Topic: NY Times Says R-09 Is the Best Flash Recorder! :)

[lbgspam]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/technology/21basics.html?8dpc=&_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

Review of R-09, Microtrack, and 660

[agave]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/technology/21basics.html?8dpc=&_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

Review of R-09, Microtrack, and 660

mini jacks suck!! after any prolonged use at all the contacts spread & u get a pop &/ Or crackel when slightly moved  & with using any high end condenser mic's you need a battery box &/ or a reducer  or / & cut the stock active cables to  down to the mini jack  .. my 660 uses phantom power from the deck / has full sized 3 pin lockalbe dual mic inputs .. ie straight from mic's to deck with nothing between   add the Oade mod acm to the 660 for now the best stealth set up out there right now ! yes it's only does 16 bit wav  but most people don't have a home setup to play the higher stuff now anyway .. but for the diff in price that quality is there  .....       so yes if u got only 500 bucks to spend go with the R-09 with added cheap mics & boxes ... want a no hassel EQ that's there when you need it show after show after show .. the 660 hands down .......... as always this is only .. I M H O ... but after soo many shows this summer with my 660 acm With a pair of schoeps 41lg's   they all suck soo don't ask me for copies .. hee hee !!

[twoheadedboy]

I don't know, my motherboard is this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131022

Supposedly 24-bit 192khz audio capable with the onboard chip (I am only using the built-in sound at this point, much better than the previous built-in solution I had from a few years ago). I listened to my 24-bit recordings (44.1khz) that were by no means recorded with ideal levels (one show averaged about -19dB and the other -14.5dB), and I heard clear differences between the original 24-bit and resulting 16-bit files through a good pair of Sony headphones. The sound was overall "smoother" and less harsh. If nothing else, I know that if I was at -19dB and made a 16-bit recording, the end result would not have been nearly as good as it turned out as I unfortunately ended up that way occassionally when I used to tape with my NJB3 due to the terrible meters. This time, my problem was being overly conservative, as these were the 2nd and 3rd shows I had taped with the unit and I had possessed it for about a week and a half; these were important shows so I didn't want to clip, and I knew from posts here that 24-bit allows you to be more conservative with the levels to less adverse effects. The ending result was the best tapes I've ever done, YMMV of course.

[Ed.]

While any of these devices will provide quality audio, the Edirol’s compact size and use of AA batteries give it a competitive edge.

I'm happy it got its edge from its small size and battery option and not all of its wonderful features, practicallity of use, LACK OF DIGI IN, etc 

too bad they didn't compare the ultimate "podcast recorders" - the 722, the pmd671, and the tascam.  hehe.

[agave]

I don't know, my motherboard is this one: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813131022

Supposedly 24-bit 192khz audio capable with the onboard chip (I am only using the built-in sound at this point, much better than the previous built-in solution I had from a few years ago). I listened to my 24-bit recordings (44.1khz) that were by no means recorded with ideal levels (one show averaged about -19dB and the other -14.5dB), and I heard clear differences between the original 24-bit and resulting 16-bit files through a good pair of Sony headphones. The sound was overall "smoother" and less harsh. If nothing else, I know that if I was at -19dB and made a 16-bit recording, the end result would not have been nearly as good as it turned out as I unfortunately ended up that way occassionally when I used to tape with my NJB3 due to the terrible meters. This time, my problem was being overly conservative, as these were the 2nd and 3rd shows I had taped with the unit and I had possessed it for about a week and a half; these were important shows so I didn't want to clip, and I knew from posts here that 24-bit allows you to be more conservative with the levels to less adverse effects. The ending result was the best tapes I've ever done, YMMV of course.

 that is  all true  & i agree with you.......  but what most people forget it's the MIC's that give you the best sound.. any platform after that signal from the mic's that has the less added signal noise  IE:clean  no added clutter from boxes/adapters/reducers/battery boosters/inline outs /pre-amps  is what give u the straight poop .. if u are thinking of getting a rig then throw all yer money at the MIC's 1st .. then up grade the other stuff down the line .. you will not be sorry in this opition of mine , as this comes from a person who has recorded shows from '79 .... you can aruge 16 vs 24 all day but if the sonics from the mic's anit there then it's a wash  & yes i agree that 24 is better than 16 . but i've got a stealth  rig  right now that will record 5+ hours phantom power with no added boxes. mic /active /deck = enjoy by me in 16 bit (but the mic's were more than 3/4 total cost of the rig )... when they come out with a deck that does dual 3 pin mic in puts that does 24 bit Phantom power  with the Mods that Oade does i'll buy it !The  fostex the deck is so0 misconfigured for stealthing it's bad all the way around ...the mic inputs come off the long  side (660comes off the bottom of the deck ) the levels are also on the long side of the deck,660 levels  is on top ie; the other end of the deck is from the mic inputs   (soo how do you explain that big bluge in yer sweater to the usher ?) while my rig  from 4th row & front row (at select $150+ seats shows never got seen by anyone & they busted people all around me .. at one show they busted the guy who seated behind me as soon as he sat down ..  as all way this is I M H O only  just trying to get people to know that the mics ARE your ears at a show . got a great deck BUT have have shitty mics then you got a shitty show ... flame on if u must just had to get that out there  !!!

[WiFiJeff]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/technology/21basics.html?8dpc=&_r=1&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

Review of R-09, Microtrack, and 660

Just love the 660 review: "it uses XLR microphone inputs - just like studio mixers.  The others use the same 1/8-inch minijacks as most consumer audio equipment, THOUGH THAT DOES NOT PRECLUDE USING PROFESSIONAL MICROPHONES, BECAUSE IT IS EASY TO GET MICROPHONE CABLES WITH 1/8 INCH JACKS."  So I guess that despite all the fuss about voltage levels my MT will power my Schoeps mics, and I don't even need those darn 1/4" TRS plugs neither.

Jeff

[Oysterhead00]

I just hope their next version has a digital in....that's the only thing stopping me from picking one up.  That and my unwavering love for the CJB3