naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Microtrack vs Edirol

Subject: Re: Microtrack vs Edirol
From: Klas Strandberg <>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 02:56:07 +0100
Hi all!

It made me pissed (excuse me) not to come to a - to me - logical and
sensible result testing the MT mic input.

So: I have today focused on the 3,5 mm input, refusing to talk to people
and not answering the phone.
Not doing the dishes or walking the dog. I am now finally pleased with the=

reliability of my test.

At http://www.telinga.com/gallery/gallery_private.htm I have posted a file=

from a test, done repeatedly,  again and again with the same result:

It is a comparison between the MT 24/96 (3,5 mm input) and the well known
and accepted Tascam DAP1. Lots of people have made excellent recordings
with the Tascam!

As a microphone I used one channel of a Stereo DATmic + the PRO6 handle,
which runs both on phantom power -Tascam - and a external power box for the=

MT 24/96

It's a ticking clock + ambience + the noise from the Tascam motor. (I had
it running also when the MT24/96 was tested)

The file is 3 sec of  xx and then 3 sec of yy and another 3 sec of xx and
so on.

Who can hear which is which? There is a difference, but.... folks...


Klas



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU