I found the noise floor of the Olympus LS10 quite noticeable when compared to
an Edirol R09-HR and, later, a Sony PCM-M10. Didn't much like the sound from
LS10's internal mics either - rather thin.
But the Olympus recorders have the best ergonomics and they're very nicely
made. Some recordists I know wholeheartedly recommend the LS11.
Nowadays I use a PCM-M10 and, if I need to use phantom-powered mics, then a
Sound Devices MixPre-D is added.
Cheers
Ian
- - -
London Sound Survey http://www.soundsurvey.org.uk
--- In Marinos Koutsomichalis <>
wrote:
>
> what about the new ls3 ??
>
>
> On 31 Oct 2011, at 20:29, Robin wrote:
>
> > Peter Shute wrote:
> >
> > > Before I got my PCM-M10, I considered the Olympus LS-7, but
> > > shied away from a model that very few nature recordists
> > > are using. I don't know if it's because it's not suitable,
> > > or because it's not well known (too new?).
> >
> > The LS-10, LS-11 and LS-5 are similar recorders with noise floor measured
> > at -122 dBu(A) by Raimund (here on the list). There is no reason not to use
> > Olympus except, as you say, familiarity.
> >
> > The LS-7 is smaller, uses micro SD instead of regular SD cards, can
> > recharge NiMH AAAs on board and has timer record. But the noise floor is
> > 4dB worse, which may or may not matter to you.
> >
> > I tend to recommend the LS-5 as the cheapest of the "larger" units since
> > the only disadvantages are the lack of bundled accessories and the internal
> > memory -- which you can always top up with cards.
> >
> > -- Robin Parmar
> >
> >
>
> --
> Marinos Koutsomichalis
> Music Research Center, University of York
> Contemporary Music Research Centre (CMRC)
> www.marinoskoutsomichalis.com
> www.agxivatein.com
> skype: marinosk_81
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
|