Topic: Recommending a pocket field recorder

[david_f]

I think I found my answer...

Iriver H120 + Rockbox

I can't believe nobody recommended this!

What do you think, recommended?

based on your descriptions above, i would not recommend the iriver.  If you want to use an external mic, then yes, its a great thing, but you are going to be extremely disappointed in the built in mic's performance.

r-09 is a good choice... as is the r-1 (a little bigger and no longer in production)... the new Marantz pmd 620 looks nice (i have even thought about changing out my r-09 for one) and then there is the sony PCM-D50 and Olympus LS-10.

most of those are a bit more then you want to spend, but you do get what you pay for.

I've got an iriver with rockbox and I agree on this. The internal mic is not cutting it for recording spoken word, lectures, etc.

I'm searching around for a little mic I can plug into the top of my iriver to turn it into a "whip out of the pocket and set on the table" type solution. If I find anything good I'll let you know.

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99546.0.html

[netwriter]

I've got an iriver with rockbox and I agree on this. The internal mic is not cutting it for recording spoken word, lectures, etc.

I'm searching around for a little mic I can plug into the top of my iriver to turn it into a "whip out of the pocket and set on the table" type solution. If I find anything good I'll let you know.

http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,99546.0.html

that's exactly what i'd need.

i'm excited about the iriver because people on various birding forums say that it's fabulous for making field recordings -- most of them use minidiscs because most digital recorders aren't good for capturing bird sounds. not that i plan on capturing bird calls myself, at least on a regular basis, but i want something that can make quality field recordings (useable on a podcast or radio broadcast) but mostly something that can make good "whip out the pocket recorder and make a good digital spoken word recording."

i do have a budget, and was hoping to get cheaper than the olympus ls-10.

if anyone has any other recommendations, please share. thanks so much!

[netwriter]

I just want to say that I appreciate everbody's continued advice on this topic.

I'm just not much of a gearhead these days, but I know what I want to do.

I'm still thinking about the Edirol and the Olympus LS-10, the IRiver and others that were recently mentioned. Based on the fact that the IRiver does not seem to be available anywhere at all, I'm not sure if I'll be able to get it even if a good ext mic will make it a nice solution. I do love the fact that it plays Ogg files, has a cult following based on an open source software add-on, and has all that built-in space.

[sunjan]

i'm excited about the iriver because people on various birding forums say that it's fabulous for making field recordings

That's a really weird statement. The internal mic on the Iriver isn't even useful for spoken word, and don't the bird people use shotguns or at least hyper caps and heavy amplification, not internal omnis?!?

i want something that can make quality field recordings (useable on a podcast or radio broadcast) but mostly something that can make good "whip out the pocket recorder and make a good digital spoken word recording."

The Iriver has a lot of advantages, but there are plenty of better options if you're looking for a dedicated all-in-one.

/J

[netwriter]

i'm excited about the iriver because people on various birding forums say that it's fabulous for making field recordings

That's a really weird statement. The internal mic on the Iriver isn't even useful for spoken word, and don't the bird people use shotguns or at least hyper caps and heavy amplification, not internal omnis?!?

Yes, using external mics -- shotguns and whatnot. <i>Not</i> the internal omni.

The birding people seem to suggest that the Iriver (with ext mic) is a great option for field recording. They've actually recommended against almost all other digital solutions. Most prefer minidisc. But since they like the Iriver so much, I figured that it would be a good solution if there was a small mic to use for spoken word. Apparently there isn't or this isn't recommended?

Don't people on taperssection recommend the Iriver for concerts?

i want something that can make quality field recordings (useable on a podcast or radio broadcast) but mostly something that can make good "whip out the pocket recorder and make a good digital spoken word recording."

The Iriver has a lot of advantages, but there are plenty of better options if you're looking for a dedicated all-in-one.

What would you recommend? I'd love SD media or built-in hard drive, and I'd love to use the internal mic for quick notes and impromptu spoken word -- but it would also be nice to be able to hook up ext mics. I'd also be using it with my telephone recorder for phone interviews.

Thanks for the advice!

[netwriter]

Just want an update on this thread -- anyone have recommendations for a dedicated all-in-one for a beginner?

Something used MOSTLY for voice recording / interviews where podcast-quality at minimum is required, that is good enough for making a nice recording of (say) a cafe or coffeehouse poetry reading or concert, but that can also be used (with or without an ext mic) for field recording, particularly the kind of ambient nature recording they do at places like birdforum.net.

What I've been looking at so far is the Edirol R-09, Olympus LS-10, Zoom H2, Marantz PMD 660, and IRiver H120 (if I can find one and a small ext mic) ... but I'm open to anything.

Thanks!

[su6oxone]

Thanks for the recommendation. $400 is a bit more than I was wanting to spend, but everything I see about the R-09 makes me happy. I guess this does look like the ideal recorder for me ... it's just that I see so many of these voice recorders for less than $50 and while I can justify tripling or quadrupling that price for something good, it's hard for me to get up to the $400 range just yet!

You can get a new R-09 on ebay for $300.  I got mine from a seller in 3 days and it is legit.  No warranty though I guess since they likely won't be authorized resellers.

[shep666]

I wonder if anyone has tried the iKey Plus. You supply flash memory, mics, and AA batteries. Below is information supplied by the manufacturer:


Sampling Rate:..44.1 kHz, 16 Bit
Dynamic Range: .....98 dB
THD+N:...-91 dB
Freq Response:..20Hz – 20KHz
MP3 compression rates..128, 192, 256, and 320 kbps
USBcompatability....USB 1.0, 1.1, 2.0
Power Source..4 ‘AA’ batteries (not included)
..9V 500mA DC adapter
Recording time on battery power... Approximately 4 to 5 hours (depending on storage device used and type of batteries)
AC Voltage Requirements..120 VAC 60Hz or 230VAC 50Hz
______________________________________________
 
- USB Port (For direct connectivity to supported USB Storage Device)
- Compatible with USB 2.0/1.1/1.0 devices
- Compatible with iPod®
- Records audio to Uncompressed WAV format or MP3 format (w/ selectable bit rate,
up to 320kbps)
- Gold plated RCA inputs
- Microphone input with Phantom power
- Built-in Phono preamp for direct connection of Turntables
- LED Indicator shows memory remaining on target drive
- Battery powered w/ low battery indicator
- DC charger input with DC adapter included for use with rechargeable batteries
- 6-bar VU meter with peak hold and Overload indicator
- 1/8" (3.5mm) Headphone monitor output
- Record volume control
- Reset button
- Requires 4 AA Rechargeable Batteries (Not Included)

[nickee]

The ikey looks good on paper but there is two different guys on the Amazon reviews that states that it does not record in real stereo on either inputs.

"The problem that I found was that this device cannot record true 2-channel input. All recordings have 2 channels of data, but each channel contains the exact same signal---an average of the two input signals. This is the case through the attached stereo mic, my own stereo mic, or through the RCA input jacks."

[sunjan]

That's a really weird statement. The internal mic on the Iriver isn't even useful for spoken word, and don't the bird people use shotguns or at least hyper caps and heavy amplification, not internal omnis?!?

Yes, using external mics -- shotguns and whatnot. <i>Not</i> the internal omni.

So: that makes your comparison moot. If the bird guys use shotguns when they record, what evidence does it give you that the Iriver's internal mic is good?! Or that you would achieve good result with a plug-in T-shape mic? You're comparing apples and oranges here.

The birding people seem to suggest that the Iriver (with ext mic) is a great option for field recording. They've actually recommended against almost all other digital solutions. Most prefer minidisc. But since they like the Iriver so much, I figured that it would be a good solution if there was a small mic to use for spoken word. Apparently there isn't or this isn't recommended?

Don't people on taperssection recommend the Iriver for concerts?

Again, your comparison is moot.
Good mics + adequate sound levels = good signal to your bit bucket.
Bad mics + dirty gain = bad signal to the same bit bucket

The Iriver is a great recorder, matched with the right mics and pre/bbox.
But if you plug in a mic with no sensitivity below 100Hz , you won't have any bass in your tape! And if you're forced to crank up the Iriver gain into the digital domain due to inadequate powering, you'll be adding insult to injury.

For the bird people, I guess they don't care about bass, because chirpy chirpy cheep cheep doesn't roar below 100Hz anyway.

i want something that can make quality field recordings (useable on a podcast or radio broadcast) but mostly something that can make good "whip out the pocket recorder and make a good digital spoken word recording."

What would you recommend? I'd love SD media or built-in hard drive, and I'd love to use the internal mic for quick notes and impromptu spoken word -- but it would also be nice to be able to hook up ext mics. I'd also be using it with my telephone recorder for phone interviews.

R-09 with the internal mics Church modded springs to mind....

[stevetoney]

Sunjan hits the nail right on the head. 

FWIW, it appears to me that you keep wanting to come back to this list and ask the same question until someone tells you...yes...here is a GREAT sounding solution...AND it costs $100.  The problem is, that solution just isn't out there.

I would add that the bird people are just that...they're bird people and they are not technical geeks that deal with quality in recordings, such as you have in the audience you've got on this forum.  So the bird folks that use their irivers are probably just all on the same bandwagon...that's fine for them and I guess it must meet their needs, but you've spelled out a fairly concise set of criteria with your original post and people on this list have answered you with quite a high degree of diligence, yet you seem to keep coming back and asking the same question.  What do you want or expect out of this forum?

The bottom line is the recorder you choose is simply a device that records whatever bits get sent to it by a microphone...whether it's an internal or external mic.  If the mics on the recorder are garbage, then you're gonna get garbage sound.  OK, added to the 'quality of recorder question' that some recorders have a lower inherent noise floor than others. 

Something that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is that a reason the R-09 is more expensive is because it records in 24-bit...which again is going to provide some additional sound quality that you desire. 

To support some other opinions that have been offered, I've also recorded with the R-09 internal mics and while they aren't ideal, they are plenty sufficient for the needs that you describe.  I recorded some music with the internal mics and thought they were surprisingly nice sounding. 

But if you don't want to spend the $$, then you'll get what you pay for and, based on your criteria, you probably won't be happy...it's that simple.

If you're waiting for someone to tell you that the internal mics on XXX recorder which costs $100 sound REALLY good, you're simply not gonna get it from anyone here!

[flintstone]

"I would add that the bird people are just that...they're bird people and they are not technical geeks that deal with quality in recordings, such as you have in the audience you've got on this forum. "

Hold your horses, mate!  Nature recording needs are different than, but no less technically demanding than concert recording.  There are plenty of nature recordists who seek the highest quality, geeks as well as birders.

Nature recording has the particular challenge of recording low sound pressure sources at a distance (think of a small bird singing from the top of a distant tree), which means high mic sensitivity and preamp gain cranked way up.  This is a recipe for high self-noise in recordings unless you've got very good gear. 

Nature enthusiasts don't have to sneak their gear into a club, but they do have to carry it for considerable distances, and for hours at a time.  So small recorder size and decent battery life are important for nature recordists, too.

Flintstone

[stevetoney]

"I would add that the bird people are just that...they're bird people and they are not technical geeks that deal with quality in recordings, such as you have in the audience you've got on this forum. "

Hold your horses, mate!  Nature recording needs are different than, but no less technically demanding than concert recording.  There are plenty of nature recordists who seek the highest quality, geeks as well as birders.

Point well taken.  I implied that birders don't know their technical stuff...which is of course a stupid statement...but the point I was trying to make is that the recording scenario's that Netwriter wants to record in (as specified in the original thread post) are more in line with what the people on TS.com are in tune with. 

Nature recordists that are recording bird-songs at the higher frequencies of the human hearing spectrum may likely get very satisfactory results with a setup that is completely unacceptable for the large range of recording scenarios that Netwriter desires.

For example, it doesn't surprise me at all to hear that someone can get fairly high quality bird recordings from a fairly low quality mic because we all know that the lower frequencies are the hardest to reproduce with any accuracy, since those are the same frequencies that so many of us spend so much $$ on in our setups to get a higher and higher quality of.  (Stevie Ray's guitar sounds fine on my 1985-era cheap mic recordings, but the bass completely sucks.)

However, I think we can mostly agree that acceptable results in bird-recording scenario's may not necessarily translate what most consider acceptable in spoken word or music recording.  Or maybe not!

[evilchris]

Another vote for the R-09.  You should be able to find it for $300 or $325 if you shop around.

EDIT: With the R-09HR on the horizon, you might be able to find a gently used or closeout R-09 for even less.

[sunjan]

Another vote for the R-09.  You should be able to find it for $300 or $325 if you shop around.

EDIT: With the R-09HR on the horizon, you might be able to find a gently used or closeout R-09 for even less.

Yeah, I'm seeing the drop already. Selling now with a BIN price of $269!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=290214383654