Topic: Edirol R-09HR "vs" Sony PCM-M1

[reba_103194]

Hi, I have an M1 and was thinking of upgrading to the R-09HR.  Which "wins" in terms of pre-amp and A/D sonic quality?  (Assume both @ 44.1k/16bit)

Clearly the R-09HR has many advantages (size, weight, media, features), but I'm wondering if the M1 would be regarded as having any sound quality advantage.

Background: I'm putting together a low profile rig and am wondering how worthwhile it is to get both a new deck and mics or if I should keep the M1 and just focus on mics and possibly a pre/battery box...

-- Thanks y'all --

    

[jlykos]

I have never used either of these units.  That said, jumping up to 24 bit recording in general entails a huge improvement in sound quality over 16 bit recording.  You can capture more of the music and the result is a wider and deeper soundstage with a much greater dynamic range.  It is not subtle.  I used a Microtrack initially and I could not get over the difference between that and my D8.

Why should we assume 16 bit for each?  Step up to 24 bit and there is no comparison.  I would get the R-09HR and upgrade the mics later for a low-profile setup.

[carpa]

I had a pcm-m1 and now I have a R09hr and I don't regret of the choice.
It is difficult for me to compare the two things as I had the sony till three years ago, and only now I have the Edirol. Then I used the Sony pcm m1 with a sony ecm 979 stereo mike, which is now broken and so I'm using Edirol's internals  (absolutely not bad but not comparable to a good external microphone) waiting to buy something.
As far as I can remember the Sony preamps were quite good and the sound was clean. After selling the pcm m1 I have recorded with the same mic into a presonus inspire 1394 then into my laptop, and I wouldn't tell so much difference in the results.
With my Edirol I only tried a Shure vp88; this mic has a pretty high self noise floor (24 db)  and very low sensitivity, but nevertheless this I didn't notice appreciable noise in recording a piano with r09's mic input at 60 gain (low sensitivity mode).
This makes me think that Edirol's preamp, while certainly not stellar, are anyway not bad at all.
This is what I can tell just "by memory", and it is not even supported by technical know-how. Just a half-cent opinion.
c

[reba_103194]

-- Thanks for the advice so far --

For the comparison I said assume 44.1/16 in order to compare just the sonic quality of the analog internals + the A/D of the decks.  From what I've read it doesn't sound like the M1 is anything special in that department in light of today's technology, but I wanted to ask for your opinions.

Part of the reason for my question is that I don't have any mics yet, and want to keep this round of spending to around $1500 or less.  That could easily get spent on just a pair of mics and a pre/bb.

Based on how quickly new decks seem to have been coming out I just wonder if it makes any sense to stay with the M1 for my first 6 months and then upgrade to a new deck later in the year.  Especially if Sony were to come out with a smaller version of the D50.

Or just plunk down for the new deck now (following the maxim that TS is not a place to save money )?

[pjdavep]

I used to run a "Oade mod SBM-1 > PCM-M1" rig and my regular R-09 (prior to HR version) was undetectable by me as far as sound quality in the limited comparisons I tried.  I think gewwang did similar comparisons at a Black Crowes show and I could not tell a difference in the sound quality.  Given that the R-09HR is suppose to be an improvement over it's predecessor, and the ease of use of the R-09, I'd say it's a no brainer     Make the plunge!

Not only are there no moving parts in the R-09, you can be ready to record in about 5 seconds, and won't be running out of tape if you get a big enough SDHC card.

Later,
   pjdavep

[taperwheeler]

My .02...

Put the money into the mic/pre combo you want and for now, run the M1.  I imagine flash recorders will be making major advances in the near future.  Mics and pres, maybe not-so-much.  Obviously the jump to 24-bit will be a huge improvement but waiting a year or so, improving your front end now (mics/pre), and seeing what options in 24-bit flash recorders and price have down the road...I think sounds like a plan to consider.

Whatever you do, enjoy...

[dave570]

Go for the R-09HR.  I have a D8 which still works and moved to the R-09HR last year not regretting it. Not that the M1 isn't better than the D8, but I got tired of tape issues. I always thought I would never hear the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit because of hearing loss from the 70s (Tuna & GD). I was wrong. Get the pre-amp too, it helps with quieter music a lot. The R09HR eats less batteries than any DAT deck and can go for 5-6 hours with 2 Duracell Ultras. Taping in 24 bit at low levels eliminates the chance for distortion and then you can raise them on the computer when mastering. It takes me about 45-60 mins to master/track and burn cds of a show vs the 2-3 hours it used to take when I used DAT tapes.  Best of all, if you have a mini-jack input in the car you can drive home from the show and listen to it. I do that all the time now after shows.

Having said that, I will never sell my D8. It was prof cleaned by Pro-Digital in 2008 and will always be a memorable part from my past. Keep the M1 for back-up purposes or if you want 2 different versions of the same show in case you or the taper you are patched into has issues.

[reba_103194]

I'm sold.

