Hi --
As Emil described, there was a language mix-up
that lead to me using a set of recordings for the
first test where the trim knobs on the DR680 were
not at maximum.
I've made a new blind comparison test out of
re-done clock and ambience recordings with both
recorders set a Maximum Record Gain. The SD702's
recording needed 10.5 dB gain in post to match
the playback level above 70 Hz of the DR680's.
Emil's new recording was made about 8pm with much
more Low Hz activity in the background which
allows a key difference in the recorders to be
more obviously seen and heard if monitored with
good headphones or speakers with very good low Hz
response.
http://tinyurl.com/36rs6om includes .zip link for
downloading the 3mb QuickTime movie.
There's a link to a page that identifies the recorders.
As to what pre gain numbers to assign to these
recorders I defer to the audio engineers and
shall never cite them again until I better
understand the discrepancies.
In the "DR680" compartment in my mind there is
now a asterisk that reads, "This recorder has a
comparatively high gain mic pre-- capable of 10
dB more file saturation than my SD744T recorder
and around 13dB more than my MixPre. " Of
course, I don't own a DR680, but maybe someday I
will. Rob D.
=3D =3D =3D
At 9:15 PM +0200 8/29/10, emil klotzsch wrote:
>
>hi guys,
>i just looked at the nature recording group and realised theres a lot
>of threads about my test.
>sorry, i did not read all, but i saw that a often question is if i had
>the gain on the 680 settetd to high and the trim to max.
>
>to answer this in short: NO.
>the 680 has the gain setted to HIGH. (otherwise its very very NOISY)
>but the Trim is not touched. my mistake, sorry. its not robs fault.
>thats the reason why the 680 was less saturated than the 702.
>
>the long answer is, that i made this first test you heard where i did
>not trim the gain cause i thought that the trim is just a digital trim.
>(i thought that i have read this anywhere..)
>rob infromed me that this is not the case. so i made a new test i
>though i sended him one or two days after the first test.
>well i did not. at least i can not find the email i could swear i have
>sended him.
>pittily these test files are not fully existence anymore, i deleted
>the files from the 702.
>
>however, never mind, i now made a new one, just an hour ago, and
>sended it to rob.
>4022 going into 680 and one 4022 going into the 702.
>gain on the 702 MAXED.
>gain on the 680 setted to High and trimmed MAX.
>i can reveal here one thing, the 680 is louder.
>
>sorry, i used the same clock, i don=B4t have another.
>after some time i removed the clock, so you should hear later, if rob
>provides this, a pure roomtone.
>
>and in the test you all heared, there are two files cause i swapped
>the mics to exclude that one mic sounds too different from the other..
>
>hope this helps.
>
>all the best
>emil
>
>www.emilklotzsch.de
--
|