| Subject: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack? |
|---|---|
| From: | "Aaron Ximm" aaron_gmail |
| Date: | Fri Jun 23, 2006 11:58 am (PDT) |
> > I've been reading with interest the comments on Edirol's new R-09 and = wonder if anyone had practical comparisons to make between it and MAudio's= Microtrack 24/96. One big physical difference I have noticed > > Over at taperssection.com the R-09 and microtrack are being discussed at= length. The > microtrack does not have many fans there for various reasons: noisy prea= mps, noisy line > in, software glitches, and in one instance an exploding battery! > > the r-09 is very new, so there is less info about use in the field, but = preliminary reports > are promising. A similar thred started on RAMPS this week, with several votes for the R-09, but likewise, mostly because (a) it has field replaceable batteries and (b) no one's uncovered things to complain about yet... :) best, aaron -- www.quietamerican.org 83% happy 9% disgusted 6% fearful 2% angry |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, beppopatina |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, Jeremiah Moore |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, beppopatina |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, Jeremiah Moore |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
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