After I decided to stick with miniature mics, my budget is looking do-able for even some of the more expensive mini-mics, a pre/bb, and a R-09HR.  I will probably keep the M1 for backup purposes as well; I agree it is a good idea to have in case anything happens to the 09HR or for having 2 sources of a show...   

Looking forward to it - thanks everyone.

  

[Belexes]

I have kept my old M1 and a brick of sealed tapes.  Great for a backup and there really isn't much value in the resale market for the old Sony portables anymore.

[Mike R.]

My .02...

Put the money into the mic/pre combo you want and for now, run the M1.  I imagine flash recorders will be making major advances in the near future.  Mics and pres, maybe not-so-much.  Obviously the jump to 24-bit will be a huge improvement but waiting a year or so, improving your front end now (mics/pre), and seeing what options in 24-bit flash recorders and price have down the road...I think sounds like a plan to consider.

Whatever you do, enjoy...

I've pretty much come to the same conclusion.  I just ordered a mix-pre.  The digital recorders are moving so fast right now I think I can wait a bit and let another round of product development come out.  The mix-pre will run into a PMD-660, I guess bypassing all the good work Doug Oade did to it.

[nak700s]

I am currently using an M1 and love it.  The only drawback is the length of tape and that usually isn't a factor.  The R-09 has many advantages but the size of the screen is a huge let down for me.  Honestly, the biggest bonus of using any flash recorder, in my opinion, is that you can quickly transfer it into a computer (such as CD wave) for editing and then burn it to CDs.  That process has to be done in real time with the M-1.  I have only used the R-09 once in the field and the results seem fine.  I haven't had the chance to track and burn the CD yet, but I uploaded it onto my hard drive right away, that was nice!

I would personally recommend waiting on the recorder and focus on the mics.  It seems that your mic situation is the weakest link and should get the attention first.  As you said, there are many new recorders hitting the market now and it won't be long until something comes out that you won’t have to question.  Personally, I'm waiting for a flash recorder the size of the M-1 or smaller that will have individual right and left recording adjustments.  Patience is a virtue.  Your deck is fine and doing a great job, get some great mics now.

Also, you are right to compare apples with apples.  When comparing the —1 with anything else you should use 16 bit.  Keep in mind what you will be doing with your recording.  Will you be listening to it on your computer, burning it to a CD, DVD or something else.  I use CDs, so I record in 16 bit.  You have to determine what you want to do before you determine what equipment is best for you based on its features and recording capabilities.

Hope I’ve helped 

[bonghitwillie]

i used an m-1 for about 8 years.  alot of tape past through those heads.  it started getting a little funky.  occaisionally doing the thread/unthread thing when starting to record.   plus the rewind did not work to well.  and when an m-1 goes bad, it cannot really be fixed. i got an r-9 in jan 2008 and have not looked back.  i use 8g sdhc and 2400mah batts.  you can record 24/48 non stop for 7.5 hrs!  no tape change.  no batt change.  almost no problems.  and i have recorded alot of shows.  the unit is delicate.  i am very careful with the jacks and batt cover.  i also have the r-9 rubber condom for it.  so i have had no mechanical problems.  i think the physical design has changed with the hr version.  the r-9 has inputs on the top.  i use a right angle plug and a broccoli (mafia money clip) rubber band to hold it in place.  the rubber band goes around the top of the plug and then completely around the r-9, top to bottom.  one of the best aspects of the r-9 is that you can start recording before you enter the venue and keep recording after you leave.  it still feels a little weird not having a tape back up of what you record.  i recomend using two hard drives to store shows on, in case one fails.

[fmaderjr]

I use CDs, so I record in 16 bit. 

You should read the many posts here about the advantages of 24 bit recording even if you're going to convert to 16 bit for listening. The principal one is that you can record at a much lower level (say peaking around -12 or even lower), giving yourself plenty of headroom to avoid the chance of clipping. Then you can boost in post without adding audible noise. You really should look into this. It's a lot more fun recording when you don't have to be constantly worrying about your levels.

I made a lot of good recordings with an Oade modded TCD-100, but maintenance was very costly. Every year or 2 I'd start getting dropouts and it would cost $200+ at Pro Digital to bring it up to speed. Paul said there are tiny plastic gears in there that can go even when you're not using the machine. Solid state (or hard drive) recorders are much more reliable IMO.

[nak700s]

Yeah, I get that.  I've only had one problem with my M1, but it was at a really bad time and it cost me a show.

As far as recording in 24 bit is concerned, I do plan on experimenting with that when I graduate to a flash recorder.  I'm loving the new Tascam DR-100, but want to wait until its been out a while to properly evaluate its performance.

[fmaderjr]

I'm loving the new Tascam DR-100, but want to wait until its been out a while to properly evaluate its performance.

Always a great idea to wait until others have reported on all the +'s and -'s. I grabbed a Zoom H4 when it first came out (plus a bunch of Sound Pro's accessories that brought the cost to nearly $500) without waiting for reports. Huge waste of money. Will never do that again.

You'll love 24 bit recording with a flash recorder when you make the plunge. I love not having to sweat my levels anymore as well as the high speed transfer to the computer.