Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Recording Gear => Topic started by: frankied on January 13, 2009, 02:50:01 PM
-
Can the R-44 be used with a pre amp.By leaving the phantom power off does that make it line in?If I wanted to use it with my pre amp and also take a line from another set of mics is that posssible???...or i'm I limited to just mics and the r44?Help please.I want to get it but if its that limited i'm undecided.
-
you can run a pre in front of it but it stills runs through the r44's pre. no way to truly by pass it.
-
Can the R-44 be used with a pre amp.By leaving the phantom power off does that make it line in?If I wanted to use it with my pre amp and also take a line from another set of mics is that posssible???...or i'm I limited to just mics and the r44?Help please.I want to get it but if its that limited i'm undecided.
You are set to Line-in when the sensitivity (outer) knob is set to 1. This still runs through the same circuitry, but it's not amplifying, so makes no difference to the sound AFAIKS.
FWIW: I sometimes use a Sound Devices MixPre in front of mine (when recording ambient stuff and some studio duties) and love the pairing. Awesome recorder the R44.
digifish
-
thanks...just getting ready to place the order
-
you can only bypass the R-44 preamps by going in via the SPDIF input.
-
Are all recorders the same?? So for example if I use D50 and run it using an external preamp via line-in am I still using the D50 preamp? Thanks
-
This topic continues to come up pretty regularly. Here's an interesting post on the subject by TSer Todd R, 4 years ago, that's still valid today:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,10860.msg132251.html#msg132251
-
Are all recorders the same?? So for example if I use D50 and run it using an external preamp via line-in am I still using the D50 preamp? Thanks
The Sony line in bypasses the preamp. Very nice box in general!
Richard
-
Brian's excellent link really does make required reading. "Todd R" makes a good case for regarding devices which have a single input for mic and line as being potentially superior to devices having separate inputs, or devices having line-in only. Whether you agree with that view or not, it seems to me that it's not a matter where you can make categorical statements. You simply have to check the audio quality of the device you are interested in, and see whether there is a problem or not. You can't say that all devices with separate inputs are better than all devices with single inputs, or vice versa. It depends on the design of the particular device.
So in the case of the R-44, has anyone got any evidence that there's a problem with using it for line level signals, based either on proper listening tests or performance tests? I suspect not.
-
This topic continues to come up pretty regularly. Here's an interesting post on the subject by TSer Todd R, 4 years ago, that's still valid today:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,10860.msg132251.html#msg132251
That was my point "This still runs through the same circuitry, but it's not amplifying, so makes no difference to the sound AFAIKS. "
-
This topic continues to come up pretty regularly. Here's an interesting post on the subject by TSer Todd R, 4 years ago, that's still valid today:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,10860.msg132251.html#msg132251
That post was an excellent read. I'll quote it so I can find it again! lol
Thanks.
-
That was my point "This still runs through the same circuitry, but it's not amplifying, so makes no difference to the sound AFAIKS. "
I think what people get worried about is that although there's logically no reason to suppose that running audio through a preamp set not to amplify, and running it through the same preamp set to amplify, should give a different sound, it's believed by some that running audio through a variable level preamp regardless of setting will colour the sound. So you'd somehow get the supposedly coloured sound of the external preamp, plus the supposedly coloured sound of the R-44 preamp - in other words, two lots of colouration.
Whether that's the case or not, the counter argument made in the post to which links are made above is that a mic preamp should not necessarily colour sound any more than any other gain stage fronting an AD converter - they are both gain stages and the line-to-AD gain stage may in fact be technically inferior to the variable level gain stage (ie a mic preamp which can be set to zero gain) if the designer has been less careful with its design than if he (or she!) was designing a variable level gain stage.
In other words, there's no reason to suppose that a dedicated line input (plus gain stage before the AD converter) colours sound any less than a line-to-mic variable level input, and it's conceivable that it could colour it more.
-
Um. Actually, the general statement that one stage of amplification is ALWAYS better than two isn't supportable either in theory or in practice. It's too great a generalization to be relied upon.
As a counter-example (which couldn't exist if the author's claims were valid), take the Sony TCD-10 Pro DAT recorder, on which I once spent nearly $3000 thinking that I'd found the machine I would record with for years to come. It has a single set of balanced inputs which can be switched to either mike or line level, so according to the author of that message, it's better than if it had separate mike and line inputs, with a gain stage in between.
Turns out that the mike inputs can easily be overloaded by condenser microphones of average sensitivity, while the line inputs are so noisy that to drive them requires signal levels that come near the clipping limit of many professional outboard preamps. In what way is that a good arrangement, except that it saved Sony an extra pair of XLR input sockets?
The notion that fewer stages is ALWAYS better is just that--a notion. In reality there isn't always any neat correspondence between circuit simplicity and good sound, or between the number of stages in a component and its practical usefulness. I'm afraid it comes down to particular cases and situations. If you want to know something about the behavior of a piece of equipment, test that piece of equipment and see how it behaves; then you know something about it. Don't just sit on the sidelines and draw questionable conclusions based on misapplied generalizations.
--best regards
-
Um. Actually, the general statement that one stage of amplification is ALWAYS better than two isn't supportable either in theory or in practice. It's too great a generalization to be relied upon.
--best regards
Good points. So let's be specific, the R44 has 11 possible sensitivity settings (outer ring), it sounds great from 1 (+4 dB - line) all the way up to 9 (-44 dB), after that things start to get a little hissy for my tastes. It can handle whatever input/mic I have thrown at it. I have recorded everything from a Jumbo at take-off power from about 200 meters and down to crickets at about the same distance :)
(http://www.audiomidi.com/assets/10474_edi_r44_front.jpg)
Regards Scott
-
take the Sony TCD-10 Pro DAT recorder, which I once spent $2700 on, thinking that I'd found the machine I would record with for years to come. It has a single set of balanced inputs which can be switched to either mike or line level, so according to the author of that message, it's better than if it had separate mike and line inputs, with a gain stage in between.
I have to say I'm not sure whose message "that message" is, but in the case of the TCD-10's inputs switchable between mic and line, there would be two possibilities of implementation as far as I can see.
One would be that the switch would connect the input either to a mic input or to a line input - functionally the same as having two separate input connections routed through different input circuits. The other is that the switch simply inserted a padding resistor or the like before the mic input circuit, which is indeed not a good idea, and is quite different from having a preamp with variable gain. Such a pad does tend to give rise to excessive noise and that therefore corresponds with your experience.