Subject: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack? |
---|---|
From: | "Jeremiah Moore" jeremiahmoore99 |
Date: | Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:00 pm (PDT) |
Correction: The digital audio input on the Microtrack 24/96 is coaxial SPDIF (rca-style jack), not optical. -j >One significant difference is that the Microtrack 2496 has a digital >optical input, while the R-09 does not. So if you need a very small >recorder to act as a bit bucket for a preamp with digital output, then >the Microtrack should be considered. > >The other obvious difference is that the Microtrack 2496 records up to >24/96 (doh!) while the R-09's maximum digitizing rate is 24/48. I >doubt this would be of any practical significance for most field >recordists, but it might make a difference to a few people. > >--oryoki > > -- ----------------------------------------------------------- jeremiah moore | SOUND | http://www.jeremiahmoore.com/ professional site and reel http://babyjane.com/timeweb/ personal site http://northstation.net/ music project |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, Rob Danielson |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: Parabolic dish sources in UK ?, David Harris |
Previous by Thread: | Re: Edirol R-09 or MAudio Microtrack?, Rob Danielson |
Next by Thread: | Re: Parabolic dish sources in UK ?, David Harris |
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