On Mon, May 12, 2008 2:56 am, dc wrote:
I sent this first message on 7 May. And today, 12 May, almost 5 days later
(!), I'm told this message was rejected:
finale@shsu.edu: host smtp.shsu.edu[158.135.1.173] said: 451 4.7.1
Greylisting in action, please come back in 00:10:00 (in reply to
On 07.05.2008 A-NO-NE Music wrote:
You do not wish to use limiter. The result is terrible. If you record
in 24-bit, you can set the input level at -10db peak, and you still get
full resolution. I personally set at -16db. Just a habit.
The mic pres will still have more noise...
Johannes
--
On 07.05.2008 Darcy James Argue wrote:
And I'm sorry, but the idea that there is no way something this small could sound
great is absurd. It's the microphones used that make the most difference -- the
recorder itself makes comparatively little difference.
This is definitely true to a certain
That's kind of what I wanted to know.
Thanks,
Dean
On May 7, 2008, at 11:53 PM, dc wrote:
David W. Fenton écrit:
I've been wanting something like this to use to record rehearsals of
my viol consort so we can use the recordings to make ourselves hear
our own playing better, and I'm wondering
I have Zoom H2, and it sounds really bad. I gave it to my wife for
recording her classes. My bass player has Edirol R-09, which sounds
much better.
I didn't consider MicroTrack since it didn't meet my needs. I probably
won't consider Yamaha either since I don't agree with their design
What microphones are you using? My experience is that all of these
units sound very similar when using the same mics at the same quality
settings.
And I'm sorry, but the idea that there is no way something this small
could sound great is absurd. It's the microphones used that make the
Darcy James Argue / 08.5.7 / 11:37 AM wrote:
And I'm sorry, but the idea that there is no way something this small
could sound great is absurd. It's the microphones used that make the
most difference -- the recorder itself makes comparatively little
difference.
While I agree microphone
On Wed, May 7, 2008 12:26 pm, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Also there is no way to use decent microphone if the device has no
balanced input (except Zoom H4).
The Microtrack is balanced (TRS).
Dennis
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz / 08.5.7 / 0:36 PM wrote:
The Microtrack is balanced (TRS).
Sorry I missed that.
But I think carrying decent microphones with these devices kinda defeats
the purpose. Even with balanced input, none of these devices provides
phantom, meaning you have to add external pre if
Has anyone used the ZOOM H2 and found it satisfactory?
Dean
On May 7, 2008, at 7:30 AM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
I have Zoom H2, and it sounds really bad. I gave it to my wife for
recording her classes. My bass player has Edirol R-09, which sounds
much better.
I didn't consider MicroTrack
On Wed, May 7, 2008 12:52 pm, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
none of these devices provides
phantom
The Microtrack has phantom.
Gotta read those specs. :)
Dennis
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
I'm chiming in with a vote for a Marantz flash recorder. I have one that
I've been using for 4 years now, and it is a workhorse. Phantom power,
records to compact flash. I can get 3+ hours of recording at 44.1
uncompressed. I use a Rode NT4 mic.
They probably have better units now.and
Dean M. Estabrook / 08.5.7 / 0:54 PM wrote:
Has anyone used the ZOOM H2 and found it satisfactory?
Again, my comparison between my Zoom H2 and my bass player's Edirol R-09
was done on our weekly gig. We made the setup as similar possible, and
placed at the same location. The difference was
Hi Dennis,
While I've been generally happy with the results from my Edirol R-1
digital recorder plus Core Sound binaural capsule mics, if I did have,
say, $1000 to spend on a new portable digital recorder plus mics
(which I don't, but let's say I did), I am curious what you would
1/4? And how long can it record with it's batteries when using Phantom
power?
I know my little Marantz box can do over 3 hours driving a stereo mic. If I
had a bigger compact flash cartridge, like a 4 gig one, I might be able to
go 6 hours. I should try it.
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Dennis
On Wed, May 7, 2008 1:06 pm, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
I'm chiming in with a vote for a Marantz flash recorder. I have one that
I've been using for 4 years now, and it is a workhorse. Phantom power,
records to compact flash. I can get 3+ hours of recording at 44.1
uncompressed. I use a Rode NT4
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz / 08.5.7 / 1:02 PM wrote:
The Microtrack has phantom.
Gotta read those specs. :)
Shoot! I am keep embarrassing myself, huh. The reason why I didn't
include Microtrack for my comparison on my purchase was, aside from I
didn't want to carry external microphones, I remember
On Wed, May 7, 2008 1:13 pm, Darcy James Argue wrote:
While I've been generally happy with the results from my Edirol R-1
digital recorder plus Core Sound binaural capsule mics, if I did have,
say, $1000 to spend on a new portable digital recorder plus mics
(which I don't, but let's say I
On Wed, May 7, 2008 1:18 pm, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
1/4? And how long can it record with it's batteries when using Phantom
power?
I don't know, since I keep battery packs in my pocket. Whenever the little
icon goes down to half, I plug them in.
The spec rates mine at 3-4 hours and the
By the way, I recorded this from row 14 left with the Microtrack on my
knee, using its own T-mic:
http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/music/waam/fanfare-heat-premiere.mp3
It's the Vermont Youth Orchestra playing my Fanfare:Heat this past
Sunday. They'll send a pro recording, but I just had to
On 7-May-08, at 1:18 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
1/4? And how long can it record with it's batteries when using
Phantom
power?
I know my little Marantz box can do over 3 hours driving a stereo
mic. If I
had a bigger compact flash cartridge, like a 4 gig one, I might be
able to
go 6 hours.
Darcy James Argue wrote:
What microphones are you using? My experience is that all of these units
sound very similar when using the same mics at the same quality settings.
And I'm sorry, but the idea that there is no way something this small
could sound great is absurd. It's the microphones
I'm interested in this recorder discussion, too, though there's something
that I haven't heard discussed.
I have a small Olympic recorder. Nice machine for catching my son's voice,
etc, but hits a wall when a full orchestra plays Tchaikovsky. Clips the loud
parts. With all of the recorders
On 7-May-08, at 12:52 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz / 08.5.7 / 0:36 PM wrote:
The Microtrack is balanced (TRS).
Sorry I missed that.
But I think carrying decent microphones with these devices kinda
defeats
the purpose. Even with balanced input, none of these devices
On 7-May-08, at 12:26 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Darcy James Argue / 08.5.7 / 11:37 AM wrote:
And I'm sorry, but the idea that there is no way something this
small
could sound great is absurd. It's the microphones used that make the
most difference -- the recorder itself makes comparatively
Andrew Levin / 08.5.7 / 2:32 PM wrote:
I have a small Olympic recorder. Nice machine for catching my son's voice,
etc, but hits a wall when a full orchestra plays Tchaikovsky. Clips the loud
parts. With all of the recorders mentioned can you set input levels? Or do
they have built-in compressors
I'd say that's pretty impressive. Thanks for sharing.
Dean
On May 7, 2008, at 10:45 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
By the way, I recorded this from row 14 left with the Microtrack on my
knee, using its own T-mic:
http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/music/waam/fanfare-heat-
premiere.mp3
Most recorders have an analog -20 db input level switch for recording
loud sources. My Edirol R-1 does not have an analog switch, and
requires a somewhat convoluted method of reducing the input level
digitally, which is one of the two things I find most frustrating
about it. (The other is
On 7 May 2008 at 13:11, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Dean M. Estabrook / 08.5.7 / 0:54 PM wrote:
Has anyone used the ZOOM H2 and found it satisfactory?
Again, my comparison between my Zoom H2 and my bass player's Edirol R-09
was done on our weekly gig. We made the setup as similar possible, and
On Mon, May 5, 2008 11:49 pm, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for
your opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need
for a digital recorder (and maybe playback machine) for use in her
job. I think she's thinking in the $1k
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for your
opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need for a
digital recorder (and maybe playback machine) for use in her job. I
think she's thinking in the $1k range (since CA got some special
Hi David many thanks for the good info. We have seen the ZOOM
in a catalog, and were intrigued ... however, I had no idea as to its
quality, so your words are good to hear. I'm on a MAC, if I
connected the ZOOM via the USB cable, would the file automatically
place in iTunes, or just
Survived a fall into a river, you Say? That's much more impressive
than my cell phone which fell into our toilet (no, don't ask me how),
and was toast. Again, I appreciate the good info. See, I knew this
list wouldn't let me down.
Thanks,
Dean
On May 6, 2008, at 2:49 AM, Dennis
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Hi David many thanks for the good info. We have seen the ZOOM in a
catalog, and were intrigued ... however, I had no idea as to its
quality, so your words are good to hear. I'm on a MAC, if I connected
the ZOOM via the USB cable, would the file automatically
On Mon, May 5, 2008 11:49 pm, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for
your opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need
for a digital recorder (and maybe playback machine) for use in her
job. I think she's thinking in the
On 6-May-08, at 11:25 AM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Hi David many thanks for the good info. We have seen the ZOOM
in a catalog, and were intrigued ... however, I had no idea as to
its quality, so your words are good to hear. I'm on a MAC, if I
connected the ZOOM via the USB cable,
On Tue, May 6, 2008 8:03 am, Christopher Smith wrote:
A couple of things about these two models. The Microtrack takes a few
seconds to boot up and when you hit Record the start is not
immediate, so if you are trying for dictaphone-like immediacy you
will be disappointed.
The boot time is
At 8:49 PM -0700 5/5/08, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for
your opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need
for a digital recorder (and maybe playback machine) for use in her
job. I think she's thinking in the $1k range
Thank you sir ...
Dean
On May 6, 2008, at 8:29 AM, John Howell wrote:
At 8:49 PM -0700 5/5/08, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for
your opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need
for a digital recorder (and maybe
On May 6, 2008, at 10:44 AM, Lee Actor wrote:
Yeah, Lee the Pocketrak 2G is in the catalog I'm using ... as
you say, it lists at $350. Says the thing is only .5 in thick ..
I'm wondering how much sound the built-in speaker can put out. I'm
checkin' it out.
Dean
I'm also about to buy
On Tue, May 6, 2008 6:29 pm, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Yeah, Lee the Pocketrak 2G is in the catalog I'm using ... as
you say, it lists at $350. Says the thing is only .5 in thick ..
I'm wondering how much sound the built-in speaker can put out. I'm
checkin' it out.
I downloaded the manual.
Aha ... someone who understands specs. I'm really glad you researched
it ... I suspect others may be happy also. So far, I think it's going
to be the ZOOM.
Thanks,
Dean
On May 6, 2008, at 5:20 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
On Tue, May 6, 2008 6:29 pm, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Yeah,
Before I spend hours googling this topic, I thought I'd ask for
your opinions on the matter. My wife, a music educator, has a need
for a digital recorder (and maybe playback machine) for use in her
job. I think she's thinking in the $1k range (since CA got some
special one time funding for
43 matches
Mail list logo
