Subject: | 10. Re: SONY PCM-M10 noise test |
---|---|
From: | "Raimund" animalsounds |
Date: | Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:29 am ((PST)) |
Rob Danielson wrote: > I'm not at all concerned about a few extra pounds if they serve my > purpose. :-) Rob D. Sure Rob, I fully agree with that approach. There is of course no doubt tha= t the extra pounds are absolutely necessary if one wants to get the best po= ssible results. What I originally meant is that one can already use one of the larger and h= eavier recorders because the additional weight and volume can be neglected = when you consider the additionally required components. So, why do you comp= lain about the higher noise levels in those tiny pocket recorders? The pric= e of the Fostex FR2-LE for instance is also very acceptable in my opinion.= Regards, Raimund |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | 9. Re: SONY PCM-M10 noise test, oryoki2000 |
---|---|
Next by Date: | 11. Re: SONY PCM-M10 noise test, Raimund |
Previous by Thread: | 9. Re: SONY PCM-M10 noise test, oryoki2000 |
Next by Thread: | 11. Re: SONY PCM-M10 noise test, Raimund |
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