Topic: Should I keep my microtrack? Thinking about going back to minidisc.

[taper420]

Bought it almost two weeks ago.... tomorrow's pretty much the last day I can return it. What I like is 24 bit, digital in, and drag and drop uploading. What I don't like is no seamless split over 2 gigs, shitty analog components, and relatively expensive media. Also I've noticed dropouts or hiccups during playback (in the same spot), but these weren't there when looking at the wave on the computer. I have an ultralite with spidf out that works good with it as a medium/small size setup, so I don't have to drag the laptop along always. And I tried it out as a stealth setup without external preamp/ADC and it really wasn't all THAT bad. Not the greatest, but definitely doable.

My alternative is the RH1 HiMD recorder. I already have an rh10, so the new one would be for switching to seamlessly after the first one runs out (94 min). What I like about it is it'll work with my mac (unlike the RH10), the ADC is top notch, the media is pretty cheap and can be used as an archive of the original recording (unlike CF cards which you must erase and reuse), and I'll be able to upload my huge catalog of legacy md's finally. Things I don't like about it are it's 16 bit, it's not drag and drop, the ADC is 20 bit which means it will truncate the additional 4 bits from a 24 bit digital signal (which may not matter cause those bits are noise anyway?), yet I do think it applies dither when going down from 20 to 16. Also the 1 gig limit is a pain, but not so much since I'll have two recorders. And I guess the only other thing would be the need for an external preamp (not usually a problem) because the preamp on the MD clips way to early and is unusable in my opinion (where as the one in the MT is at least usable). Also, it only accepts optical digital input, and my ultralite uses spidf so I'd need to use a co2, or my traveler if I wanted to run digital in.

Gotta make a decision quick, like I said, tomorrows the last day I can return it. I'm kinda bumming about having to get rid or these $150 worth of CF cards (which I don't think can be returned), but I am looking forward to uploading these hundreds of legacy md's from my early days of taping.

What do you guys think?

[powermonkey]

I've not used a microtrack, but is the lack of a seamless file split not something that is likely to be resolved by a future firmware update?

[Javier Cinakowski]

because the preamp on the MD clips way to early and is unusable in my opinion

I found the Hi-MD's preamp to be very usable.  (low-sen setting)  I have not had any brickwalling problems or distortion.  I recorded some fairly loud concerts (not metal).  With the thing set to low sensitivity, I have pulled some really nice tapes.    The preamp stage is fine and the ADC is great. 

That being said, I ditched the Hi-MD format because I hate Sonic Stage and 1GB is just not enough.  Now if the Hi-MD was 3GB discs with drag and drop, nothing could touch it...

[taper420]

I wrote to them and I've read some threads here... it seams like it can't be fixed. I made three suggestions how they could make it so, and most if not all of them we're not technologically possible. The MT stores data in a 2gig buffer and then writes this to the card when you stop recording. I suggested two mono files instead of one stereo because I assumed the 2 gig limit had something to do with the 2 gig .wav limit.... but it's not...it's due to their buffer (which was probably designed with foreknowledge of the 2 gig .wav limit.). So while splitting to mono would allow us to get twice the record time in a single .wav file, it doesn't matter because the size of the buffer is the size of the buffer, and I assume it's not designed to read and write at the same time. One possible solution I suggested was giving us a manual seamless split option before the limit is reached...but somehow I don't think this is possible or it would have been done already. I forget my third suggestion, but I believe it was equally as hopeless. It doesn't seam like this seam is going to be fixed.

[Roving Sign]

I've not used a microtrack, but is the lack of a seamless file split not something that is likely to be resolved by a future firmware update?

If you follow some of the threads - it seems like this request has been made since the device was introduced, and not addressed in any of the firmware revisions. Seems like the general consensus is that its not going to happen...?

I'm reconsidering the Microtrack - but the 2gb issue is irksome. The 2 gig limit seems to make 24/96 slightly impractical - perhaps a minor inconvenience that you can work around - but I can see it being a hassle - just like a tape flip...take your eye off the ball for a second - and yer screwed...

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I've not used a microtrack, but is the lack of a seamless file split not something that is likely to be resolved by a future firmware update?

