Topic: Digital recorder wishlist wanted

[capnhook]

I If I was paranoid, I'd buy an external battery pack with replaceable AA cells and plug it into the DC jack. That way you're always prepared, without sacrificing valuable real estate in the main recorder unit.

I'm not so much "paranoid" as I am "cheap"......how 'bout manufacturers supplying that external AA battery pack??   

[spyder9]

Thanks for the input. but I'm talking about a true P48 unit, not the usual handheld.  Take another look at the DR-100 and you'll know what I mean.    

4 AA batteries with longer recording time.

I'm in the stealth camp, and maybe a minority here, but I see no advantage having a huge internal AA battery bay.
Also, consider that AA batteries are NiMH at best, which has a lower energy density than rechargeble flat Li-Ion/Li-poly cells.
As long as the battery stick is field-removable, I see no disadvantages with semi-proprietary flat lithium cells. They are smaller and last longer  - compared with the same cubic footprint of AA cells.
You can find generic third party batteries and chargers for pretty much every brand on the market. As long as Tascam would stay with any reasonably established form factor, you can get backup batteries for a few bucks:
http://photography.shop.ebay.com/Cameras-Photo-/625/i.html?_catref=1&_dmd=1&_fln=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_ssn=buyitnowhk&_trksid=p3911.c0.m282

I've heard the arguments that AA can be found anywhere if you get stuck, and it's easier to stock up with AAs for a festival, but I'm not buying that as an argument to have an internal AA bay.

I've ran maybe 100 shows with my Iriver, and never once had a battery failure. I just bought a top of the line Cameron-Sino flat cell on ebay, and make sure I've charged it well in advance. This gives me 8-12hrs recording time, which is more than enough for me.

I If I was paranoid, I'd buy an external battery pack with replaceable AA cells and plug it into the DC jack. That way you're always prepared, without sacrificing valuable real estate in the main recorder unit.

Keep stealth stealth - and small! :-)

[sunjan]

Thanks for the input. but I'm talking about a true P48 unit, not the usual handheld.  Take another look at the DR-100 and you'll know what I mean.    

Sorry, I understand we're talking about two different beasts here. For open gear, I concede with spyder that AA cells are more versatile.

[marvin100]

My dream recorder would be the Sound Devices 7xx line without timecode (& with the corresponding price/size cut)

[spcyrfc]

the sony D50 with six channels of input.  similar to what illconditioned said.  3 1/8'' in jacks to make 6 channels.  gain for each channel or at least each set of channels.  solid build. 

[RTD]

for me most important: extremly short booting time, not as the crappy microtracks with around 20 seconds. Maximum should be 2-3 sec.

[Popmarter]

A REMOTE with LEVELS! Like the Iriver/Rockboxed remote!! Excellent for stealthing

[Gutbucket]

A REMOTE with LEVELS! Like the Iriver/Rockboxed remote!! Excellent for stealthing

& gain control.

[Gutbucket]

That got me thinking about an idea I had long ago..

A setting to specify and maintain any desired headroom for automatic and transparent 'over' protection without using a traditional limiter or by writing two redundant files recorded with different gains-

Instead, I propose a feature that automatically lowers gain by a set, user-defined amount anytime the input level crosses a user-defined threshold and notes each occurrence in a simple CUE file with the same name as the WAV file.  After recording, the CUE file could then be used to specify inverse gain changes at the appropriate points.  The gain reduction applied could either be held until a new file is started (an effectively infinite 'release time' in compressor/limiter terms) or in a more advanced implementation, a release time could be specified and that event also noted in the CUE file.

Example: Say I set levels so that the program peaks I expect reach -10dBfs.  Say I also turn on the over protection feature and set the threshold described above to -6dBfs, specify a gain reduction of -3dB for any peak event that crosses that threshold, and specify a release time of 'hold until start of next file or manual reset'.   The recorder then acts normally for all expected program peaks of less than -10dBfs and also for any program peaks of up to -6dbfs.  But if an unexpected event peaks at -2dBfs, over protection automatically reduces my gain setting by -3dB for the remainder of the recording and notes the exact time this occurred in the CUE file.  Effective headroom is then increased to 13dB for any following events.  Any following peaks higher than -6dB will again kick in over protection and further reduce gain  by 3dB increments, each occurrence noted in the CUE file.  The gain will rapidly be adjusted to a setting better suited the program material and the end result after re-adjusting the levels of the file afterwards using the CUE file entries will be completely free of any traditional limiter or compression effects.

A really large initial peak of more than 10dB (or subsequent peaks of increasingly higher +3db increments) will still cause a single, brief over, but over protection immediately kicks in and reduces gain each time, so that the gain is rapidly and automatically adjusted downwards to accommodate the unexpectedly high signal levels.

Such a feature would make balancing noise-floor against peak level simpler by providing peak protection without sonic drawbacks.  It could be invaluable for recording very low level or highly dynamic material the user is unfamiliar with.  I’ve recorded things with overly-conservative levels just to completely avoid the chance of distortion in unfamiliar circumstances and ended up with files that peak at -25dBfs and RMS values of much less.   This feature would have no sonic ill effects if it was left ‘on’ for every recording, regardless of if it was actually needed or not.

In addition, the CUE file could also easily note other events, such as user specified event markers, low battery voltage warnings, etc.

[it-goes-to-eleven]

I like the idea of a cue/hints file which allows session gain changes to be automatically unified in post.  It would be essential to sort out all the automated changes.   Rockbox has a fairly refined auto gain feature (though I haven't used rockbox since it was introduced). Being open source, just about anything is possible.

One challenge with your suggested approach is how the gain is influenced by applause.  I don't worry much about applause clipping except when it happens during the music.  Then I cringe.

[Gutbucket]

Good point on applause, since it can be the loudest event during acoustic music.  I typically set gain for those situations to just accomodate the applause without clipping, often adjusting levels by clapping myself beforehand.  That amount of gain has proven to be sufficient for me with even very low level sources without introducing noisefloor problems durring the music.  The unclipped applause sounds better too, even if I need to reduce it's level later in comparison to the music.

I have had occastional problems going the other way though.. setting levels so they just accomodate expected applause at acoustic concerts, then finding the event way over amplified by an unexpected FOH system, a much louder artist, etc.

The CUE recording system could easily record, and later be used to even out, all gain changes made during recording, including any non-automatic ones made by the operator.  The CUE file could be read and used manually, or could easily drive an automatic level adjustment envelope plugin.  It could also be used like a typical compressor or limiter wby setting a non-infinite release time, but one that was totally reversible or tweakable after recording if desired. Automated with a plugin, large numbers of events could be handled easily, with provisions to ignore sections the user designates (like applause) or to restore them by less than they were reduced initally, acting more like a standard limiter or compressor.


[edit- I've never used rockbox, but I've heard about the auto gain feature.  Seems like a good idea. This would be basically an easily reversible extension of that in it's most simple sense, with teh potential of doing much more]