We've talked about it. The line inputs on the M-audio Microtracker
tested inordinately noisy.
http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/pages/MicroTrack_NH900_722_=
IMA-QT-present.html
Others have reported the same problem with the Edirol R4 I believe.
I've not come across and explanation for the noise on the balanced
inputs,.. It used to be even -10dB RCA line inputs were immune from
significant noise. The Hi-MD line line inputs aren't noisy. I've not
read reports on the R-9 yet. I can can hear more differences between
matched studio speakers than between the A-D in recorders I use. Rob
D.
At 9:54 PM +0200 6/9/06, jason kahn wrote:
>hello list
>as my dat is slowly dying, i am looking at other options of recording;
>specifically one of the newer 24 bit wave recorders (edirol r-09,
>microtrack, etc).
>i am using a rode nt-4 going through a sound devices mic pre. i am
>satisfied with this set-up for my recording needs.
>my question is: are there any appreciable differences in sound quality
>when recording through the line-in input of these recorders?
>most of the discussion i've seen on the list has been about the pre-amps
>and phantom power capabilities of these portable recorders, which i
>would be bypassing altogether.
>i often read that one or the other recorder "sounds better." is this
>referring to the analog-digital converters in each recorder? if so,
>which recorders have people found to give "better sounding" recordings
>(and i know this is really subjective...). or are some line inputs
>noisier than others?
>i can't afford a sound devices hard disc recorder right now, so my
>choices are limited to the microtrack and edirol r-09 (24 bit, small,
>relatively inexpensive).
>thanks very much for any help!
>with best regards
>jason kahn
>
>
>
>"Microphones are not ears,
>Loudspeakers are not birds,
>A listening room is not nature."
>Klas Strandberg
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
--
Rob Danielson
Peck School of the Arts
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/
|