhaps we might find out in the future that these current recorders were as cheap as they're gonna get. 

[madman]

Blackmikito, or there's always the option of buying what's out now, selling it later and again upgrading to the latest and greatest.  That's what geeks do best!

[MattinSTL]

I may be a geek... but I'm a poor geek... so I gotta' stick with proven choices. I cancelled my MT today and I'm going to decide between MixPre> R1 or ACM 660 or stock 671.

So now we're down to 3.

[zowie]

I may be a geek... but I'm a poor geek... so I gotta' stick with proven choices. I cancelled my MT today and I'm going to decide between MixPre> R1 or ACM 660 or stock 671.

So now we're down to 3.

Just curious -- why isn't the R-4 in contention.  Price?

[MattinSTL]

Yeah I like the R4, but a 671 would be maxing me out. That's why I said I'd get either the ACM 660 from Doug or else a STOCK 671 from Doug... that way I could always send the 671 back to him later and pay for the mods when I have more cash.

Otherwise I would have said "modded 671" in the showdown.

[blackmikito]

For me, it's the size of the R-4, which is probably due to the fact that they made the box to be a "fully loaded" recording studio.
But, since I'm only ever going to be taping to 2 track stereo, with 2 mics, and I'm mainly going for stealth, considering the R-4 would be in the same ball park as considering computer notebook taping. I've already got the computer, so I would only need to add a nice pre/ad in front. But, again, that would be if I was open-taping, which I don't normally do.   

I'm guessing that if Marantz could've made their units smaller, they would've. Same with Edirol. Perhaps what we're seeing with the MT is an effort to force as many things together that, although they would all be great to have in one unit, can't really fit in a unit that size yet. Already, in the other threads, the talk has resorted to "well, it's okay that it only gives 30v phantom, since I was going to be running a pre in front" and "the inputs are really snug, so I've gonna shave the case down a little around the inputs to make them fit."  I don't know if it's polishing a turd or squeezing blood from a stone.  I applaud the efforts nonetheless, cuz I was looking forward to this thing being the bee's knees too. But c'mon...there is only so much firmware can fix. 

[MattinSTL]

So blackmikito... I don't know if you can venture an educated/experienced opinion for me... but what do you think... MixPre > R1 or ACM modded 660?

Anyone else wanna' throw down an opinion between JUST those two?

[Evil Taper]

OAde said I'd have my R1 on tuesday but it's not even shipped yet....wtf

[blackmikito]

So blackmikito... I don't know if you can venture an educated/experienced opinion for me... but what do you think... MixPre > R1 or ACM modded 660?

Anyone else wanna' throw down an opinion between JUST those two?

The main con I see in the ACM 660, although I’m sure that it’s a fantastic unit, is that the advanced concert mod removes the ability for the recorder to do line-in, in favor of maximizing the xlr inputs. Which means, that using a separate pre in front wouldn’t be an option and you would have to put all of your faith into the sound and performance of the unit.  Compared to the R-1, which has a useless mic input, but does have a clean line-in, you have the flexibility to use the pre of your choice or even go straight line-in. 

As well, with the R-1 you maintain the ability to use the unit for other recording uses at shows, like daisy-chaining onto someone else’s rig, or board patching.  And if you also have the separate pre, you maintain the ability to use that separately as well, either for home-studio use or as a front-end to laptop taping.  And, should other newer recorders like the MT start coming out, that lack a decent or comparable pre to the one you already have, you still have the flexibility to switch out the recorder and keep your pre.  Or if a new and better pre comes out, you can switch that out too and keep the recorder.

Price-wise, even though the ACM 660 at $709 is cheaper than a combo R-1 + Pre rig at $1000-$1300, with the R-1/pre rig you maintain the ability to purchase them one at a time, with the R-1’s $400 price tag a little easier to bear for us not-so-rich types, and you still have a fully useable and excellent unit by itself.

Lastly, the Marantz unit is too large.  I could easily fit the R-1 (or DAT) and a similar sized pre into a show, but I really don’t think I could squeeze the Marantz down there, even without mics.  But, I think that the size issue would be the only one mentioned that wouldn’t matter for open tapers.

Oh yeah, and the R-1 does 24 bit, 660 only does 16 bit.  660 uses 4 AA batteries, R-1 uses 2.

[MattinSTL]

Thanks for all the input guys... 99.999% of you are a real asset to the community.

Thanks to everybody who contributed in this thread and the others which discussed the "final four" as I'd call them.

I'm an open taper... as open as it gets actually. I'm the guy with the ton of shit strapped around my neck and fiddling with knobs in a bag full of stuff facing up at me.

After a lot of consideration my rig will be stock 671 fed line-in by an FP24... and I'm done for now. That broke the bank.

By the way... BRAND NEW FP-24 for $450! (how about THAT deal?) Follow my ebay link to the last one before it's gone.