Walt:
I heard that Nagra received a lot of criticism concerning the Orb drive when
they introduced the prototype last fall. As a result, they postponed the
release of the unit and I've been wondering if they were changing to some
other kind of drive storage.
Lang
> "Randolph S. Little" wrote:
>>
>> NatureRecordists:
>>
>> You may wish to check out the new Nagra V portable digital sound
>> hard disk recorder specs at http://www.nagrausa.com
>
> I read that, and a few quick comments:
>
> They say it uses a Orb disk. If so, this is not really a hard disk
> recorder, a Orb disk is a different thing. It does use the technique of
> flying the head over the disk (at a height of 3 microns). This is a
> serious problem in that the Orb drives are not built with all the shock
> resistance of standard hard disks. Reports on the drive seem to indicate
> that they work reliably in only one position (flat on the desk). Meaning
> it may not work carried around on a strap, and I see no strap lugs on
> it. Even then it's extremely vulnerable to dust and dirt or being
> bumped. The disk cartridge has a shutter, but like any removable has to
> injest raw air from time to time when inserted or removed, with it's
> attendant dust particles. Anything bigger than that tiny gap can rip
> material out of the disk surface, or the head. This is a classic problem
> with removable hard disk technology. And we are talking about taking
> this out into the field, which can often be pretty grubby?
>
> I'm not familiar with the technology of the actual recording, it's
> called magneto resistive. It sounds like it's magnetic media, vulnerable
> to degradation by ordinary magnetic fields. I expect the info is
> available on the internet.
>
> There was considerable stir about Orb drives, particularly in the Mac
> community about a couple years back. I've seen the drives back then in
> the mac section in CompUSA, in a USB form. It's fundamentally a SCSI
> drive as originally designed. There is a PC version. However, the last
> ones I saw in CompUSA were on the disposal table very cheap. And I've
> not seen them recently, or heard much mention, though I've not really
> looked. (They are definitely not in the mac section) There apparently
> was a fairly high failure rate to the drives, at least in the early
> going. All the hallmarks of a custom drive and format that did not make
> it in the marketplace. Or, at best is still only hanging in there.
>
> Meanwhile, Fujitsu announced in January the next capacity upgrade for
> standard 3.5" optical disks, the most durable and reliable removable
> disks you can use. Just as fast or faster than a Orb disk. The new drive
> will read and write to a new size, 2.3gig, as well as all the older
> sizes. This is a standard cartridge system, not something limited to a
> single manufacturer:
> http://www.fcpa.com/products/mo-drives/mcj3230ap/specifications.html
>
> It would be interesting to know how Nagra ended up with the Orb. Sounds
> a lot like old stodgy company not familiar with modern stuff gets
> flim-flammed. For those considering this recorder, do the research on
> the current state of the single source Orb drive. The last price I saw
> on disks was more like $40 than the $30 Nagra quotes, but that's a while ago.
>
> The Nagra also appears to use XLR digital output connectors, not the
> standard stuff. No optical out, no USB to transfer the files. A line
> input that's a 15 pin mini D connector! Banana plugs! What a strange
> mixture of connectors! You might luck out and they are using a standard
> disk formatting which would allow you to buy a Orb drive to use for
> transfer but it appears to have no high speed transfer.
>
> They make a point that the format is BWF, which is apparently a variant
> of the WAV format used in the broadcast industry. It might be a good
> idea to check that format out before assuming this is standard WAV. The
> AES/EBU format is broadcast stuff, not the same as the digital format we
> are used to. It sounds very specific to broadcast equipment in it's
> overall design.
>
>> I note that the "Preliminary Information" lists only 44.1 kHz and 48 kHz
>> sampling frequencies, but the Richmond press release adds 96 kHz.
>> At just 3 kg (about 7 pounds) one would likely not suffer "Nagravation"
>> which has been reported after carrying the heavier Nagra IV analog
>> recorders.
>
> As far as useful 96 khz sampling, if there really is such a thing, it's
> output circuits only go to 20 kHz, not even the top of 44 or 48 kHz
> sampling rates. And the switch for 24/16 bit sampling is listed under
> Dither, making me wonder if one or the other is not a true sampler but
> only mathematically derived.
>
> Looking at the pictures, and thinking about it, unless that's without
> batteries this thing is not built very solidly. Need info on what sort
> of frame and body it's got. I also find it a bit strange that the Orb
> drive appears to be grafted onto the machine rather than built in, and
> under a plastic cover, that worries me a little.
>
>> Who will be the first to get their hands on one of these jewels and let
>> us know how it rates for field recording of bioacoustical information?
>
> It will probably drag a few more folks off their tape fetish. Though not
> onto proven trustworthy media.
>
> I have no doubt it will sell. They could probably put their label on a
> actual concrete block and use a hemp rope for the "strap" and call it a
> recorder and someone would pay thousands of dollars for it.
>
> But, it should be evaluated just like any other recorder, not by brand
> name. It has all the hallmarks of a fairly specialist machine designed
> for tying into specific broadcast equipment. And, in many ways what is
> to be expected when a company that's been living way in the past tries
> to play catch-up. It's carrying a lot of electronics not necessary for
> nature recording, and has connectors that are going to result in a bunch
> of strange adapters needed, and is not very modern in it's features.
> (though I note it does have the prerecord buffer) It has a strange
> physical design with the drive not being integrated, and that would
> probably turn out to be annoying in portable field use, if not a
> reliability problem. It's using a special disk drive and format that's
> entirely dependent on one company, not a industry standard.
>
> I'd say if it's under $2000, preferably way under, it might be worth
> considering as a risky experiment, but if it's above that it's
> overpriced. Wait for the model that fixes some of this one's problems.
>
> Walt
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|