Given how much time has passed and how long we've been asking, it seems clear that M-Audio is NOT going to provide seamless split.. Or even the basic work-around of recording dual channel mono (where you'd have two mono files, each up to 2GB in size).

If digi in wasn't important, I'd suggest an r09.

[Todd R]

Personally, I'd keep the MT -- if only because there is no way I'd go back to real-time transfers (still required with MD right?).  Plus to do a good transfer with MD, you need a digital out MD.  Way back, no portable/field MD players had digital optical out, so it required a separate home-stereo sized MD player with optical out just to do the real time transfers digitally.  All of which to me is way too much of a pain, though I'm not sure all this holds true in your case/these days.

As to the 2Gig limit on the MT, to compare apples to apples, the HiMD only does 16/44.1k wav, right?  At 16/44.1, the MT can get about 3 hours and 25 minutes of record time.  That really makes the 2Gig limit pretty much a non-issue for 16/44.1.  I know the 2G limit is a much bigger deal at 24/48 or 24/96, but since the hiMD can't do that, it seems to me you'd be better off making the comparison of what each can do at 16/44.1, and then deciding.  If you need to record for 3 hours straight with the MT, record at 16/44 and you're no worse off than the HiMD.  If you only need to record up to 2 hours, record 24/48 on the MT, and you've done better than would've been possible with the MD.

[bgalizio]

If digi in wasn't important, I'd suggest an r09.

[Roving Sign]

Personally, I'd keep the MT -- if only because there is no way I'd go back to real-time transfers (still required with MD right?).  Plus to do a good transfer with MD, you need a digital out MD.  Way back, no portable/field MD players had digital optical out, so it required a separate home-stereo sized MD player with optical out just to do the real time transfers digitally.  All of which to me is way too much of a pain, though I'm not sure all this holds true in your case/these days.

I think he's talking HiMd - which I think now has drag/drop transfers - and - will read and transfer old ATRAC MD discs

[dkarDaGobert]

Personally, I'd keep the MT -- if only because there is no way I'd go back to real-time transfers (still required with MD right?).  Plus to do a good transfer with MD, you need a digital out MD.  Way back, no portable/field MD players had digital optical out, so it required a separate home-stereo sized MD player with optical out just to do the real time transfers digitally.  All of which to me is way too much of a pain, though I'm not sure all this holds true in your case/these days.

As to the 2Gig limit on the MT, to compare apples to apples, the HiMD only does 16/44.1k wav, right?  At 16/44.1, the MT can get about 3 hours and 25 minutes of record time.  That really makes the 2Gig limit pretty much a non-issue for 16/44.1.  I know the 2G limit is a much bigger deal at 24/48 or 24/96, but since the hiMD can't do that, it seems to me you'd be better off making the comparison of what each can do at 16/44.1, and then deciding.  If you need to record for 3 hours straight with the MT, record at 16/44 and you're no worse off than the HiMD.  If you only need to record up to 2 hours, record 24/48 on the MT, and you've done better than would've been possible with the MD.

Hi Todd
with the new hiMD-recorders its possible to upload the recordings directly with usb to the computer - the last himd-recorder (rh1/m200) can upload old records which are on normal MDs too!
So there´s no realtime transfering with a digital out / line-cable needed!

i´ve got the rh1 and the mt - and use my rh1 only as a portable player or as SBD-Backup!

I think he's talking HiMd - which I think now has drag/drop transfers - and - will read and transfer old ATRAC MD discs

the HiMDs doesn´t have really drag n drop transfers - u need to use the sonicstage software..
only the Sony MZ-RH1 can upload old atrac MDs!

[Todd R]

Oops, sorry, I guess I don't know much about HiMD.  I thought Sony kept everything MD crippled so we couldn't pirate music.

Nevermind.

[shaggy]

As to the 2Gig limit on the MT, to compare apples to apples, the HiMD only does 16/44.1k wav, right?  At 16/44.1, the MT can get about 3 hours and 25 minutes of record time.

with the rockboxed H1XX, you can get twice as long with lossless wavpack encoding!  But the AD is a bit shrill, better as a bit bucket....

[dunebug81]

I have the RH1 and I love it.  I can say its the best recorder I have ever used.  Small, excellent battery life, cheap media (even reuseable if you want to reuse it), uploads are MUCH faster then your RH10 not to mention being able to upload all your regular MDs.  For $300 you can't go wrong. 

