Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)  (Read 95546 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #105 on: May 27, 2013, 10:37:03 PM »
Given that the unit behaves as if the block diagram is correct, and given that Edirol have published the same block diagram in two iterations of this class of device, and that only one person on the planet (as far as I know) is responsible for any assertion to the contrary, then I see no reason to challenge the block diagram.

Edit - of course there's also the fact than other (not all) digital recorders work that way too.

I forget now whether (in all the pages of discussion here and elsewhere) anyone has explored the nature of the distortion arising from overloading the recording using the outer knob, vs overloading using the inner knob, but I guess it might be quicker for me to do that than to try to find the answer by a search.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2013, 10:39:03 PM by Ozpeter »

Offline hi and lo

  • Trade Count: (38)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2314
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #106 on: May 27, 2013, 11:04:39 PM »
..given that Edirol have published the same block diagram in two iterations of this class of device, and that only one person on the planet (as far as I know) is responsible for any assertion to the contrary, then I see no reason to challenge the block diagram.


Correct, however you asserted that there was overwhelming proof Doug was wrong, as though someone had rigorously tested the hypothesis and confirmed it to be valid or invalid. I didn't see any tests, let alone definitive proof either way, just end-user discussion and anecdotal evidence. It's not unheard of for published documentation to be wrong and go uncorrected.

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #107 on: May 28, 2013, 01:20:34 AM »
The Edirol R44 threads go back a long way, and it's not that easy to search for precisely what one is looking for.  So in the interests of nailing this discussion of the function of the inner knob once and for all, for the current generation of readers, here's some links which I think will be persuasive.

First -

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,107018.msg1621904.html#msg1621904

This shows that when the inner knob is all the way down, you get digital silence.  That in itself seems to me to be persuasive - you'd expect at least some bits to be non-zero if this was an analog domain control.  Also, as you increase the setting of this control, signal and noise increase virtually identically, which is what you'd expect from digital amplification (but not analog amplification).

This post also shows that as the "clicky" outer gain control is raised, signal to noise ratio improves (as you would expect of any mic preamp), and that when you increase from the position marked -14 to that marked -20, you get more than 12dB of gain but with 5dB less noise.   This indicates that using higher gain with the outer knob provides the best signal to noise ratio.

Posts following that one did not dispute my findings.

Second -

Back in May 2008 I had this email from Roland Australia in response to some questions I'd sent them, which they forwarded to their R&D people in Japan.  As usual with an email, where their reply quotes my questions, my quoted questions are indicated by ">".

"Hi Peter,

Got this response from Japan R&D:-

Dear David-san,

The block diagram describes only basic concept so that the customer does
not get confused.

 > First, the manual says that the limiter operates in the analogue domain, 
> but the block diagram shows it operating in the digital domain.  In use, 
> it seems to overcome preamp overloading, which would mean that it must 
> be an analogue limiter - which is good - but clarification would be 
> useful.

The R-44's limiter is analog and digital mixed like the R-4Pro. When you
turn on the limiter, analog gain goes automatically -12dB down for
prevention of digital distortion and after that passes through the
digital limiter. After that the signal level goes +12dB back up
again for matching total signal level.

*The limiter threshold is -10 dB relative to digital full scale.

 > Second, the block diagram shows the continuously variable level controls 
> (the inner knob, not the stepped sensitivity control) operating in the 
> digital domain.  The manual text doesn't seem to say whether that's true 
> or whether the level is actually analogue domain. Again, it would be 
> useful to be sure of how it works.

SENS knob ( outer knob ) is analog domain. ( stepped )
LEVEL knob ( inter knob ) is digital domain. ( continuous )

<About suggestion>
The R&D guy said that they appreciate for sending the suggestion.

It is impossible to be mounted the R-44 due to hardware and software
limitation.

But it is helpful to develop next generation product.
Please say our regards to the customer!



Hope that all helps.

Kind regards,
David Lackey "

(The "<About suggestion>" concerned some suggestions I made for improving the product, not relevant to this post.  Note also, outside the current topic, that using the limiter is pointless if the recording is going through a post-production stage later - just record at a lower level and use a finely-tuned limiter in your DAW to obtain the best, undo-able, result.)

So - we have very convincing tests undertaken (more than once actually) by myself, coupled with categorical statements made by Roland R&D Japan, vs statements attributed to Oade which, when you think them through at any level do not make sense (eg the assertion that lowering the first stage of a two-stage amplification system and raising the level of the following stage is likely to result in an overall improvement of signal to noise), and which certainly do not correspond with the opinions of the vast majority of other users based on extensive experience, nor with the known behaviour of this device. 

I reiterate that Oade are being reported as making incorrect statements about this device (causing end user confusion, not to mention wasting my time in refuting them) and this does nothing to enhance their reputation with me (for what that's worth) - as for others, well, up to you to draw your own conclusions.

If Oade are being misquoted, or quoted out of context, I'm sure this thread would be a good place to set the matter straight.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2013, 01:25:52 AM by Ozpeter »

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #108 on: May 28, 2013, 08:10:29 PM »
I have emailed Mr Oade about this matter and his initial brief response indicates that he does not understand my point.  I have written again setting out as clearly as I can how his advice is demonstrably incorrect, and hopefully he will amend it.

cashandkerouac

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #109 on: May 31, 2013, 05:50:43 PM »
I have emailed Mr Oade about this matter and his initial brief response indicates that he does not understand my point.  I have written again setting out as clearly as I can how his advice is demonstrably incorrect, and hopefully he will amend it.

did you receive a follow-up response from Doug?

Offline Ozpeter

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #110 on: June 01, 2013, 04:41:09 AM »
No.  But maybe it will take him a while to reproduce my test results - if, that is, he cares to.

I pointed out to him that the signal to noise ratio of the preamp improves at higher settings of the outer knob, and that setting the inner knob has no effect on signal to noise ratio (whether it operates in the digital domain or not, it behaves in all respects as if it does, which is what matters).  Therefore setting the outer knob low and the inner knob high (as he advises) demonstrably records with a reduced signal to noise ratio.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2013, 04:45:23 AM by Ozpeter »

Offline Elana

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 243
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #111 on: June 04, 2013, 04:42:24 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Offline cybergaloot

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Gender: Male
  • Poohbah!
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #112 on: June 04, 2013, 04:46:11 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Yes, it will fail over to the internals. You should get quite a bit more than 40min on internals even with phantom on.
--
Walter

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. Will Rogers

MICS: Line Audio CM3, CA-11 (O & C), CA-14 (C), CAFS, Studio Project C4 (O,C, HC), Studio Project LSD2, ADK-tl, ADK-A6, ADK-5.1, MXL 603S, JM-27s, Sennheiser e600 Drum Pack, Avantone Drum Mic kit, Shure MX393S
RECORDERS: Zoom F8n w/ F-control, H2, DR-40, R16, R-44, HD24, DR-2D, DR-44WL, DR-07, Denon DN-500R
PRES: CA-UGLY, CA-9000, UA-5, Art USB Dual Tube Pre, Focusrite Platinum Octopre (X3)
STUFF: Henry Eng Patchbox I & II, A&H ZED-22fx, Soundcraft Si Impact, TOA D-4 + 2X D-4E, M-Audio MobilePre
PLUS: Gaffers tape, lot's of gaffer's tape! And cables, lot's of cables

Offline Elana

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 243
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #113 on: June 04, 2013, 05:11:24 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Yes, it will fail over to the internals. You should get quite a bit more than 40min on internals even with phantom on.

Thanks.  Are there any benchmarks of how much time can be gotten on internal AA's with phantom on 2 inputs?

Offline cybergaloot

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4058
  • Gender: Male
  • Poohbah!
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #114 on: June 04, 2013, 05:26:11 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Yes, it will fail over to the internals. You should get quite a bit more than 40min on internals even with phantom on.

Thanks.  Are there any benchmarks of how much time can be gotten on internal AA's with phantom on 2 inputs?

Somewhere here on Taper's Section there are the times some folks got but it will depend somewhat on what mics you have and what batteries you use. Some mics use more power than others and it makes a difference whether you use rechargable batteries or regular alkaline. Hopefully somebody will chime in who has a better feel for how long you can run but personally I've run over 1 1/2 hours with all four channels running phantom off the internal batteries. In my case it was an accident so I don't know how long it would have kept on going.
--
Walter

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. Will Rogers

MICS: Line Audio CM3, CA-11 (O & C), CA-14 (C), CAFS, Studio Project C4 (O,C, HC), Studio Project LSD2, ADK-tl, ADK-A6, ADK-5.1, MXL 603S, JM-27s, Sennheiser e600 Drum Pack, Avantone Drum Mic kit, Shure MX393S
RECORDERS: Zoom F8n w/ F-control, H2, DR-40, R16, R-44, HD24, DR-2D, DR-44WL, DR-07, Denon DN-500R
PRES: CA-UGLY, CA-9000, UA-5, Art USB Dual Tube Pre, Focusrite Platinum Octopre (X3)
STUFF: Henry Eng Patchbox I & II, A&H ZED-22fx, Soundcraft Si Impact, TOA D-4 + 2X D-4E, M-Audio MobilePre
PLUS: Gaffers tape, lot's of gaffer's tape! And cables, lot's of cables

Offline capnhook

  • All your llamas are belong to us....
  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (20)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3968
  • All your llamas are belong to us....
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #115 on: June 04, 2013, 08:59:17 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Yes, it will fail over to the internals. You should get quite a bit more than 40min on internals even with phantom on.

Thanks.  Are there any benchmarks of how much time can be gotten on internal AA's with phantom on 2 inputs?

Somewhere here on Taper's Section there are the times some folks got but it will depend somewhat on what mics you have and what batteries you use. Some mics use more power than others and it makes a difference whether you use rechargable batteries or regular alkaline. Hopefully somebody will chime in who has a better feel for how long you can run but personally I've run over 1 1/2 hours with all four channels running phantom off the internal batteries. In my case it was an accident so I don't know how long it would have kept on going.

same here
Proud member of the reality-based community

BSCS-L->JB-mod [NAK CM-300 (CP-3) and/or (CP-1)]->LSD2->CA CAFS-Omni->Sony ECM-907**Apogee MiniMe Rev. C->CA Ugly II->**Edirol OCM R-44->Tascam DR-22WL->Sony TCD-D8


"Don't ever take an all or nothing attitude when it comes to making a difference
and being beautiful and making the world a beautiful place through your actions.
Every little bit is registered.  Every little bit.  So be as beautiful as you can as often as you can"

"It'll never be over, 'till we learn."
 
"My dream is to get a bus and get the band and just go coast to coast. Just about everything else except music, is anti-musical.  That's it.  Music's the thing." - Jeb Puryear

Offline Elana

  • Trade Count: (10)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 243
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #116 on: June 04, 2013, 10:12:04 PM »
I'm sure these have both been asked and answered but finding info in these threads is tough. 

If AA batteries are put in the R-44 and the external batt fails, will it gracefully fall back on the internal AA's w/o causing a problem to the recording?

I've heard you can get about 40mins off of AA's w/ phantom on (2 channels maybe?) - is this correct?

Yes, it will fail over to the internals. You should get quite a bit more than 40min on internals even with phantom on.

Thanks.  Are there any benchmarks of how much time can be gotten on internal AA's with phantom on 2 inputs?

Somewhere here on Taper's Section there are the times some folks got but it will depend somewhat on what mics you have and what batteries you use. Some mics use more power than others and it makes a difference whether you use rechargable batteries or regular alkaline. Hopefully somebody will chime in who has a better feel for how long you can run but personally I've run over 1 1/2 hours with all four channels running phantom off the internal batteries. In my case it was an accident so I don't know how long it would have kept on going.

same here

Thanks - good to know.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13383
  • Gender: Male
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #117 on: June 21, 2013, 10:49:56 AM »
Does anyone know if the R-44 will clock to a SPDIF input stream while recording 4 analog inputs and not actually set to record the digital input?

I was running it along with a DR-680 last night and it would have been nice to have the clocks of both recorders synced.  In the past I  have done it the other way around- sync'ing the DR-680 clock to the digital output of the R44.  In that case I don't need to actually record the digital input on the DR-680 to have it lock to the output of the R-44.  However, this time I was running the V3's SPDIF digital into the DR-680, so I only had the 680's digital out available for linking to the R-44.. and I needed all 4 analog inputs on the R44.

I hooked it up that way before the show as a quick test, and there was no indication on the R-44 either way.  I assume it simply ignores the digital input in that case, but maybe not.

musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

kirk97132

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #118 on: June 21, 2013, 12:29:02 PM »
Does anyone know if the R-44 will clock to a SPDIF input stream while recording 4 analog inputs and not actually set to record the digital input?

I was running it along with a DR-680 last night and it would have been nice to have the clocks of both recorders synced.  In the past I  have done it the other way around- sync'ing the DR-680 clock to the digital output of the R44.  In that case I don't need to actually record the digital input on the DR-680 to have it lock to the output of the R-44.  However, this time I was running the V3's SPDIF digital into the DR-680, so I only had the 680's digital out available for linking to the R-44.. and I needed all 4 analog inputs on the R44.

I hooked it up that way before the show as a quick test, and there was no indication on the R-44 either way.  I assume it simply ignores the digital input in that case, but maybe not.
R-44 DOES NOT sync to spdif when recording analog.  Only the HD-P2 or DR- 680 when set that way or a USBPre-2 will do it by default. 

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (14)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 13383
  • Gender: Male
Re: edirol/roland r-44 (part five)
« Reply #119 on: June 21, 2013, 12:39:07 PM »
Thanks Kirk!
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.206 seconds with 56 queries.
© 2002-2019 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF