| Subject: | Re: comparing 20 portable digital recorders |
|---|---|
| From: | "Robin" escalation746 |
| Date: | Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:37 am ((PST)) |
The articles have been updated to make the criteria even clearer. As Rob po= inted out, the consideration of EIN in the second article was out of contex= t, since the main criterion there is portability and the use of the interna= l microphones. A fuller treatment of the M-Audio MicroTrack II and Zoom H2 has been added. The third article will consider sound quality as the primary criterion. -- robin |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Spiders and sound, Mike Rooke |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: comparing 20 portable digital recorders, Nathan Gorman |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: comparing 20 portable digital recorders, Robin |
| Next by Thread: | Re: comparing 20 portable digital recorders, Nathan Gorman |
| 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