I buy 1gb discs from a local shop here and they are the cheapest I've seen anywhere.  www.tapewarehouse.com Shipping prices are reasonable and if you're out of state you won't have to pay tax! 

Sonic Stage still has to be used but its not that bad.  The latest version 4.2 (I think) is pretty stable unlike previous versions.  They also just put out an update for Windows Vista if you are running that.  You said you have a mac and there is a Mac tool but I've never used it but i hear its pretty easy to use.

[busterr]

What I like is 24 bit, digital in, and drag and drop uploading. What I don't like is no seamless split over 2 gigs, shitty analog components, and relatively expensive media.
My alternative is the RH1 HiMD recorder. I already have an rh10, so the new one would be for switching to ??seamlessly?? after the first one runs out (94 min).

Here's my $0.02... Your first sentence in the quote is why I own a MT, a simple to use(w/ new fw), bit perfect device(using coax in) for about half the price of anything actually comparable. Yes, the non seamless split is not ideal, however running two md decks and monkeying around trying to line up your waves after the fact seems like more work than simply starting a new file during a song break. Why don't you just use your current md to fiil that gap if nessesary?. Also if you already have the cf cards you need, you are effectively done buying media, so i'm not real sure why that's an issue. As far as stealthing goes I find the random crowd intrusions that comes along with stealthing, far more annoying than a little analog noise from the internal pre's and whatnot.

Hope that helps, it just seems like you'd be taking a step backwards.(nothing at all against hi-md) Unless you have no interest in 24 bit I'd say keep the Microtrack, then maybe look into borrowing a hi-md that you can do your transfers with.

[Brian Skalinder]

What do you guys think?

I think you should sell your MT to me at a cut-rate price. 

[taper420]

What do you guys think?

I think you should sell your MT to me at a cut-rate price. 

I realize you're not too serious, but....

1. I can still return it for a full refund
2. I think I'm gonna keep it and
    a. deal with the 2 gig limit, and use my current rh10 for patching gaps when needed
    b. look for an rh1 to borrow for transfering my legacy md's or
    c. buy an rh1, transfer my md's, sell here for cut-rate price.
3. I already paid too much for the MT cause I needed it right away, bought it from J&R, B&H was closed for passover, didn't have a print out for price matching


on a similar but different note.... i mentioned in my first post that I've had dropouts while playing back the MT (with the latest firmware). What's scary is they occur in the same spot everytime. What's not so scary is it doesn't show up in the waveform once transfered to the computer. Anyone have similar experience? I already know it's not the media because it's happened at least once on each recording I've made, and I've used different media...one a sandisk ultra II and one a lexar platinum II

[cmoorevt]

on a similar but different note.... i mentioned in my first post that I've had dropouts while playing back the MT (with the latest firmware). What's scary is they occur in the same spot everytime. What's not so scary is it doesn't show up in the waveform once transfered to the computer. Anyone have similar experience? I already know it's not the media because it's happened at least once on each recording I've made, and I've used different media...one a sandisk ultra II and one a lexar platinum II

I've had an MT from the start and it has never been good on playback.   Something about the buffer I think.  Some of the earlier firmwares caused the playback to lock up after a period of time and this new one causes some dropouts.  Fortunately it is more of an inconvencience than anything else as it doesn't cause any problems with the file on the card.  I've never had a problem with any recordings that didn't play back correctly.

[busterr]

Yep what "cmoorevt" said.
If it only drops out while playing back on the MT itself and not on the computer, that is a relatively common issue. The older FW's caused more headaches regarding playback, but I imagine they can keep improving this w/ future updates.

Oh and by the way i think Brian was serious. 

[busterr]

Regarding J&R, you may want to consider bringing it in there(or call costomer service#) with some print outs and tell them you want a refund because you can get it cheaper elsewhere. My guess is since it's within 30 days they will still honor their price match policy(which is somewhat unclear from what I saw). It may put a few bucks in your pocket.
Good luck with whatever you end up doing though. 

[dunebug81]

c. buy an rh1, transfer my md's, sell here for cut-rate price.

When that happens let me know and I'll buy it.

