Topic: Marantz PMD-620 or MicroTrack II over the Edirol R-09?

[Mass. Wine Guy]

I realize that any recorder can be improved by using a separate pre-amp and microphones, but I'd love to get something that sounds great using the unit's own internal mics. To me, my new Edirol R-09 is ok, except for the hiss is generate. I have heard very good things about the Marantz PMD-620, and read some pains about it: the headphone input is right between the mike inputs on top, there is a delay between the record signal and the headphone playback, the up and down record volume buttons have an audible click if pushed during recording. Despite these issues, how is this recorder's sound quality? Ditto for the new MicroTrack (although this seems to have some kind of internal noise-generating defect that version III needs to fix).

Thanks very much.

[Dede2002]

I realize that any recorder can be improved by using a separate pre-amp and microphones, but I'd love to get something that sounds great using the unit's own internal mics. To me, my new Edirol R-09 is ok, except for the hiss is generate. I have heard very good things about the Marantz PMD-620, and read some pains about it: the headphone input is right between the mike inputs on top, there is a delay between the record signal and the headphone playback, the up and down record volume buttons have an audible click if pushed during recording. Despite these issues, how is this recorder's sound quality? Ditto for the new MicroTrack (although this seems to have some kind of internal noise-generating defect that version III needs to fix).

Thanks very much.

To my ears, the R-09 internal mics are better than the PMD 620's. But the Marantz has a better pre.

[Mass. Wine Guy]

Does this equate into less hiss on input?

To my ears, the R-09 internal mics are better than the PMD 620's. But the Marantz has a better pre.

[vegas06]

I have to agree as well to the previous post.
I currently have a Edirol R09, Marantz PMD620, Edirol R4 (Yes I am probably going to get the R44 when it's released), Zoom H2, and used to own the Zoom H4 and the M-Audio Microtrack.

I prefer the built in mics of the R09 slightly over that of the PMD620.  But the built in pre's of the 620 are better than the R09. 
Overall, I prefer the PMD620 because of it's better build quality and button layout, as well as some menu features, like being able to save 3 presets for various recording situations.  Which is really handy for situations where you might need to go to a quick change of settings and go.  In my unbiased opinion, everything else between the two recorders are similar in my mind.  And either would be a good addition to someone's arsenal.

Just before you or anyone else asks, I got rid of my Zoom H4 because I already was using my Edirol R4 for recording situations where I need XLR audio and while the Microtrack worked well for me, couldn't get passed the fact that they went with 1/4 inputs and not XLR and the built in battery (which they are still doing in the new model), which sucked.

I still like using the H2 for what it is, a decent small recording mic (I don't the 1/8 mic or line inputs because they aren't great).  And use it for what it really was intended for, using the built in mics in 2-4 channel mode. Works well for me when recording string and wind ensembles during wedding ceremonies.

[Dede2002]

Does this equate into less hiss on input?

To my ears, the R-09 internal mics are better than the PMD 620's. But the Marantz has a better pre.

I believe so.

[ballerusk]

Sorry to hijack this thread, but thought it would be better than starting a whole new topic.

PMD-620 or Edirol R-09? $399 vs $348 (at SP). I intend to use external mics going line-in with a CA preamp. I had my eyes set on the Marantz but Chris at SP tries to convince me into going the other way

I like that the 620 is slightly smaller and lighter, and from what I've read (on TS) it's a better build than the R-09. However the R-09 seems to have the advantage of a friendlier UI and the possibility to turn of the rec light. I had a R-09 previously and was quite pleased with it, except I found the lid (for SD and batteries) to be a bit clumsy to open.

*sorry for my (occassionally) broken English*

[aaronji]

However the R-09 seems to have the advantage of a friendlier UI and the possibility to turn of the rec light.

You can turn off the rec light on the PMD620 too.  The only light source that can't be turned off is the screen, but it has 10 levels (and the lowest is not very bright).  And, to me, the user interface is very easy.  There are three pre-sets, each of which contains all of the settings in one list.  You just select a pre-set, scroll down to change the settings you want, then press a button to save the changes.  I actually like this feature quite a lot.  You can set up three likely configurations and then select the needed one rapidly.

[spyder9]

I've owned both at one point a few weeks ago.  R09 preamp is much quieter than the 620's.  Did not hear any significant advanatge between preamps' overall sound.   Construction on 620 does "feel" solid, but it still comes across as a toy, when compared to a Sony D50.  To add, the R09 and the 620 are pretty much the exact same size.

Get the MTII if you intend to use it as a bit bucket.  If not, then get the R09 for your analog choice.

[Dede2002]

I've owned both at one point a few weeks ago.  R09 preamp is much quieter than the 620's.  Did not hear any significant advanatge between preamps' overall sound.   Construction on 620 does "feel" solid, but it still comes across as a toy, when compared to a Sony D50.  To add, the R09 and the 620 are pretty much the exact same size.

Get the MTII if you intend to use it as a bit bucket.  If not, then get the R09 for your analog choice.

Really? To my ears, there's no way you compare both units (pre) running external mics.
Again, to my ears, the PMD 620 sounds way quieter than the R-09's ( I own both).

[spyder9]

I've owned both at one point a few weeks ago.  R09 preamp is much quieter than the 620's.  Did not hear any significant advanatge between preamps' overall sound.   Construction on 620 does "feel" solid, but it still comes across as a toy, when compared to a Sony D50.  To add, the R09 and the 620 are pretty much the exact same size.

Get the MTII if you intend to use it as a bit bucket.  If not, then get the R09 for your analog choice.

Really? To my ears, there's no way you compare both units (pre) running external mics.
Again, to my ears, the PMD 620 sounds way quieter than the R-09's ( I own both).

Rig used: AT3031/AT4051/AKG C568EB > Aerco Preamp > Line IN > R09/620. 

Total of 6 samples, 3 for each recorder with each mic.  Aerco was constant in the chain.  All tests proved R09 quietier, even when running the noisiest mic of the group.  I can create a torrent if you would like.

If anything, take your samples and upload to Adobe Audition, Soundforge, or your favorite WAV editor software, .......... and you'll be very surprised on the level of noise in the 620's recordings.  R09 is very quiet compared to anything else in its class.

 

[ballerusk]

Thanks for the replies, looks like I'll be going AT943 (3w) > CA ST9100 v3 > R-09 soon, prepared for those loud rock shows

With the money I save I'm considering one of the SP hats. I have already made one myself, but without holes so the fabric will cover the mics (natural windshield? Perhaps good for outdoors?) and the cap says "bootleg" on the front haha.

[seabrook]

Rig used: AT3031/AT4051/AKG C568EB > Aerco Preamp > Line IN > R09/620. 

Total of 6 samples, 3 for each recorder with each mic.  Aerco was constant in the chain.  All tests proved R09 quietier, even when running the noisiest mic of the group.  I can create a torrent if you would like.

If anything, take your samples and upload to Adobe Audition, Soundforge, or your favorite WAV editor software, .......... and you'll be very surprised on the level of noise in the 620's recordings.  R09 is very quiet compared to anything else in its market.

 

Since the Sony PCM-D50 is only $100 more it should be included in the comparison matrix.  If it is then would it win the 'quietest internal preamps' contest?

[Brian Skalinder]

Since the Sony PCM-D50 is only $100 more it should be included in the comparison matrix.

I'm sure spyder9 eagerly awaits your shipping to him of a brand-spanking-new PCM-D50. 

[spyder9]

Agreed Brian.  He should send me the D50.   

I had a D50 and sent it back after 1 show.  It lacked the warmth that the R09 has, which is a sound I've grown accustom to and prefer.  D50 felt more "ENG-like" to my ears, much more transparent, aggressive mids, and lean in the low frequencies.  Well built recorder, however, and the best engineering in its class..........  but in the end I preferred the R09 sound.      

[Mass. Wine Guy]

Another variable to consider is Chris Church's modification of the R-09's internal mics. I haven't had this done to mine, but I'm thinking about it. I'd be surprised if the resulting sound quality isn't very good.