Points well taken. I’m glad to see that so many recorders available today pretty much include MP3 as standard. Whilst I prefer not to use MP3 to record with I certainly don’t deny its usefulness particularly when wanting to make very long recordings. I prefer - even when recording voice - to use as higher quality bit and sample rate that the recorder can handle - to keep as much of the natural quality as is possible - and then compress afterwards if I need to. I’m very pleased to see that Olympus has seen fit to include FLAC as a recording/playback format, that way a recording can be compressed in a lossless way and save quite a bit of space. I know someone who bought a perfectly useable voice recorder for $30 and that’s exactly what it was designed for, to record voice for notes and so on. The recorder doesn’t talk or do anything particularly fancy, you can mark points of your recording I believe. Everything is recorded internally so for a note taking device this may be absolutely perfect for those on a budget.
> On 5 Aug 2018, at 9:57 am, Steve Jacobson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dane, > > I am glad you added this to the discussion. I think even what is considered > a great recording is probably going to be different for different people. > Some people will find the added voice input of the Ultrinex to be worth the > extra price and the trade-off in maximum bit depth and sampling rate. While > I buy into the notion that the higher these ratings are the better the > quality if you are converting analog to digital or making live music > recordings, if your plan is to keep them as MP3's and you are making the > recordings for your own enjoyment, then the Ultrinex may be a very good fit. > Its maximum bit depth and sampling rate are higher than that of CD's but are > lower than recorders used for professional use. My understanding, though, is > that the Ultrinex does not work as well when using it with an external > microphone. This actually makes more difference to me than whether it can > record with a 96-bit depth or 192K Sampling rate. That won't be true for > everybody, though. I just think that there are other factors that can be > important, even for serious users, that might vary with the individual. > > Best regards, > > Steve Jacobson > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Dane Trethowan > Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2018 1:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [all-audio] Eltrinex 12 pro field recorder > > We have to put this into perspective. > Howe suitable this recorder would be for you is dependent on what you > yourself want to record so let's start looking at that. > If you want to record notes then this machine would do a damn good job I > should think but then I would ask myself isn't it overkill? > There are recording solutions for a fraction of the price that do an > excellent job at recording voice. > A talking this and a talking that in my opinion isn't everything, is your > goal to make a good recording or listen to something chatter away at you. > I remember when I bought my first Digital Recording device, a Zoom H1. > Okay this model isn't available any longer but at $99? Well the H1 was a > bargain. > The recorder had no menu system to speak of so all I had to do was press the > record button on the front and the machine started recording. > The quality of the recorder was incredibly good for the price. > I then started doing research and I discovered that many professional people > were using Zoom H1 recorders for dictation work. > The Zoom H1 has been replaced with the Zoom H1n and I think the H1N sell for > around the same price. > So there's just one example I can give of a incredibly versatile recorder > that doesn't have a lot of bells and whilstles but is good at what it does, > that being capturing audio. > I like my Olympus LS-P4 recorder - or Kitkat Recorder as I heard someone > lovingly refer to it -, this recorder is another of my picks as it does so > much so well and in an incredibly small device, I'd have to check but I think > I paid $199 for the LS-P4. > Now I use the LS-P4 in preference to the Zoom H1 for general recordings but I > will not throw away my H1 and I do use it from time-to-time as it has > functionality still that the Olympus LS-P4 doesn't have, a better headphone > amplifier for example. > Anyway consider your options carefully and evaluate exactly what you want to > record. > If you're not sure and just want a versatile recorder to record anything that > comes the way of your ears then perhaps a Zoom H1N or an Olympus LS-P4 would > more than likely do the job. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Hamit Campos > Sent: Saturday, 4 August 2018 11:34 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [all-audio] Eltrinex 12 pro field recorder > > Yeah someone had asked about this a while ago and given the site. I think it > can do MP3. I know as I said before it does PCM Wav 48 KHz at > 24 bits. Which is good. That's your typical 7.1 Blu-Ray movie. > > > On 8/4/2018 12:18 AM, Robin Frost wrote: >> Hi, >> Does anyone who exactly Eltrinex is it's a name I've never even heard >> of before and what formats in which this thing records? The manual >> didn't seem to say when last I looked. >> Robin >> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Dane Trethowan >> Sent: Saturday, August 4, 2018 12:11 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [all-audio] Eltrinex 12 pro field recorder >> >> Quality of the modern Olympus recorder such as the LS-P4 is better and >> the unit itself is cheaper. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Merv Keck >> Sent: Saturday, 4 August 2018 1:07 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [all-audio] Eltrinex 12 pro field recorder >> >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if anyone has checked one of these out? And how it >> compares >> in quality to an Olympus recorder? >> >> https://www.specialneedscomputers.ca/index.php?l=product_detail >> <https://www.specialneedscomputers.ca/index.php?l=product_detail&p=5490> >> &p=5490 >> >> >> >> I could live without the FM feature. But the rest sounds fairly >> decent. And >> I'm not sure what the range is in recording formats and bitrate off >> the top >> of my head. I would be interested in hearing intelligent and informed >> opinions. >> >> Thanks in advance. >> >> Merv >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ********** Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the halfwits in this world behind. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1073): https://groups.io/g/all-audio/message/1073 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/24163591/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/all-audio/leave/1074140/405281159/xyzzy [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