Whats the lag time between stoping one file and starting to record a new one on the MT?  Surely its got to be faster then swaping MDs.  While the RH1 is faster then the RH10 it still takes a good 30 seconds or so.  Usually its not a big deal cause 95 min is longer then most shows i go see or at the very least they take an encore around the 80-90 min mark.

[taper420]

c. buy an rh1, transfer my md's, sell here for cut-rate price.

When that happens let me know and I'll buy it.

Whats the lag time between stoping one file and starting to record a new one on the MT?  Surely its got to be faster then swaping MDs.  While the RH1 is faster then the RH10 it still takes a good 30 seconds or so.  Usually its not a big deal cause 95 min is longer then most shows i go see or at the very least they take an encore around the 80-90 min mark.

I'll let you know, what's your offer...keep in mind I'll barely be using it.
It's quicker than any md recorder for sure...maybe 5 seconds....point is I would have two HiMD recorders so really the disc flipping would be moot. Of course there would be the pain of connecting the two files seamlessly as busterr024 pointed out, I've done it before, it's not too much trouble, but it is an extra step.

Yes there are shows I see where I would be fine with 95 mins, or even 115 mins, but there are definitely shows that wouldn't. When I started this hobby/obsession it was first with the legacy md recorders. That was back when we only had 82 mins. I quickly learned I needed two units to get a complete copy. So maybe I'm just conditioned into being paranoid about not having enough time. It's just so nerve-racking when you have ten minutes left and you don't know how long this next song/jam is going to be. I just want to be able to enjoy the show without worrying about that crap. But I digress, because I'm always going to have a backup running anyway, which can act as a patch in the event of catastrophic loss. So I guess the strengths of the MT really do outweight the RH1, especially since they're so close in price. I'll have my Rh10 rollin in the event that the set lasts longer than 115 minutes. I'm sticking with the MT.

Thanks all, would anyone care for some t?
+'s around.

[boojum]

I use my MZ-RH1 for live taping.  Few shows run 94 minutes a set so one disc will do a set.  The time required to swap discs is ~1 minute if you have to swap while the gig is still running.  Even a bad show will get a minute's pause with or without applause.  The upload is quick enough, from 1/2 to 1/4 to real time of the MD.  The pre-amp is a non-issue as for amp'ed music I got in through line-in.  For acoustic I use mic-in.  In either case I set the record level at 20/30 and make up the difference with ReplayGain on FLAC files that I make from the WAV files SonicStage creates from PCM.   All in all it is small, efficient, does a good job and the media is not expensive. 

The SONY SonicStage is still in some very bad language that causes it to be slow, but the uploads are not.  And, you can upload all your legacy recordings through the RH1 and save them as WAV's.  All in all, I like the SONY.  But I have always been a SONY whore.  In short: it does the job and it does it well.

B)

[Arni99]

I know some RH1 tapers who use HI-SP instead of PCM, so you get 7h56min on 1 HI-MD and the difference to PCM is not really a THAT huge AND HI-SP is accepted on DIME for trading if its 1st generation .
The HI-SP (ATRAC 256kbit/s) files get converted to WAV when transferred by sonic stage 4.3.

I don´t think I could separate the PCM and HI-SP files in a listening-test.

The RH1 is perfect for stealthing because when put in your left frontpocket u can easily check the manual recording level and adjust if needed. I have a hole inside my frontpocket where the cable goes to the line in of my recorder.

That´s hard with my rockboxed iriver h140 and the same problem with my edirol r-09.

 

[Arni99]

I just ran a test playing 1 song on my home-stereo
1.run: recording on my Edirol r-09 mic-in with my Sennheiser MM-HLSO-omnis
2.run: recording on my MZ-RH1 mic-in with my Sennheiser MM-HLSO-omnis

The MZ-RH1 recording sounds a lot better. WHY? It has less noise and the overall sound is really good...not as "iron-metal"-sounding as the Edirol´s.
I guess the internal preamp and A/D converter of the RH1 are superior to the Edirol´s.
Some reviews of the RH1 on the net show the RH1´s preamp is top notch.
One of the reviewrs wrote the RH1´s preamp is the best of nowadays recording devices up to 1000$.
I guess the same goes for the ADC.
Will use both devices for tonights open taping session and run both at 16bit 44.1kHz.
I can live with the 95min limit of PCM recording ...otherwise there would be NO excitement at all when taping and the display shows 9x minutes .

Correct me if I´m wrong but isn´t the microtracks preamp worse than the Edirol´s?

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I just ran a test playing 1 song on my home-stereo
1.run: recording on my Edirol r-09 mic-in with my Sennheiser MM-HLSO-omnis
2.run: recording on my MZ-RH1 mic-in with my Sennheiser MM-HLSO-omnis

Can you post some samples with the gain settings you used?

I've found home stereo volume is much lower than a live rock concert. So there is always the question of whether the extra gain required matches the real world case of the end user.  If you record quiet material without a pre-amp, those low volume tests are important. I've always found big differences between live material and recording the home stereo.  Especially when you get into how a particular pre-amp handles a muddy room vs. an outdoor situation, etc.

As far as comparing the A/Ds, you'd really need an external pre-amp and a live source.

[taper420]

As far as preamps go...
I've used my rh10's preamp once at a tDB show, plugged my sennheiser's right into the mic in (powered the mics on their own internal AA's instead of phantom)....put rh10 on low sensitivity, and set the levels for no clipping (not that the levels matter at all if you're clipping your preamp). There was major brickwalling. I think perhaps the MD preamps sound very good at low levels, but I can't use them for the stuff I normally tape. They even overload at band practice, so as far as I'm concerned they have no practical purpose (same is true for the MT as well). Now that I have a CA 9100 preamp (the size of a pack of cards), I wouldn't ever just use the preamp on the MD or the MT anyway.

As far as ADC goes, I know that the one on the HiMD is top notch. I'm pretty sure it's 20 bit as well, and dither's down to 16 when recording PCM. I believe it's at least as good if not better than the one in the Korg (yes it's one bit too), the only difference is it can't store it in the native 1 bit format. So actually I'm going to be very interested to see with some test in the future, if the quality of the himd's ADC, out weights the MT's 24 bit ADC. If that's the case, then you'd actually get a better sounding recording at 16/44, rather than at 24/44 (lets keep it at 44 so we don't get sonic issues with the SR)

[flintstone]

The preamp in the Hi-MD recorder is very good.  Sony doesn't report self-noise data for its minidisc machines.  A couple of attempts to measure the Hi-MD preamp self-noise arrived at figures around -115dBu.   Not stellar, but very creditable for a device that costs less than $300.  And considerably better than the competition at that price point.

Here's an article that describes one experiment to measure self-noise in the Hi-MD recorder
http://www.wildlife-sound.org/equipment/himd/himdmyths_meas.html

And here's an accompanying piece that describes the SPL that causes brickwalling in the Hi-MD at Hi-Sensitivity Mic In, Low-Sensitivity Mic In, and Line In.  My conclusion: Go Line In and keep a 20dB pad handy if you're recording at a loud venue.
http://www.wildlife-sound.org/equipment/himd/himdpklevels_meas.html 

Listening is believing.  Here's a link to a Quicktime movie that attempts to show how quiet the preamp of the Hi-MD recorder is, compared to the Microtrack and the Sound Devices 722. 
http://www.wildlife-sound.org/equipment/himd/himdlisten.html

These three web sources tested the Sony MZ-NH700, a first-generation Hi-MD machine.  There's no confirmation from Sony, but it appears that the same preamp design and components are used in all Hi-MDs.  One interesting note on the Nature Recordists list reports that the nice OLED display on the latest-and-greatest MZ-RH1 added a bit of hum to recordings.  The MZ-RH10 also has an OLED display.  Maybe the earlier designs are the best. 

One feature of the NH700 is that it uses a single AA cell rather than a proprietary "gumstick" battery.  Rechargeable AAs and Lithium AA work too.  The NH700's case has a bulge for the battery, which some people don't like.

It's hard to find a new MZ-NH700 these days.  It's a model that was sold in Asia and Australia.  The nearly identical MZ-NHF800 was sold in USA.  New and used models can be found on eBay.

Flintstone

[silentmark]

The 2 gig limit seems to make 24/96 slightly impractical - perhaps a minor inconvenience that you can work around - but I can see it being a hassle - just like a tape flip...take your eye off the ball for a second - and yer screwed...

It will start another file, just not seemless, I think you lose about 5 seconds ...

[powermonkey]

Is it possible to patch from the MT to minidisc, so that you could use the MD to cover the gap between the 2gig files? That probably sounds stoopid, I know, but at least you'd not be losing 5 seconds.

[mrsoul]

why not get 2 Hi-MD and hot-swap when you get to 94 minutes?  The Hi-MD will stay in pause record forever without pulling down the battery.  It's what I do.  Just cut out the swap (it's best between tunes) and you are good to go.

Now, I just sold my RH1 cause I found the proprietary Lithium ion battery a hassle (I had an extra battery too).  I prefer the RH910 with the AA sidecar.  I sold my RH10 to get the RH1 and feel like I made a bad decision.  The RH1's controls were just too small for my fingers.  It sounded good on playback, but I hardly ever use the MD for playback, mainly for recording and then transfers.  I am thinking about the R-09 but not 100% convinced.  Gonna wait to see what shows up this summer on the digital recorder scene.  In the meantime, it's me and the RH910 and a borrowed NH700 for the hot swaps...

Good thread!!!

[Javier Cinakowski]

WTF doesn't sony make an ATRAC lossless.   You would get about 160min of record time (if the codec is anyhting like the other lossless codecs).  That would have made the Hi-MD the shit!

[taper420]

Is it possible to patch from the MT to minidisc, so that you could use the MD to cover the gap between the 2gig files? That probably sounds stoopid, I know, but at least you'd not be losing 5 seconds.

That's what I've been planning on... haven't had a set run over 1:55 yet though.

why not get 2 Hi-MD and hot-swap when you get to 94 minutes?  The Hi-MD will stay in pause record forever without pulling down the battery.  It's what I do.  Just cut out the swap (it's best between tunes) and you are good to go.

That's exactly what I have been pondering doing.

But I've come to the conclusion that the MT is better suited for my needs. I still have the RH10 for patching at the 1:55 mark if I need it. One of my secondary uses for the MT is doing VO work, and uploading quickly for editing. The HiMD recorders can't compare to the drag and drop ease provided by the MT....and this makes a huge difference when working with my workflow. VO #1 > upload > edit, VO #2 > upload > edit, ect.

Thanks for all the responces though. +t's.... definitely helped me make my decision. Maybe someday I'll get these legacy md's archived.

[taper420]

WTF doesn't sony make an ATRAC lossless.   You would get about 160min of record time (if the codec is anyhting like the other lossless codecs).  That would have made the Hi-MD the shit!

They did.... unfortunatly too late to impliment in any of their hardware though (as of yet). It remains a (pretty much useless) method of archiving audio through the sonicstage program, but can only be played on your computer.

[Javier Cinakowski]

WTF doesn't sony make an ATRAC lossless.   You would get about 160min of record time (if the codec is anyhting like the other lossless codecs).  That would have made the Hi-MD the shit!

They did.... unfortunatly too late to impliment in any of their hardware though (as of yet). It remains a (pretty much useless) method of archiving audio through the sonicstage program, but can only be played on your computer.

Well, if they implement it into a new model of the HiMD, I am going to have a ton of gear to sell....

[dunebug81]

Is the sonic stage software the hard to use?  uploading stuff of the MD isnt much different then uploading something off the mt.

WTF doesn't sony make an ATRAC lossless.   You would get about 160min of record time (if the codec is anyhting like the other lossless codecs).  That would have made the Hi-MD the shit!

They did.... unfortunatly too late to impliment in any of their hardware though (as of yet). It remains a (pretty much useless) method of archiving audio through the sonicstage program, but can only be played on your computer.

Well, if they implement it into a new model of the HiMD, I am going to have a ton of gear to sell....

Ya that would be awesome.  Getting 3 hours on a 1gb disc and 1 hour on a 80min would be pretty nice.  I have not heard of any new HIMD models coming out this year but its still early and usually they are announced around may and released in july.

[taper420]

Is the sonic stage software the hard to use?  uploading stuff of the MD isnt much different then uploading something off the mt.

I'm on a mac so I would be dealing with the mac wav importer program, which is pretty straight forward. The sonicstage program isn't that bad either, just a little too big for doing simple importing. But either way, the MT's drag and drop is much faster. It copies over usb 2.0 from a flash card, which may even be faster than uploading from a harddrive. The only himd using usb 2.0 is the rh1, and it still doesn't reach the full potential of the connection, because of limitations in reading the disc (it is mechanical after all).

[JoeKiller]

If you are worried about expensive media, check this thread: http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,83458.0/topicseen.html

Also, for the 5-second split.  That is about right, 5 seconds for one file to the next.  Sucks but oh well.  I have lost seconds from an extended set due to this 'feature', off the top of my head, it was a pain at the Accoustic World Tour because they never stopped playing, just seagued through all three bands and then Antibalis went for a long set. 

[mrsoul]

I sold my RH1 last week thinking I was going to the new Zoom H2 or the R-09.  I think the RH1 is a cool MD but the controls and layout are not optimal for open taping.  I went ahead and bit on a used RH10 I saw on ebay.  (Should have been delivered today but the post man left a note to pick it up at the post office since nobody was home).  I sold my 1st RH10 to get the RH1 (should have kept the RH10!!!).  I really like that big OLED screen layout and the AA battery sidecar is a definite necessity, the lithium ions in the RH1 don't cut it for me, although I understand it helps make the line out option better.

So, I may still get the Zoom H2 when it hits the streets but I have 2 Hi-MD again and will probably stick with this setup until a 24 bit flash recorder with an ADC as good as the Sony Hi-MD, in the same price range with the necessary controls/power sources is available.  I have been with MD since 2003, I understand its limitations and its benefits.  Media is still relatively cheap and dependable.  I have mastered the issues with Sonic Stage (although I haven't had any problems since at least 3.x and it's not up to 4.3)

Until then, it's hot swap around 90 minutes and keep it rolling... 

RH910 in the day, RH10 when the lights go down...

[Arni99]

I sold my RH1 last week thinking I was going to the new Zoom H2 or the R-09.  I think the RH1 is a cool MD but the controls and layout are not optimal for open taping. 

I sold my Edirol R-09 last week because it´s not cool for stealth taping when it comes to checking levels. On the RH1 I always see the levels looking down to my frontpocket and I can easily adjust with my right hand leaving the RH1 inside the pocket.
Now I only need to get used to the 94min 55sec PCM limit .
Maybe fade in the 2nd part of the shows if some parts of a song get lost by changing HI-MDs.
Fade out the 1st part at 94min and fade in the beginning of the 2nd part, remembering the max in put level of course .

I still have my iriver H140 so I can easily avoid this issue .

[udovdh]

I sold my Edirol R-09 last week because it´s not cool for stealth taping when it comes to checking levels.

Level checking is for amateurs.

Indeed. One knows the recorder. One knows the venue/band. Set and forget.


What if the levels are too high/low during checking? (or at least you think they are) You adjust? And then, back at home?
You have half a recording? Or need to guess what adjustments you made where?

[Arni99]

I sold my Edirol R-09 last week because it´s not cool for stealth taping when it comes to checking levels.

Level checking is for amateurs.

Indeed. One knows the recorder. One knows the venue/band. Set and forget.


What if the levels are too high/low during checking? (or at least you think they are) You adjust? And then, back at home?
You have half a recording? Or need to guess what adjustments you made where?

maybe freelunch uses AGC or has been and still is taping the same band at the same venue for years and knows what level needs to be set in advance....

[bgalizio]

I sold my Edirol R-09 last week because it´s not cool for stealth taping when it comes to checking levels.

Level checking is for amateurs.

Indeed. One knows the recorder. One knows the venue/band. Set and forget.


What if the levels are too high/low during checking? (or at least you think they are) You adjust? And then, back at home?
You have half a recording? Or need to guess what adjustments you made where?

maybe freelunch uses AGC or has been and still is taping the same band at the same venue for years and knows what level needs to be set in advance....

Or just knows his gear well. I don't stealth, but I rarely need to change my levels during a show. I can pretty well set them before the band comes on and end up OK. I just know how my gear behaves and can generally anticipate the band/venue.

[Arni99]

I know that level 11/30 on line-in is a good starter for loud rock-shows;) with MY GEAR(RH1), nevertheless I check levels during the 1st song and then press the HOLD button and enjoy the show.