Taperssection.com

Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: bgalizio on June 03, 2008, 08:25:41 PM

Title: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on June 03, 2008, 08:25:41 PM
This is an ADC line-in comparison between the Edirol R-09 and R-09HR. For the ADC test, I ran as follows:

Pioneer DV-588-A CD/SACD/DVD-A deck > Kind Kables (RCA > mini) > recorder (24/48 line-in)

I chose to record at 24/48 because it's the highest available on the R-09 and it is the recording format I will personally be using.

The R-09 was set at level 8, and the R-09HR was set at level 35. This results in approximately the same final recording gain for the two (see the R-09HR thread for more details http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,100541.msg1400415.html#msg1400415). I initially tried the default inputs (13 and 40, respectfully), but was clipping.

The discs used for the comparison are as follows:
Track 1 - Grateful Dead - American Beauty DVD-A, Box Of Rain
Track 2 - Nickel Creek - Nickel Creek SACD, The Lighthouse's Tale

I recorded appx 90sec of each track. Disregard any clicks you may hear at the beginning of the recording, as it was me pressing play/track switch. The files are an A-B blind test, with A-1 being track 1 for recorder A, B-1 being track 1 for recorder B, etc.

The 24/48 FLAC files (encoded to FLAC level 8 using xACT) may be downloaded below:

A-1: http://www.mediafire.com/?cxcwskmzf47
B-1: http://www.mediafire.com/?td9wjlcd1zo

A-2: http://www.mediafire.com/?mnezssyzedn
B-2: http://www.mediafire.com/?ylejmtsnmyw

FFP: http://www.mediafire.com/?7cytduujxsy

After a few days or no activity in this thread, I will post the key. For those who are impatient, you can PM me for the key.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: Dede2002 on June 03, 2008, 10:48:39 PM
I'm impacient. I'll PM you. ;D
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: Dede2002 on June 04, 2008, 04:03:22 PM
This is an ADC line-in comparison between the Edirol R-09 and R-09HR. For the ADC test, I ran as follows:

Pioneer DV-588-A CD/SACD/DVD-A deck > Kind Kables (RCA > mini) > recorder (24/48 line-in)

I chose to record at 24/48 because it's the highest available on the R-09 and it is the recording format I will personally be using.

The R-09 was set at level 8, and the R-09HR was set at level 35. This results in approximately the same final recording gain for the two (see the R-09HR thread for more details http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,100541.msg1400415.html#msg1400415). I initially tried the default inputs (13 and 40, respectfully), but was clipping.

The discs used for the comparison are as follows:
Track 1 - Grateful Dead - American Beauty DVD-A, Box Of Rain
Track 2 - Nickel Creek - Nickel Creek SACD, The Lighthouse's Tale

I recorded appx 90sec of each track. Disregard any clicks you may hear at the beginning of the recording, as it was me pressing play/track switch. The files are an A-B blind test, with A-1 being track 1 for recorder A, B-1 being track 1 for recorder B, etc.

The 24/48 FLAC files (encoded to FLAC level 8 using xACT) may be downloaded below:

A-1: http://www.mediafire.com/?cxcwskmzf47
B-1: http://www.mediafire.com/?td9wjlcd1zo

A-2: http://www.mediafire.com/?mnezssyzedn
B-2: http://www.mediafire.com/?ylejmtsnmyw

FFP: http://www.mediafire.com/?7cytduujxsy

After a few days or no activity in this thread, I will post the key. For those who am impatient, you can PM me for the key.

Well, that's a tricky one ;). They both sound great. But to my ears, samples A are more light and less defined on the bass side.
For this alone I'd choose samples B.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on June 05, 2008, 07:50:16 AM
Bump. I thought more people would be interested in this comp.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: gmm6797 on June 05, 2008, 06:57:26 PM
I am but cant find my good Shure head phones LOL
Ill run it vis speakers when the download ends
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: Dede2002 on June 07, 2008, 11:54:42 PM
Bump. I thought more people would be interested in this comp.

Why don't you just move the whole thing to the recording gear area? Sure there would be more interested people there. ;)
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on June 08, 2008, 07:32:42 AM
Bump. I thought more people would be interested in this comp.

Why don't you just move the whole thing to the recording gear area? Sure there would be more interested people there. ;)


Good call - mods, could you move this thread to the recording gear section?
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: jmz93 on June 08, 2008, 11:20:01 AM
I want to say the #2 samples are the R9HR, but really, I think any difference I am hearing is all psychological, i.e. not there except for in my head. *laughs*

They both sounded great through tube amp plus Klipsch speakers, and my Grado SR80 headphones and I can't tell a difference.

Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: cl516 on June 08, 2008, 12:09:00 PM
well i can only listen through a laptop speaker right now, so i won't even try
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: HarpDoc on June 08, 2008, 01:52:53 PM
I also vote B. Fuller sound.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: spyder9 on June 08, 2008, 03:30:24 PM
I prefer the B tracks.  Big bell-bottom bass, recessed highs, and passive mids.  A and B aren't that close sounding.  A tracks sound like they have some air in the them and lack the bass response that B has.  Overall, they both sound great. 

Thanks Ben!    ;D 
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: GregDunn on June 08, 2008, 04:11:40 PM
Very difficult to pick a clear winner for me.  I "think" B has a little more clarity and the string plucking might be more defined, but not enough to get worked up over.  :)  Track 2 is actually a little better for this test IMHO because it makes use of lower level signals where I would expect the A/Ds to have more differences.

