Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart  (Read 6811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« on: August 27, 2008, 07:32:12 AM »
Hi all,

I had some time to kill at work, so I decided to play around with Excel and do a market overview of the recorders on the market.
Kinda like Brian's list, but in a graphical format.

My idea was to provide starting point for newbies. They can imagine a budget, go to the chart, and size up which recorders are considered best value for money.

I listed all recorders on the market that are frequently used for live taping, but with some limitations:
 - Minimum requirement: able to record 16bit PCM
 - No tape based recorders
 - No mono devices
 - No laptops or PDAs
 - No recorders with issues that made them completely useless for taping
 - No after-market mods (Oade, Busman, Church, Guysonic etc)
 - No "broadcast-only" devices which aren't available thru retail channels (they don't show up in Google Shopping). Anyway, they are usually way overpriced compared to the feature set.
 - Upper price cap $2500

After listing all models, I fetched the lowest retail price from Google Shopping. New only, refurbs excluded. Shipping not included.
For discontinued models that are still used, I took an average of the "lowest sold price" for items in good shape from Ebay International. I know that this skews the comparison versus new retail gear, but it's better than nothing.

I then went on to give subjective "feature points" to each recorder, based on the knowledge gathered here on TS.
It's something like a condensed average of the features a taper would look for. Basically the ability to tape an entire show plus support band without interruption, with as good quality as possible.

The parameters I considered are:
 - Bitrate/frequency
 - Sound/component quality
 - Useable pre, phantom/mic powering or good built-in mics
 - Media type (reliability, capacity to record a long show without flips, use at festival)
 - Battery (recording time, ease of use, need for external powering)
 - Ease of handling, UI
 - Known issues
 - Need for outboard gear vs. built-in
 - Portability/stealthability

A problem I had is that some devices require (expensive) outboard gear (phantom,pre,A/D) to give decent result, while others are good to go with just a pair of mics. I know that this also skews the comparison, but I tried to take that into consideration when grading them.

Disclaimer: I know that the feature points can be contested. See this as a first attempt.
For most models, I don't have any first hand experience, I've just read the opinions here on TS. And I'm still pretty clueless when it comes to high-end recorders.
If the chart can spur some debate ("I would rank X higher than Y"), I'll be happy to revise the chart.

Suggestions, critique, flames? Post them here...

Legend
Black: retail
Red: retail, but only available on certain markets (read Japan)
Blue: discontinued, Ebay prices for used gear
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 07:35:53 AM by sunjan »
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline divamum

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 411
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #1 on: August 27, 2008, 10:04:47 AM »
This is a BRILLIANT idea!! Thanks so much for doing that (wow, you really DID have time on your hands!!!).  This is the kind of thing I can point folks to and let them do their own blasted research  lol

The only suggestions I would make:

- separate category for the used items. As it stands, the iriver Hseries appear to be at the low grade end of the midrange (if I'm reading it correctly - 1=low grade 7=high grade, yes?) and as far as recorders, that's not the case because they're awesome 16bit machines when RB'd.  Apologies if I'm misinterpreting the graph, but I guess that's good in a way since it indicates how others could misread it, too.  I think many would consider them every bit as good recorders as, for instance, the Zooms.

Also, a formatting point: would be great if you can put "blocks" behind the text so it's easier to read; the text is quite small (I'm viewing in Firefox fwiw) and a little hard to see clearly - the cell texts are much smaller than the XY axis labels, for instance.   I guess one would change the background colour behind the text to do that (will excel let you do that? I seldom use it and when I do just the basics, so not sure *how* to achieve what I mean, but it would make it clearer, I think)

In any case thanks - this is great!
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 10:13:05 AM by divamum »
DPA4060
R09

Offline Belexes

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5223
  • Gender: Male
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #2 on: August 27, 2008, 10:31:36 AM »
T

Very helpful for noobs.
Busman Audio BSC1-K1/K2/K3/K4 > HiHo Silver XLR's > Deck TBD

CA-14 (c,o)/MM-HLSC-1 (4.7k mod)/AT853(4.7k mod)(c,o,h,sc)/CAFS (o)/CA-1 (o) > CA-9100 (V. 4.1)/CA-9200/CA-UBB > Sony PCM-D50/Sony PCM-M10

Offline flintstone

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 767
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #3 on: August 27, 2008, 11:16:07 AM »
Interesting exercise!  Thanks and +T.

I think the problem with this approach is that the numeric score assigned to the recorders is mostly a count of features.  More expensive machines have more features, so they get a higher score.  Less expensive machines, despite having sterling qualities, have fewer features so they are scored lower.

I think it would be more useful to show the matrix that is the basis for the score you assigned.  List the features and characteristics (stealthable, preamp quality, phantom power, XLR mic input and so on) in a column on the left, and the recorders in a row across the top.  Assign scores in the matrix, and present the total score at the bottom.  (This is most likely the way you arrived at the scores you used in the charts.) 

The big advantage of showing the matrix is it gives people a chance to assign their own weights to the scores in each category. 

Maybe being stealthable is more important than having 5 levels of low cut filter.  Maybe preamp quality is less important because an external pre will be used.  Maybe XLR and phantom power is more important than being stealthable.  Maybe costing less than $200 is essential.

Each person has a different set of needs and criteria. Presenting the information in matrix form would allow a person to easily compare based on their own requirements.  It would also help people learn about features and characteristics that they may not have thought about.

Flintstone

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2008, 11:53:00 AM »
I think the problem with this approach is that the numeric score assigned to the recorders is mostly a count of features.  More expensive machines have more features, so they get a higher score.  Less expensive machines, despite having sterling qualities, have fewer features so they are scored lower.

I think it would be more useful to show the matrix that is the basis for the score you assigned.  List the features and characteristics (stealthable, preamp quality, phantom power, XLR mic input and so on) in a column on the left, and the recorders in a row across the top.  Assign scores in the matrix, and present the total score at the bottom.  (This is most likely the way you arrived at the scores you used in the charts.) 

Thanks a lot for the feedback, everybody!
Flintstone, you're right. The ideal would be to have all specs for all models on one page, just like the Wingfield audio overview.

To be honest, I started out filling in these specs and features, assigning weighted points. But as the list grew it was just too time consuming to get all the data. I didn't have that much time!   ;D

Instead, I arranged all the recorders in a ranking list from top to bottom, based on the verdicts here on TS and my knowledge about each model's strenghts and weaknesses. The feature points should not be seen as a count of all features. It's rather a subjective weighted appraisal of just the features that are useful for John Doe Taper.

Divamum, I admit being a klutz with Excel. I'll try to improve the layout. The only reason for me separating the low/mid/hi into three sheets was the lack of space on one page. And maybe the iRiver should have a higher score than the H2. That's exactly the kind of feedback I like to hear!

I'll get back to the workshop and try to improve things...
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2008, 11:57:19 AM »
Hi all,

I had some time to kill at work, so I decided to play around with Excel and do a market overview of the recorders on the market.
Kinda like Brian's list, but in a graphical format.

My idea was to provide starting point for newbies. They can imagine a budget, go to the chart, and size up which recorders are considered best value for money.

I listed all recorders on the market that are frequently used for live taping, but with some limitations:
 - Minimum requirement: able to record 16bit PCM
 - No tape based recorders
 - No mono devices
 - No laptops or PDAs
 - No recorders with issues that made them completely useless for taping
 - No after-market mods (Oade, Busman, Church, Guysonic etc)
 - No "broadcast-only" devices which aren't available thru retail channels (they don't show up in Google Shopping). Anyway, they are usually way overpriced compared to the feature set.
 - Upper price cap $2500

After listing all models, I fetched the lowest retail price from Google Shopping. New only, refurbs excluded. Shipping not included.
For discontinued models that are still used, I took an average of the "lowest sold price" for items in good shape from Ebay International. I know that this skews the comparison versus new retail gear, but it's better than nothing.

I then went on to give subjective "feature points" to each recorder, based on the knowledge gathered here on TS.
It's something like a condensed average of the features a taper would look for. Basically the ability to tape an entire show plus support band without interruption, with as good quality as possible.

The parameters I considered are:
 - Bitrate/frequency
 - Sound/component quality
 - Useable pre, phantom/mic powering or good built-in mics
 - Media type (reliability, capacity to record a long show without flips, use at festival)
 - Battery (recording time, ease of use, need for external powering)
 - Ease of handling, UI
 - Known issues
 - Need for outboard gear vs. built-in
 - Portability/stealthability

A problem I had is that some devices require (expensive) outboard gear (phantom,pre,A/D) to give decent result, while others are good to go with just a pair of mics. I know that this also skews the comparison, but I tried to take that into consideration when grading them.

Disclaimer: I know that the feature points can be contested. See this as a first attempt.
For most models, I don't have any first hand experience, I've just read the opinions here on TS. And I'm still pretty clueless when it comes to high-end recorders.
If the chart can spur some debate ("I would rank X higher than Y"), I'll be happy to revise the chart.

Suggestions, critique, flames? Post them here...

Legend
Black: retail
Red: retail, but only available on certain markets (read Japan)
Blue: discontinued, Ebay prices for used gear

Thanks a lot, Sunjan.+T
I don't think you have that much time in your hands.
But I do believe you have lots of wish to help. ;)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline Todd R

  • Over/Under on next gear purchase: 2 months
  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4901
  • Gender: Male
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #6 on: August 27, 2008, 02:40:42 PM »
Very cool Sunjan, great work!

A couple of suggestions:
I'd transpose the x and y axes (transpose the data/graphing).  It makes more sense to me to consider how much I pay (x-axis), and then see what level of features I get for that price (y-axis), as opposed to thinking about how many features I think I want and then finding what the range of prices are in order to get that number of features.

Add digital input as one of the features you track.  That is, all else equal, a Sony D50 is better than a R-09 since it has a digital input.

Add XLR inputs to the features you track -- more rugged, reliable, etc.

If you aren't already, keep track of phantom power separately from mic plug-in power.  Actually, I might even skip plug-in power since in most cases it is too wimpy to really be of use (unless you are tracking not just whether the deck has plug-in power, but whether it provides a high enough voltage output to be used directly for concert taping).  But having 48v phantom power is a different beast entirely.

Personally, I'd probably skip built-in mics as a feature you track since I doubt there are many ts.com users who ever use built-in mics (I could be way wrong in that assumption though).
Mics: Microtech Gefell m20/m21 (nbob/pfa actives), Line Audio CM3, Church CA-11 cards
Preamp:  none <sniff>
Recorders:  Sound Devices MixPre-6, Sony PCM-M10, Zoom H4nPro

Offline Will_S

  • Trade Count: (15)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #7 on: August 27, 2008, 04:37:06 PM »
Cool idea and +T, but I think your raw data in a spreadsheet form is probably a lot more useful then the (very debatable) single value rating. 

Personally I have a couple quibbles with the rankings:

iRiver should be higher considering it has a digital input unlike almost all the other small recorders.

Microtrack and Microtrack 2 should be lower considering how unreliable/problematic they have proven for a lot of folks.

If you really follow these rules:
 - No recorders with issues that made them completely useless for taping
 - No after-market mods (Oade, Busman, Church, Guysonic etc)
The Marantz PMD660 should be either much lower or gone completely, as the stock model is very easy to overload and very noisy.

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #8 on: August 27, 2008, 04:50:57 PM »
Cool idea and +T, but I think your raw data in a spreadsheet form is probably a lot more useful then the (very debatable) single value rating. 

Personally I have a couple quibbles with the rankings:

iRiver should be higher considering it has a digital input unlike almost all the other small recorders.

Microtrack and Microtrack 2 should be lower considering how unreliable/problematic they have proven for a lot of folks.

If you really follow these rules:
 - No recorders with issues that made them completely useless for taping
 - No after-market mods (Oade, Busman, Church, Guysonic etc)
The Marantz PMD660 should be either much lower or gone completely, as the stock model is very easy to overload and very noisy.

Thanks Will! I didn't know this problem with the stock 660, and the extent of the bad reputation the MT/MT II had. You live and learn...

Unfortunately, the raw data is still very incomplete, I made estimates and made assumptions to come up with the feature rank number.
 
I'll go back to the drawing board and grade each feature more in detail. If work continues to be slow, I'll post the whole kaboodle here in a few days. ;-)
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline divamum

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 411
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #9 on: August 27, 2008, 05:38:29 PM »

Personally, I'd probably skip built-in mics as a feature you track since I doubt there are many ts.com users who ever use built-in mics (I could be way wrong in that assumption though).

Since Sunjan mentioned the original idea was a chart for newbies, seems those are exactly the kinds of things to include as a feature. That said, perhaps a subcategory? Not sure of the best ways to do this - as you pointed out in my own thread "grouping" items, it's hard to figure out what to use as the bases.

This is an awesome thing to do, though - I'm sure it will really benefit a lot of people who're starting their research/taping endeavours.   +T (and then some!)

 
« Last Edit: August 27, 2008, 06:06:48 PM by divamum »
DPA4060
R09

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #10 on: August 28, 2008, 11:20:54 AM »
Since Sunjan mentioned the original idea was a chart for newbies, seems those are exactly the kinds of things to include as a feature. That said, perhaps a subcategory?

Ok, I've added categories and given individual marks, but it's still very rough estimates. I don't have all specs for all recorders in detail, so the grading is just what I recall from the verdicts about each model on the top of my head. Don't bash me for individual figures, because I'm sure a lot of them are wrong.

Anyway, I uploaded the spreadsheet, and shared it on Google docs:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pjm7KsUOV9pDfzlBG9RQTKQ&hl=en
(Click the "Overview" tab at the bottom left)

I also decided to split up the charts between open and non-open gear. It makes more sense than low/mid/high.

I kept the X/Y scale, since it fits the landscape format on the screen better. I tried to improve fonts and colors, but it's still a bit rough.

Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline flintstone

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 767
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #11 on: August 28, 2008, 03:04:54 PM »
Thanks for sharing your worksheet. 

I was interested to see the categories you chose:

Bitrate/frequency   
Sound/component quality   
Channels   
Preamp   
Inputs   
Mics   (meaning does the recorder have internal mics?)
Media type   
Battery   
Handling   
Issues   
Outboard needs   
Size      
Stealth
Price   

And also interested to see that you assigned values from -1.5 to +5
to the categories.   That helps explain the wide range of final ratings.

I would encourage others to grab the worksheet, and assign your
own values to the categories so you can arrive at your own rankings.

For example, you may not want to assign a higher score to a recorder
that samples at 24/192 because you don't use a data rate that high.
Or you may not give a higher score to a device that has digital inputs
because you use an external pre that doesn't have digital out.  Or
maybe XLR inputs are essential, so recorders that don't have them get
a zero in the input category.

You might want to add your own categories, too.  For example, are the
controls for limiter, low cut filter and mic sensitivity activated by
switches on the outside of the recorder, or are they choices in the menu
system?

Tailoring the matrix  to your needs will result in a better purchase decision.

Flintstone

Offline sunjan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2006
  • Gender: Male
  • Taping since 1988, 28 years of fine recordings...
    • Just a handful of stuff I put on etree
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #12 on: August 29, 2008, 08:23:49 AM »
And also interested to see that you assigned values from -1.5 to +5
to the categories.   That helps explain the wide range of final ratings.

I would encourage others to grab the worksheet, and assign your
own values to the categories so you can arrive at your own rankings.

For example, you may not want to assign a higher score to a recorder
that samples at 24/192 because you don't use a data rate that high.
Or you may not give a higher score to a device that has digital inputs
because you use an external pre that doesn't have digital out.  Or
maybe XLR inputs are essential, so recorders that don't have them get
a zero in the input category.

You might want to add your own categories, too.  For example, are the
controls for limiter, low cut filter and mic sensitivity activated by
switches on the outside of the recorder, or are they choices in the menu
system?

