Rob Danielson wrote:
> If one needs a good mic pre too and stereo, $2K is around the cost of
> portadisk and a MP2. But at 4K$ for 4 channels of 24 bit, don't you
> think most folks will continue to wait to get just the 24bit option?
One would have to have top end mics for there to be much reason for
combining a MP2 with a Portadisc. Even with the MKH mics, as my samples
show, a Portadisc alone is a pretty capable recorder.
I do hope everyone realizes that for the thought to be improvement in
sound quality with 24bit, you are also into highest end mics. And buying
4 of those for 4 channel is going to be a big investment. Many nature
recordists now record mono, and part of that for some is the cost of
going stereo, which doubles mic and supporting equipment cost. Going 4
channel is another doubling.
Anyone who thinks they will do high end sound in 4 channel for only the
cost of the recorder maybe should do some rethinking.
> I also have reservations about the hard drive recording direction. Do
> I want to always have to manage hard drive data/space before I can go
> out with a clean drive to record? I do record a lot and 20GB on a hd
> is alot to keep track of/make constant decisions about. It takes
> considerable time for me to archive selected field recordings and
> project mixes onto to 4.2 GB DVD-R's. Do I want to add this practice
> to all of my field minutes too? A 3 hour DAT tape costs $2, holds 2GB
> of data, pops out and in and serves as data back-up after I transfer
> all or some of the data to DVD-R. I listen to the tapes as I transfer
> them to the hard drive before burning to DVD so I don't see this as a
> complete time loss. A DVD-R takes at least an hour to organize and
> burn. If I brought back 20 hours from an excursion, I'd have no
> choice but to spend 3-4 hours dumping data off the drive before going
> back out or delaying the chore by popping in CompactFlash. Instant
> random access is great, I'd need it to make choices about what to
> transfer cuz once its gone from the drive, it's gone. How often do
> you miss great stuff jumping around on a large file? It is safer,
> easier to dump-off every minute to DVD which with tape I can do any
> time I want even while washing dishes instead of taking precious
> field time. And there is another risk with making large files. Ever
> had a sound file go corrupt? Sound Devices is 20 minutes from the
> summer camp we are planning in the Kickapoo Valley May 16-18.
I have for some time pointed this out. These huge capacities have to be
put somewhere, and that's not endless files on your computers HD. That's
not backup, that's working files. No matter how big your HD's, you can
fill them. And a HD in a computer is very vulnerable to some software
glitch.
In the last two years of the herp survey, for several months of the year
I had no time for processing. I was often out recording 4-5 nights a
week. I would come in, put the locked full MD's into the storage box,
restock my bag with blanks and be off. From January to August I did no
processing. Then through the fall I'd catch up. With MD, not only was I
not tied to having to constantly do the computer stuff and backups, but
since I was using a media that, in itself, is archival, I did not have
to worry a lot that it might go bad in that period.
When I did the backups, it was not just one copy. I've been in computers
far too long to trust that. I would end up with three copies, MD, CD-R,
and 3.5" MO Disk.
Walt
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|