Topic: Hi-MD vs. Microtrack

[eyekanspehl]

Hello everybody,

I think this is my first post here, and I'm looking for advice. Some background information: several years ago, I purchased a Sony MZ-R55 MD recorder, and for some time now I've been considering upgrading to a Hi-MD recorder. As a birthday present, I was given a microtrack 24/96, which I didn't know a lot about when I got it. I attempted to record with it shortly after receiving it, and ended up with less than satisfactory results (which I blame in large part to my own ignorance and inexperience with using the device). I've been contemplating trying to sell my microtrack and buying a hi-md. Can anyone offer me advice as to whether I should stick to the microtrack or go with an hi-md? It might all boil down to personal preference, but in all honestly, I don't have a lot of experience with recording shows and thought that I might be able to get some insight from people who have more experience. I've done some searches and read through some posts, and I'm still feeling conflicted.

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

Off the bat, with minimal experience with both...

The Hi-MD is a great system, but only 16/44 - CD Quality.

The MT2496 is a tempermental system that is 24/96 - DVDA quality.

The latest firmware updates for the MT2496 seem to have removed most of the bugs and have made the MT2496 is very viable recording system.  But the HiMD system is rock-solid and MD is well-supported.

I think if I were to stay 16/44, I'd pick the HiMd or the Marantz 660 (16/48).  But I like the possibilities of 24/96 so I went with the Tascam HD-P2.  I tried out a MT2496 for a month, never actually taped with it, but I wasn't very comfortable with it...  I upgraded to the HD-P2 almost immediately...

My 2 bits...

Terry

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

Unless this has been corrected, I would go with the HI-MD if you're planning on running Mic In.

When I had a MT, and tried to go MIC IN (Super Stealth situations) things did not go well (preamps overloaded). For digi in (out of my UA-5) the MT was fantastic. The only problem I had going Digi in was the 2GB limit. I never really had a problem with that though. I just started a new file between songs. If you listen to any bands that play for a long time, without time between songs this might be a problem. Most bands I listen to don't play that long, and I usually had the JB3 as a backup so if I missed a few seconds, I could splice that source into the MT source.

I sold my MT, but I may buy one again. I want to go back to 24 bit, I just want to see if any of the newer 24 bit recorders end up being a better choice for me.

[Nixoo]

What was the reason of you being not satisfied? Was it soundquality or user-error because of device complexity or anything like that? Let us know what mics you were using and if you're on a batterybox or pre-amp. Were you satisfied with the recordings made on the old MD? Did anything improve at all?
Just trying to help

My conclusion could be that you don't need a new recording device, but need to tune-up the other stuff. The Hi-MD has a excellent pre-amp, but the MT has some other advantages like far higher and exchangable storage capacity so no need for swapping plus of course the 24bit/96khz possibility.

[yousef]

Speaking as someone who is currently being driven mad by the "eccentricities" (to put it very politely) of the Microtrack, I'd suggest selling it and replacing it with an Edirol R-09.

I'd shy away from the Hi-MD, purely because of the media costs and the potential need to swap discs during longish sets. Also my old non-Hi MD wore out extremely quickly so I'm a little suspicious about build quality/longevity.

Having said all that, you'll find people here who swear by (rather than at) the Microtrack so YMMV.

[taper420]

This is tough... especially cause I have both and pretty much use them interchangibly. By far they get the most use recording my band practices and jams. For this I run CA cards> 9100 preamp> line in (on himd) or TRS in (on MT). I have a difficulty hearing any difference during casual listening and haven't done a more stringent test. I think this is largely due to the external preamp. I do notice, even at supposed line level, the MT runs hotter than the HiMD, so the ext. preamp is helpful when needing to keep loud levels down. They would blow if using the MT preamp. Now, the HiMD does have a good quality, low noise preamp, but this also makes it brickwall at "concert level" sounds.....it's more suitable for recording birds. So IMO the preamps in either device are not suitable for what we're doing. Taking all that into account, I have had plenty of jams that go over 94 mins (limit of HiMD), and for that reason I mostly use the MT. I don't want to have to worry about flipping when I'm watching music, let alone playing it. You get over three hours of cd quality before the 2 gig limit on the MT. And having 24bit as an option is a plus in my book, although your uninterupted rec time goes down to 1:55 when using 24/48... which is still doable in most situations.

So taking into consideration that you should be using an external preamp with either... I would keep the MT. It will also be useful as a bit bucket if you plan on upgrading to an external ADC in the future (himd has digital in, but it resamples). If you're never going to be using an external preamp on either device in a loud concert setting, then I'd say the MT will give you unusable results, and the HiMD will give you barely listenable results. GL with your decision.

[e.heman]

Keep the Microtrack. It's far more convient making CD's as the HiMD. I made some very nice recordings with my MT, but i never succeeded in making a nice cd from my MD"tapes".  Changing disks is not so comfortable as an 8G card. (The only but is the 2G limit)

[eyekanspehl]

Thank you everyone for your thoughts. Just to sort of tag on to this - how much time can you get on an 8 gb card if you're recording in 24bit? One of my concerns is that I'm likely to be in situations in which I'll be seeing several shows in a short span of time and might not be able to transfer them between shows. I have no problem with switching card or discs mid show because the types of things I tend to see usually have breaks in them during which I could happen. I'm just trying to decide if, from a financial standpoint, it would be better for me to have something like a HiMD and a bunch of blank discs or the MT and some backup cards.

[Arni99]

Thank you everyone for your thoughts. Just to sort of tag on to this - how much time can you get on an 8 gb card if you're recording in 24bit?

should be 1h55min(2GB limit at 24bit/48kHz) x 4 = 7h40min at 24bit/48Khz on a 8GB card.

[boojum]

Is there a demonstrable difference between 16/44 and 24/96?  OK, the physics is different, but can you "hear" the difference.  As far as I know it just pads with zeros.  Correct me if I am wrong.

As for the Hi-MD being beyond its depth with anything louder than bird songs, well, that has not been my experience in seven years.  Maybe I missed it.  I have recorded to SP, LP2 and LP4 and while the sound quality degrades from SP on I have not overloaded its capacity to record.  I set the mic sensitivity to "Lo" and lower  the recording level and that seems to do it.  Likewise for the Hi-MD PCM format, so far.  I record bar bands, folk, bluegrass, rockabilly, choirs, blues, jump blues and jazz and it has all worked.  I have used the SONY ECM-MS957, OKM II's, MM-HLCS-1's and SP-CMC-4U's so far and they all work OK.  All work better with a source of bias power and the SONY cannot work without its internal 1.2 vols AA battery.

OK, I like the MD as a recording device.  Simple, small, good, and easy to use.  The Hi-MD discs go for < US$5.00 and are good for a million uses.  I will settle for 10% of that.  The RH1 fits in my shirt pocket quite nicely and I can listen to the recordings on the way home.  YMMV.  I have a Macally HP-I481 outboard LiIon battery to refuel the battery in the Hi-MD which goes flat after ~six hours of recording.

Cheers   

[flintstone]

See http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm for test results of the mic preamp in several recorder models.  These tests show that the preamp in the Hi-MD recorder has lower self-noise than the Microtrack. 

These tests also show the Hi-MD preamp will overload at a lower sound pressure level than the Microtrack does.  The Microtrack isn't as good as the Edirol R-09 in handling high SPL.  This isn't a big deal, it just means you have to be prepared to add a pad (an attenuator) in the mic input circuit if the venue is extra-loud.

Flintstone

[boojum]

These tests also show the Hi-MD preamp will overload at a lower sound pressure level than the Microtrack does.  The Microtrack isn't as good as the Edirol R-09 in handling high SPL.  This isn't a big deal, it just means you have to be prepared to add a pad (an attenuator) in the mic input circuit if the venue is extra-loud.

Flintstone

I use a battery box to supply higher bias power to the elecret mics than mic-in does: no problems.  With the ECM-MS957 which is self-powered also works fine.  I go in through the line-in so the pre-amp is not an issue.  I also set the mic sensitivity to "low" and dial down the recording level.  The controls are there.  ;o) 

I do not want anyone to think that the MD or Hi-MD is the Swiss Army knife of recording.  But for my modest means and amateur ranking it does superbly.  It's a trip, too, to show up with the gear and them whip out the tiny RH1.  Folks who do not know the platform are dubious at first.

Cheers   

[nameloc01]

i do not even know how many shows i recorded with my hi-mds. i have never, not even once, overloaded the recorder when i ran> line in. if you run > mic in it is quite easy to overload it,which is why most people who record loud shows run line in.

it really comes down to exactly what you want for yourself. i'll use myself as an example... while there are technically superior units, the r-9, maybe the MT ect. i personally have this thing about having removable media for each and every show i do. this is extremely important to me, which right off the bat, makes my decision easy... the hi-md.its that simple.if it wasnt so important, i prob get an r-9.
not trying to steer you, but a hi-md is quite capable of making some sick fuckin' recordings.this is in conjuction with a quality microphone setup ( pre/BB ect)
i am very confident in sony products, as i have about a dozen of them in my house in the various A/V setups and i have never had a problem with any of it,and i did happen to,it would be extremely easy to find a service center, or get questions answered straight from the source.
anyhow, ya' just gotta decide what it right for YOUR needs.

[Arni99]

I sold my EDIROL R-09 some weeks ago and purchased a 2nd Sony MZ-RH1 .
When I heard the r-09´s preamp my decision was clear.
With my RH1s u DON´t need an external preamp, just switch to MIC-IN for silent to moderately loud shows(amplified) and all is fine.

[boojum]

It is getting to sound like a meeting of Hi-MD zealots.  Oh, it is!!!  LOL