At 3:13 PM +0000 8/13/09, oryoki2000 wrote:
>
>
>"Raimund Specht" <> wrote:
>
>> Olympus LS-10
>>
>> SENSE HIGH, LEVEL 10 (16 or 24 bit):
>> -122dBu(A) -119dBu(unweighted)
>>
>> SENSE HIGH, LEVEL 2 (16 or 24 bit):
>> -103dBu(A) -100dBu(unweighted)
>>
>> SENSE LOW, LEVEL 10 (24 bit):
>> -121dBu(A) -118dBu(unweighted)
>>
>> SENSE LOW, LEVEL 10 (16 bit):
>> -113dBu(A) -110dBu(unweighted)
>
>That's impressive performance from a device that costs less than
>$250. Here's an eBay reseller I have used in the past who is
>offering new, unopened LS-10 for $228 shipped. This seller will ship
>to international addresses, with extra shipping cost, of course.
><http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D250413193240>http://=
cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3D250413193240
>
>--oryoki
>
Hi Oryoki--
In case some manufacturer friends happen to be following along, I
would reserve the adjective "impressive" for another occasion, myself.
A recorder that does not add audible to noise to the mics we commonly
use for nature work (10dB(A) - 12 dB(A) self-noise range) I would
consider as fully up to our tasks and "impressive" at under $400.
I'm comfortable that Vicki's listening tests have consistently shown
that the LS-10 under-performs what we've come to expect from Hi-MD,
the D-50, D-50, the FR2-LE and hopefully, the upcoming Sony pocket
recorder.
Of course, using noisy mics or recording only robust subjects opens
another level of criteria where quite a few of the pocket recorders
are fine. For someone wanting to invest in a tool for critical
recording in quiet locations with good mics, in terms of its input
noise performance, I'd place the LS-10 in the "slightly above
average" category. Its workable as several recordists have shown,
but it still has a design flaw that we know can be avoided when
engineers make low input noise a priority. Rob D.
--
|