Thanks for the feedback Flintstone.
You pinpointed exactly the issues where I struggled with the grading. Assigning "value" to various input jacks all depends on which gear you pair up the recorder with.

To generalize, I had to imagine "average Joe Taper", wanting to achieve the best sound without compromising, looking for a trouble-free concert recorder with good value and possible upgrade path. Joe Taper could be rich or poor, so we can't assume that he's just shopping for entry-level gear.

It makes sense to split the charts between Joe Open Taper and Jane Non-Open taper, because Open would likely appreciate XLR, phantom and outboard gear expandability more.

In it's most basic form, it should be enough to grade each category in three brackets:
1. not good enough
2. just good enough/useable
3. more than enough

Take battery life, for instance. 2 hours is not enough, 4-5 hours is just (barely) enough, and anything above is more than enough. So there's little benefit ranking a recorder with 30 hours battery life higher than one with 15 hours (analogous to your comparison of 192kHz above). I tried to take that into consideration.

But perhaps I should revise the scale completely?!
I've been looking at car comparison sites, which often assign a certain weight to each aspect, which then sums up to 100%.

Perhaps this ratio topic is important enough for a thread of it's own, but I was speculating that a non-open taper would prioritize roughly like this:

Sound/component quality: 25%
Inputs/Preamp/Outboard needs: 20%
Battery: 10%
Bitrate/frequency: 10%
Media type: 10%
Handling/UI: 10%
Size: 5%
Mics: 5%
Channels: 5%

Issues usually affect one or a few of the above, so no need to grade it separately. Does that make sense?

I didn't give much weight to the size, because I assume that within the pool of stealthable recorders, as long as they are stealthable, they are more or less equal. If it's too large to be stealthable, it's outside of the selection criteria anyway, if you get my idea.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2008, 08:28:58 AM by sunjan »
Mics: A-51s LE, CK 930, Line Audo CM3, AT853Rx (hc,c,sc),  ECM 121, ECM 909A
Pres: Tinybox, CA-9100, UA5 wmod
Recorders: M10, H116 (CF mod), H340, NJB3
Gearbag: High Sierra Corkscrew
MD transfers: MZ-RH1. Tape transfers: Nak DR-1
Photo rig: Nikon D70, 18-70mm/3.5-4.5, SB-800

Offline Todd R

  • Over/Under on next gear purchase: 2 months
  • Trade Count: (29)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4901
  • Gender: Male
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #13 on: August 29, 2008, 10:18:19 AM »
Thanks for sharing your worksheet. 


Ditto. This makes a lot more sense to me now.  I thought you had just come up with a list of features and then simply assigned a value of 0 or 1 depending on if the recorder had it or not (which is why I was thinking that having plug-in power for mics ranked as high as having phantom power). 

Very impressive -- the map and also the spreadsheet should be very useful in getting a quick overview of what to expect from the whole range of recorders.

Once you get this finalized, it might be good to start a new clean thread with the charts at the top in the first post and then get the mods to sticky it up at the top, or perhaps sticky it up at the top of the recorder section in the Archive/Knowledge base board.
Mics: Microtech Gefell m20/m21 (nbob/pfa actives), Line Audio CM3, Church CA-11 cards
Preamp:  none <sniff>
Recorders:  Sound Devices MixPre-6, Sony PCM-M10, Zoom H4nPro

Offline aaronji

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (9)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 4001
Re: Recorder market overview: price/feature chart
« Reply #14 on: August 29, 2008, 02:36:34 PM »
Maybe consider adding a category for build quality?

Also, it would be cool, but a wicked pain-in-the-ass, to get a large number of tapers to fill in the spreadsheet themselves (preferably assigning values only to the recorders they know something about first-hand), then average (or take the median of) the lot of them...Seems like that might produce a more reliable gauge of the "true" values of the various scores.  'Course, I would guess that nobody has the time, or motivational skills, to get that accomplished! :)

As the OP, and a number of others, mentioned, a way to apply weights would also be great...

Thanks for your time and trouble, sunjan!

P.S.  Is your company taking applications? ;)

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.073 seconds with 44 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF