Topic: Edirol R-09HR - Part TWO

[Craig T]

not sure, but I thought I would help someone else out....

i do know that not all CF cards work in all decks, like my Marantz 671 will not work with the 16gb A-Data CF card

the r09 and r09hr use SD cards, not CF's.

[gmm6797]

not sure, but I thought I would help someone else out....

i do know that not all CF cards work in all decks, like my Marantz 671 will not work with the 16gb A-Data CF card

the r09 and r09hr use SD cards, not CF's.

I am aware, I am just making a comparison of decks and cards not always working together

[gmm6797]

I have the latest firmware, 1.04.

Took the card out of the package, formatted it in the R09hr and then hit record.... I will have to recharge the AA's and run another test over the weekend.

that is curious... I have 2 of those cards and I can't get them to reliably record 24/96.  They'll go for hours, then I'll randomly get the "slow card" error.  I've been able to fill it continuously at 24/96 a few times, but I'm not confident running it at 24/96 in the field.  Could you run a few more tests, but this time stop and restart recordings a few times along the way.  What firmware are you running?

[Gutbucket]

Just a reminder the line-in is free of this noise (and that on the HR mic-in, it is at a very low level, see guysonics graph above and so not audible under any circumstances I can find, including normalizing silence). As is clear the R09HR is far better overall than the R09 for mic-in specs that also include similar digi-noise.

I've been following the ongoing testing. Big thanks to all involved especially digifish and guysonic for the hard data. It seems it's been well established that despite the imperfections, the HR has improved mic-in performance.  Yet there is one thing I've wondered that hasn't been addressed directly and is frankly like a invisible purple elephant standing in the corner of the Taperssection clubhouse-

Is the R-09HR any better than the original R-09 recording a line-input at a conservative mid-range gain setting?
(when making a 24/48 or 24/44.1 recording on both machines with a conservative line-in gain setting of 13-17 on the R-09 and whatever the equivalent gain setting would be on the R-09HR)

[flintstone]

Looking at the graphs in Guysonic's reviews of the R-09 and R-09HR,
it looks to me like the two recorders' line in performance is about the same.

Edirol R-09   http://www.sonicstudios.com/r-09revw.htm
Edirol R-09HR   http://www.sonicstudios.com/r09hrrev.htm

Flintstone

[udovdh]

Hmmm..
Maybe we need same type of graphs for just the line inputs for R09 and R09HR to be able to compare well.

[bgalizio]

Just a reminder the line-in is free of this noise (and that on the HR mic-in, it is at a very low level, see guysonics graph above and so not audible under any circumstances I can find, including normalizing silence). As is clear the R09HR is far better overall than the R09 for mic-in specs that also include similar digi-noise.

I've been following the ongoing testing. Big thanks to all involved especially digifish and guysonic for the hard data. It seems it's been well established that despite the imperfections, the HR has improved mic-in performance.  Yet there is one thing I've wondered that hasn't been addressed directly and is frankly like a invisible purple elephant standing in the corner of the Taperssection clubhouse-

Is the R-09HR any better than the original R-09 recording a line-input at a conservative mid-range gain setting?
(when making a 24/48 or 24/44.1 recording on both machines with a conservative line-in gain setting of 13-17 on the R-09 and whatever the equivalent gain setting would be on the R-09HR)

By better do you mean less noise or better sound (or both)? I did a line-in comp a while back where I, and some others, preferred the R-09HR line-in sound. Didn't specifically measure noise, though, and I no longer have the R-09 for testing.

[Dede2002]

Just a reminder the line-in is free of this noise (and that on the HR mic-in, it is at a very low level, see guysonics graph above and so not audible under any circumstances I can find, including normalizing silence). As is clear the R09HR is far better overall than the R09 for mic-in specs that also include similar digi-noise.

I've been following the ongoing testing. Big thanks to all involved especially digifish and guysonic for the hard data. It seems it's been well established that despite the imperfections, the HR has improved mic-in performance.  Yet there is one thing I've wondered that hasn't been addressed directly and is frankly like a invisible purple elephant standing in the corner of the Taperssection clubhouse-

Is the R-09HR any better than the original R-09 recording a line-input at a conservative mid-range gain setting?
(when making a 24/48 or 24/44.1 recording on both machines with a conservative line-in gain setting of 13-17 on the R-09 and whatever the equivalent gain setting would be on the R-09HR)

By better do you mean less noise or better sound (or both)? I did a line-in comp a while back where I, and some others, preferred the R-09HR line-in sound. Didn't specifically measure noise, though, and I no longer have the R-09 for testing.

I remember your comp (thanks for that ). Well, I have both units. The R-09HR sounds way better than the R-09 ( which is great recorder BTW). I  only use Line In. R-09HR is warmer, has a beautiful tight bass and is more transparent. At this time, to my ears, the graphs really doesn't matter that much.

[Gutbucket]

Thanks for the opinions, that's what I was hunting for.  Were those comps posted earlier in this thread and are they still available?

[Dede2002]

Thanks for the opinions, that's what I was hunting for.  Were those comps posted earlier in this thread and are they still available?

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,104920.15.html

I think that this is what you're looking for.

[guysonic]

Hmmm..
Maybe we need same type of graphs for just the line inputs for R09 and R09HR to be able to compare well.

Here is the R-09 verses R-09HR LINE input noise plots at -35dB reference input gain using my own PA-3SX preamplifier set at highest 36dB gain. 



Both decks look virtually identical, but R-09HR seems to have more high frequency bandwidth a might be expected of a deck capable of 88.2K/96K recording mode.

[Gutbucket]

Ahh. Thanks to both of you.

[Dede2002]

Two samples.Opinions are more than welcome 

MM HLSO-1 Micro (Senn MKE 2) > BB > Edirol R-09HR
Line In 24/96 ( 16/41, Track and Normalize with Sound Studio)

Not exactly a venue, but a room for pocket shows ( 90 seated persons) on a big books/music megastore. No PA, just two guitar amps, one bass amp and a drum kit. In other words, my kind of place. Bass and drums in civilized volume. Guitar, not so much. I'm a guitar player. I know we just can't help ourselves when it comes to volume  . The guitar in the left channel almost screwed my left ear hearing.
Anyway, the (very small) stage is only 2 feet high and I was seated on the first row, like 3 feet from the stage lip, dangerously closed, considering the guitar amps they were using.

http://rapidshare.com/files/131221088/Track05.flac.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/131226150/Track07.flac.html

[matija]

hello
tryin to decide between R09HR and Tascam DR1..
I ve already checked some topics on tapersection, also google but no step further..
line-in looks kind of similar, what about the noise and sound of built-in mics?
some audio comparison?

thanks
m

[aysvideo]

Just bought the new Edirol R-09HR and now need to get a few cards for it.  Does anyone know if these are likely to work?  If so, you can't beat these prices.

http://www.supermediastore.com/pqi-sdhc-8gb-class-6-memory-card.html#description

http://www.supermediastore.com/apacer-8gb-class-6-sd-high-capacity-sdhc-memory-card.html

Also, is there some general rule of thumb to use in deciding what types of SD cards are suitable?  Thanks.