As for which one is a "better" copy of the source - No idea what the original recordings sounded like, though I suppose I could run out and buy them for the purpose of the test.   ;D
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on June 08, 2008, 07:31:16 PM
As for which one is a "better" copy of the source - No idea what the original recordings sounded like, though I suppose I could run out and buy them for the purpose of the test.   ;D

They're good source albums to have, especially in SACD/DVD-A!

Thanks for the comments all (and the suggestion to move the topic to the recording gear forum). I'll wait a little longer before posting the key. But, if you are dying to know, send me a PM.


Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: intpseeker on June 08, 2008, 07:41:50 PM
I like 'em both and have a hard time hearing a difference.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: Gutbucket on June 09, 2008, 12:19:17 AM
In the end, I like B.

Stream of thought.. immediately noticed the string attack on track 2. Much sharper. Too much? 'A' sounds good too.  In a way that I don't take notice of the top.  Maybe that'll be better, long term.. start preferring 'A'..  remember that I had the treble boosted +1db on the amp for adjusted playback of the acoustic stuff I recorded yesterday (on an R-09).. reset flat. Prefer B, repeat the ordeal with track 1. Like 'B' on both tracks now, but most obvious on 2. Notice it in the top, mostly.

I'll guess B is HR, but if it's not I'm even happier I have what I have.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on June 09, 2008, 06:01:13 PM
In my opinion, they are very close, and both very capable devices for line-in recording. But, I give the edge to "B," as I find the bass response to be tighter and fuller.

*********SPOILER ALERT*********

Now, for the big reveal...
























































A = R-09
B = R-09HR

I was very happy to hear the low end differences between the two recorders, as I've always thought the R-09 sounded a little light in the low end. I would be very happy with either recorder, though you'll see my R-09 up for sale after next week's vacation (unless someone here wants it right now).
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: GregDunn on June 10, 2008, 01:59:36 AM
Excellent - I can hear a little difference and it's in the "right" direction.  Makes me feel very good about my choice of hardware.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: TheImplodingVoice on August 25, 2008, 02:00:52 AM
Thank you very much for the tests. It would be very helpful to hear the original track clips off the CDs. Then, we could hear how the R-09 and R-09HR altered the original sound of the track. For example, the R-09HR may slightly exaggerate the low end, or maybe it is true that the R-09 thins out the low end.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: TheImplodingVoice on August 25, 2008, 02:22:55 AM
Here is a link to the MP3 of the original Nickel Creek track from the CD:
http://www.TomJRoach.com/MP3s/Nickel_Creek_&_Allison_Krauss-The_Lighthouse's_Tale.mp3 (http://www.TomJRoach.com/MP3s/Nickel_Creek_&_Allison_Krauss-The_Lighthouse's_Tale.mp3)

I adjusted the volume of the above MP3 to match the sound levels of the R-09 samples. The CD track is louder.
Keep in mind, the D/A converter in the signal path to the R-09 and R-09HR recorders plays a role, but this MP3 should give a good indication of what the R-09 and R-09HR recorders do to the signals.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: bgalizio on August 25, 2008, 07:21:26 AM
Here is a link to the MP3 of the original Nickel Creek track from the CD:
http://www.TomJRoach.com/MP3s/Nickel_Creek_&_Allison_Krauss-The_Lighthouse's_Tale.mp3 (http://www.TomJRoach.com/MP3s/Nickel_Creek_&_Allison_Krauss-The_Lighthouse's_Tale.mp3)

I adjusted the volume of the above MP3 to match the sound levels of the R-09 samples. The CD track is louder.
Keep in mind, the D/A converter in the signal path to the R-09 and R-09HR recorders plays a role, but this MP3 should give a good indication of what the R-09 and R-09HR recorders do to the signals.

Well, also keep in mind the following:

1. I was using the "hi-resolution" versions of these albums (DVD-A for the GD disc, SACD for the NC disc).

2. Running analog out of my DVD player means its DAC plays a role.

3. The mp3 encoding of the sample posted will undoubtedly alter the sound.

When I play these files back compared to the original discs, the R-09HR sounds ever so slightly closer to the original source. The difference is in the low end. YMMV, of course.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: it-goes-to-eleven on April 09, 2010, 03:17:18 PM
Late comment on this thread...

I have always wondered about the sound quality of trim 8 vs. say 10 or 12 on the r09.  In my testing I heard some distortion at 7, but not 8.  Since I wanted as much as hot signal handling as possible, I always ran at 8.. But I wondered if a higher setting would actually sound better.  That is something I think deserves more testing on all of the recorders we use - a comp where a recorder like the r09hr is tested at 35 and 40, with the 40 results raised in post to match the gain.  Or 0 vs. -6 on the 7xx.

Given how much we spend, and how much effort we put into our recordings, details like this can be hugely important.  The difference between 7 and 8 on the r09 is a big deal, but without testing you'd never know.
Title: Re: [DD] ADC Comparison - Edirol R-09 & R-09HR
Post by: Gutbucket on April 12, 2010, 06:26:21 PM
^^^
Truth.

I run the R-09s at 8 if I have to, but prefer being in the 9-15 zone just to be safe.  But that's going on gut-level instinct, not based on listening tests.