Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Archos Gmini 120  (Read 69837 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline timP

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3537
  • Gender: Male
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #105 on: January 16, 2004, 01:02:16 PM »
as for the levels... I ran them buppin the top bar and came out with no problems....
as for testing the analog line in...not sure how to yet, sorry, learning alot as I go..........
?>FR2LE

Offline dklein

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1184
  • Gender: Male
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #106 on: January 16, 2004, 01:26:23 PM »
I just went to try the EAC wave compare, and it said that it wouldn't let me.  my initial 20 minute test was at 48kHz, and EAC said it would only compare 44.1kHz files.  

If you like the EAC compare feature, you can trick it.  Because it's based around CD audio, that 44.1 restriction is in place.  Just save your file with a 44.1 header - this will affect the pitch and playback speed of course, but for testing purposes it will let you use EAC to compare bit-by-bit.

In CEP, go Edit, Adjust Sample Rate, change it to 44,100 and save the file.  Now it will load in EAC.
KM 184 > V2 > R4
older recording gear: UA-5  / emagic A62 / laptop / JB3 / CSB / AD20 / Sharp MT-90 / Sony MDS-JE510
Playback: Pioneer DV-578 > Lucid DA 9624 >many funny little british boxes > Linn Isobarik PMS

Offline Weazel

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 229
  • Gender: Male
  • sp-cmc-8-> DIY BB -> Iriver IHP120 (rockbox)
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #107 on: January 16, 2004, 02:21:41 PM »
specs and pics of the gmini 220 are online now.
-[ pop goes the weazel ...]-

Offline JasonSobel

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Gender: Male
    • My show list
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #108 on: January 16, 2004, 03:17:11 PM »
Quote
as for testing the analog line in...not sure how to yet, sorry, learning alot as I go..........
because you're going analog in, you don't have to worry about it being bit-accurate.  Bit accuracy is if the unit will record the incoming S/PDIF signal exactly.  you don't have an incoming S/PDIF signal, so the issue is moot in your case.

as for glitches, well, there are audible as very short clicks.  do your recordings have clicks throughout them?  if so, it means that the issue is related somehow to the writing of data to the hard drive, and all inputs are affected equally.  if you're recordings sound clean, it means that the device is capable or recording a continuous .wav file, and the issue is solely with the S/PDIF input.

so, how are your recordings coming out?  clicks?

Offline timP

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3537
  • Gender: Male
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #109 on: January 16, 2004, 03:52:21 PM »
no, they sound really really nice.....no clicks or pops..
but it was in a club...
will set up my mics across the room, away from any noise the Archos may make with the HD whir, and recod silence and see if it gets pops and such...
people were using their iriver 120's internal mic to record lectures and such, and getting HD noise picked up from the internal mic...and it seemed to be at the same as the spikes and pops in the wav tests...
?>FR2LE

Offline JasonSobel

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Gender: Male
    • My show list
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #110 on: January 16, 2004, 05:22:09 PM »
I just got off the phone with their tech support, because I knew it would take a few days for them to reply to my email.  The guy didn't really know what to do.  He asked me if I had the same problem when recording from the internal mic.  I told him that I hadn't tried that because I am not interested in making recordings from the the internal mic.  I bought the unit to record in .wav format via the S/PDIF input.  He then put me on hold for a few minutes.  when he returned, he said that they have not heard of anyone else with this issue, and that I may have a defective unit or cable, and that I should return to the store that I bought it and replace it for another unit.  I told him I bought it online, and it would be a bit of a hassle to return and get a new one.  I also told him that I doubted anything was defective with the unit or cable, and that I thought the problem was either with the firmware or the recording plug-in.  I then asked to speak with someone more knowledgable about recording via the S/PDIF input, anf he informed me that they all knew the same amount about it.  So he wrote down my info and sent it off to the "front offices"  I should expect a call back from them on Monday...

just an update...

Offline twatts (pants are so over-rated...)

  • <://PHiSH//><
  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 9941
  • Gender: Male
  • Lego made a Mini-Fig of me!
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #111 on: January 16, 2004, 05:41:18 PM »
Jason,

You da man!  Keep us informed...  I was all excited to replace my Nomad, but it looks like I'll be waiting a while longer!

Terry

PS thanks for the SHNs...
***Do you have PHISH, VIDA BLUE, JAZZ MANDOLIN PROJECT or any other Phish related DATs/Tapes/MDs that need to be transferred???  I can do them for you!!!***

I will return your DATs/Tapes/MDs.  I'll also provide Master FLAC files via DropBox.  PM me for details.

Sony PCM R500 > SPDIF > Tascam HD-P2
Nakamichi DR-3 > (Oade Advanced Concert Mod) Tascam HD-P2
Sony MDS-JE510 > Hosa ODL-276 > Tascam HD-P2

******

Offline greenone

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 9273
  • Gender: Male
  • Russian mics... strong like bull...
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #112 on: January 16, 2004, 07:29:04 PM »
It's definitely good to hear that they escalated you pretty quickly, even if they weren't able to give you any more information. And good call on mentioning that you think it's a firmware issue instead of just jumping at the chance to get a new unit and/or cable...get the idea in their heads that there are knowledgeable users and uses for the firmware that they hadn't necessarily concentrated on!

--Dave
Unofficial Blues Traveler archivist - glad to work on any BT or related recordings
archive.org admin - happy to upload tracked material to the LMA

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6205
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #113 on: January 16, 2004, 07:59:38 PM »
Jason, keep pressing them, when I was testing the nomad firmware early on, it had the same identical misplaced sample issues, which were solvable in firmware. the fact that the iriver seems to have the same issues, makes me think its trivial

a few things I've learned from 100's of hours (1000?  :P) of testing, that can save you some time:

-first and foremost, establish that the unit doesnt resample inputs at all sample rates. You've tested 44.1, confirm it with 48K, and you'll never have to do it again (for this firmware)

-once a soundcard is established to not resample, youre only looking for glitches, this is easier than full bit-accurate testing. the 'glitch-free' testing is the testing you should be doing whenever you install a known-good soundcard in a new machine. There are several methods for this, but I'll give you mine. This is the long, detailed version, it assumes you have soundforge, but you should be able to do it with any wav editor:

I generate a 440hz sine wave using wavelab. its a 5 sec wave. I then take the 5 sec wav into soundforge and copy and paste it out to a 5 minute file, then save that file. whenever I need a wave for testing, I take the 5 min wav, can quickly copy it out to a 7-8 hour wave. (keeping it stored as a 5 minute wav keeps me from eating up several GB's on my drive, and it only takes about a  minute to copy it out to a long file). Anyway, once you generate the long file, go to the beginning and 'insert silence' (10 sec.). OK, now I have a reference wave file, with silence at the beginning. You will be playing back this test wav and recording it on the device you are testing. Start the device recording while rolling the silent intro. This makes it super-easy to cut it to a known point to compare it with the original wave. OK, to do a test, play it back on the computer, digi out of soundcard, then into the gmini.  The only variable here is whether the digi-out on your soundcard is good, and wont drop samples (dont do anything else on the computer while playing it back). after you record a long file on the gmini, transfer it back to the computer. at this point, you can do the quick trim and compare it with the original for bit accuracy, or just do the search for glitches (much quicker). to search for glitches, move the cursor to the beginning of the file, and do 'find'>'glitches' (the following settings will find all audible glitches: -25db slope, 80 sens.). It takes all of 10 seconds to execute this command, then come back in a few minutes. it will either stop at a glitch, or go all the way to the end of the file and say 'no events of the specified type were located'

this is really good once you get the bugs resolved and it is working well, it is trivial to do 10, 50, 100 hours of testing on the unit, which should give you complete confidence in the field.

to test the effect of different spdif sources on recording stability, just go analog out of the computer, into dat, a/d converter, etc. the sinewave is still a sinewave (tho not digitally the same), so you can do glitch testing, but not bit-accurate (like I said above, you really only need to do bit-accuracy once for each sample rate in a given firmware on a given device).

I am currently doing testing as follows:

sine wave>mini to rca cable>r500>xlr out>v3 or ad2k>2 outputs feeding nomad and vx pocket (testing both). While the procedure above seems complicated, once you get it going, its a breeze. If youve got a lot of testing to do, its the only way to go. I've done 30 hrs of testing on each of the devices in the last 2 days, spent prob 1-2 hours total doing it.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2004, 09:24:35 PM by jerryfreak »
Unable to post or PM due to arbitrary censorship of people the mod doesn't like. Please email me using the link in my profile if you need to connect

Offline JasonSobel

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Gender: Male
    • My show list
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #114 on: January 16, 2004, 09:37:09 PM »
Jerryfreak,
that seems like a good methos for long tests.  but I'm not quite at that point yet.
I have tested 48kHz and 44.1kHz with the Gmini, and have gotten the same results with both.  I have established already that it doesn't resample the digital input, the only problem is the glitches.  

but before I run extensive, long hour tests, I want to get a positve result with my short 20 minute test.  if the thing can't record for 20 minutes without glitches, there is no point for me to run a 4 hour test.  the idea a single-tone 440hz sine wave is good, and should make it easy to spot the glitches.  and I wouldn't have thought to run analog out into the V3 and then digital into the Gmini.  I would like to do all my testing with the V3, as that is what I'll be using in the field.

hopefully I'll get some kind of positive feedback from their tech support and we can ge the kinks worked out...

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6205
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #115 on: January 17, 2004, 12:04:31 AM »
well its definitely just as useful for a test of any length

yeah, i'm of the optimistic varitey that they will get past the misplaced samples, and you'll be doing long testing sooner. It seems that archos is into tailoring their products to suit their customers. If you can, ask to speak to an engineer who works on firmware, thats really the only effective way to communicate bugs effectively, as youre familiar with the experience level of the lower level techs.

I like to try as much gear as I can get my hands on, as their are definitely subtle differences in spdif streams that cause issues. jb3, d8, and m1 are all good examples of this. Its esp. important when you have a piece of gear that would likely be used by patchers. Even if the only other piece of gear you have is a soundcard or a home dat deck, you can get an idea of if the device works well universally.
Unable to post or PM due to arbitrary censorship of people the mod doesn't like. Please email me using the link in my profile if you need to connect

Offline Riley

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #116 on: January 18, 2004, 03:14:05 PM »
Well,  I couldn't stand it anymore.  I had to try it out.  I went out and bought one yesterday and we tried it out to tape our band practice.

Here was the setup:  AKG 451EB's -> Warm-mod UA-5 -> Gmini 120

Everything was recorded at 44.1kHz.  I haven't done any in depth tests yet, but I haven't as of yet noticed any audible pops or clicks in any of the recordings that we made.  I will probably do some other tests before my two week window of opportunity for returning it are up, but so far I'm really impressed.  The only problems that I noticed is that the interface seems to be a little bit quirky.  I also didn't know that the backlight on the screen doesn't work while recording, so if you get one make sure to bring your flashlight to the show.

Peace,
Riley

Offline JasonSobel

  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 3327
  • Gender: Male
    • My show list
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #117 on: January 18, 2004, 05:53:27 PM »
Riley,
cool, it's good to have more testers.  I assume you're going S/PDIF into the gmini.  did you run a DAT as well?  or into a computer?  or any other recording device, so you can test for bit-accuracy?  please post some more details...

and +t for more testing.
Jason

Offline Riley

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #118 on: January 18, 2004, 10:24:28 PM »
Yes, I was running S/PDIF.

Initially, I didn't have much time because we were about to start practicing and I needed the equipment for recording.  However, in the time that I did have, I did do one test:

I took a digital out from my D8 via an Oade active 7-pin into the Gmini.  I recorded about 10 minutes of a show that I taped.  I haven't done any bit accuracy tests yet, but I was just looking for the audible clicks mentioned in earlier tests.  I'm not saying that they weren't there, but I didn't hear any.  I also didn't hear any in over an hour of audio that we recorded during practice using my UA-5.

Also, here's a thought.  The cable that came with the unit for S/PDIF input was not of the highest quality (actually it was garbage).  Let's just say that it was not a so called digital cable.  I'm going to build a cable for input that uses shielded digital microphone cable instead.  To my knowledge, it could be possible (probably unlikely though) for these clicks to be an electromagnetic phenomenon, which a better cable may help.

Bit accuracy tests to follow.  I'll keep everyone posted.

Riley

Offline jerryfreak

  • No PZ
  • Trade Count: (31)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 6205
  • The plural of anecdote is not data
Re:Archos Gmini 120
« Reply #119 on: January 19, 2004, 02:11:35 AM »
heads up to all that archos has free recording and photo wallet plugins on their site right now.

although the supplied digital cable is poor, I wouldnt expect it to be the source of the clicks. SPDIF is very tolerant of interference on unshieled cable, the problems mentioned by others are too symptomatic of firmware issues...
Unable to post or PM due to arbitrary censorship of people the mod doesn't like. Please email me using the link in my profile if you need to connect

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.07 seconds with 38 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF