Yep, speech is nice, but I decided to forego that for quality a long
time ago, at least for recording. I really love it for my mp3 player though.
Rockbox doesn't talk in the record screen anyway, which is probably a
good thing, given how the routing of certain things tends to work out.
The older Iriver 1XX are actually way nicer than they should be as
recorders. It's preamp is even cleaner than the Edirol r1 I used to use,
and it has a true variable gain, which many recorders don't bother with.
This means the noise floor always follows the input gain, rather than
having a constant noise floor with an added layer when applying a
preamped signal.
The Iriver 3XX could be better, although it is not, and never will be, a
dedicated recorder. I heard somewhere that they were forced to dumb down
the recording side of their mp3 players by big people like the RIAA, who
complained about people using them for bootlegging. The shielding from
it's own electronics, especially the hard drive isn't so hot, and the
noise floor is a little higher, but in a loud environment such as a live
gig, it's not as noticeable.
Just don't find yourself near a bunch of GSM phones with a 320 or 340.
It will hurt.
I've made a couple of decent gig recordings with my Iriver h320 as a
back-up recorder, because I was a bad person and accidentally left all
my sd cards at home, rendering my primary recorder kind of useless.
I would still recommend an Iriver 3XX unit over anything olympus,
including the ls10, even if it's not quite as nice as a recorder than
the older 1xx stuff.
Of course, the Iriver 1xx and 3xx units are long since discontinued.
I'm planning on replacing the hard drive on my Iriver H320 with a 32GB
cf card to see if that quiets it down a little, since most of the noise
on that unit seems to be coming from there. Theoretically, I'd get
better battery life too
Hayden Smith wrote:
Hi,
Just to add to this in regards to mics - although I will note that I
fail to observe its relation to QWS and see it more appropriate for
the midimag list - I have a pair of the sound professionals BMC-12's
and use them with the Iriver H340. Granted in itself this isn't a
top-of-the-line recorder but the response from the mics with the
device is quite good if you can provide them with a stereo field of
say, the distance of anywhere from 9-12 inches. I will be using these
mics to record live gigs and to do so, I purchased the mini mic stand
which attaches to a conventional mic stand and has a width of 6, 12
and/or 24 inches. Personally I recognise that the recorders that
Patrick has indicated have a lower noise ratio in comparison to the
H340 but when looking at it from the visually impaired perspective,
the convenience of internal speech just adds to the experience.
Cheers
----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Perdue" <[email protected]>
To: "QWS list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: QWS List OT - Portable digital recorder that records
uncompressed
The cheap sound professional stereo microphones are very noisy and
have very little tolorance for high SPL environments. They might work
with something that is already noisy, like the older Olympus
recorders, because they're so noisy you can't tell the difference
between the self-noise from the mic, and the noise from the recorder.
However, on something decent, that noise from the microphones will
really shine through. I think they only have a signal-to-noise ratio
of about -57DB nominal or so, which, unfortunately, isn't too far
outside the quantization zone for 8-bit recordings. Sad I know.
The imaging on the cheaper SP mics is OK, but nothing to write home
about. I've heard better for the same or cheaper price from things
like giant-squid-audio-labs microphones, which I used for a while, or
even the old Radio Shack 33-3028 tie-clip microphones taken off the
tie clip and mounted to a pair of glasses, or even shoved behhind
your ears. Yeah, those mics were way under-rated, and, like all good
radio shack products, are discontinued.
Those mics were actually made by Audio Technica.
Sound Professionals sells some relatively decent mics, like the Audio
Technica mics with a crokie system for mounting to glasses for a
pretty accurate quazi-binaural effect, which is way nicer than the
low cost in-ear binaurals in terms of imaging, noise floor and even
SPL. They're not my favorite mics either, but it's worth the extra
money if you end up with a sound professionals set. Those in-ear
things just make me angry every time I hear them.
matt d wrote:
A good pair of sterio microphones are the Sound Professonal
microphones. They are only $78 US and are cliiped inside your ear.
To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
for archived list posts, see
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
for archived list posts, see
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
for archived list posts, see
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
To unsubscribe or change list options, see http://lists.andrelouis.com
for archived list posts, see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
