Thanks everyone for your opinions and help - I am 95% decided on going with=
the Marantz as my next recorder - now I just have to decide if the additio=
nal features on the PMD661-MKII are worth the extra money. Password, and e=
ncryption does not seem necessary. Does anyone use the newer version?
Thanks again,
Scott
--- In "Jez" <> wrote:
>
>
> no probs Eric - I didn't include every recorder in the same price range b=
ecause it really does depend on what features are most important - also, pr=
ices vary quite a bit by country, so here in the UK the 661 is around the s=
ame price as the FR-2LE, the R-44 etc. So, when mentioning the LS-100 I to=
ok the approach of 'chap has =A3500 or so to spend on a recorder & wants to=
be able to do a wide range of things without it being bulky, always having=
to have external mics, wanting quiet pre-amps for the price, xlr inputs' e=
tc. & in that case the Olympus wins. I'm sure someone else on here will hav=
e the analysis stats for the pre-amps of the LS-100 & the 661 but hands on =
i'd say there is nothing between them.
>
> The headphone issue on the LS-100 isn't a big problem, it's just on the l=
ow side so it takes a bit of getting used to - which one always has to do w=
ith each new recorder anyway.
>
> FR-2LE: a bit on the bulky side / internal mics not great.
> R-44: not a hand held / pre-amp noise can be an issue if one goes outside=
the 12 noon outer dial rule.
> Tascam DR-100mk II: internal mics not as good as the olympus / pre-amps a=
bit noisier
> R-26: very plastic / all kinds of noise issues
> Zoom H4N: plastic / coloured sound via not great internal mics / noisey p=
re-amps
> Zoom H6: as above
> Sony PCM-50: good internal mics / no xlr inputs
> PDM661: sturdy construction / decent pre-amps / internal mics not great /=
battery life not great
>
> the ones above that operate only on standard batteries might also be an i=
ssue for some folks.
>
> ta,
>
>
>
>
> --- In Eric Fassbender <eric@> wrote:
> >
> > Jez, sorry to be nit picking, but from how I read your email, there is =
only the LS-100 in the same price range of the 661, which is similar in qua=
lity but has a problem with headphone out, as you point out. What are the r=
ecorders that "plenty of folks [...] say you get more for your money"? From=
what I can see all other recorders in your list are way above the price of=
the 661 and LS-100 and if you mean that one gets more value for money if o=
ne invests in a recorder in this more expensive category then you are parti=
ally right. Of course you will get better quality with these, however, it r=
eally depends on the use case. Scott's question was about a mid-price recor=
der (limited budget). So which other recorders are there in this price rang=
e that have quieter pre-amps and how do the 661 and LS-100 really compare i=
n terms of quality? I haven't tested the LS-100 and if you have both, I'd b=
e very interested in a comparison recording :) However, looking at Scott's =
other requirements (interviews, live concerts), the LS-100 may be the bette=
r choice because it seems a lot smaller than the 661.
> >
> > What limitations do you refer to with the 661? I have found none, other=
than that I would sometimes like a couple more channels ...
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> > On 04/06/2013, at 7:24 AM, Jez <tempjez@> wrote:
> >
> > > oh oh :) this is one of those questions that can result in tons of di=
fferent answers, of course.
> > >
> > > It all depends on what features you want on the recorder & which are =
most important. The Olympus LS-100 is, imo, the best all round hand held re=
corder with decent-ish built in mics for below =A3400 for example, but of c=
ourse like every recorder it has some quirks (low headphone output that tak=
es some time to get used to etc.). I try to keep up with developments at al=
l price ranges but have to say that if you can afford it it's worth stretch=
ing your budget a bit. Again its just my opinion but I think there's not mu=
ch advantage in recorders over =A3400 until one begin to look at something =
like the Tascam DR-680. Some folks like the Roland R-44 & R-88 or the Foste=
x FR-2LE also for example.
> > >
> > > Just to be clear the Marantz is ok & if you like the features & don't=
mind its particular limitations then i'm sure you'll get a lot out of it.
> > >
> > > --- In Eric Fassbender <eric@> wrot=
e:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Jez,
> > > >
> > > > could you please provide some examples? I would be very interested =
to improve my gear.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Eric
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 04/06/2013, at 2:04 AM, Jez <tempjez@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > the 661 has ok pre-amps but not the quietest in this price range.=
If you start with a zoom then just about anything else will be a big step =
up as they have some of the noisiest pre-amps. The 661 is an ok recorder fo=
r sure, but there are plenty of folks who'll say you get more for your mone=
y with other recorders (good in-built mics, better power usage etc etc).
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In Tim Kahn <timothy.kahn@>=
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I also have the 661 and I love it very much. I moved from the o=
riginal H4. I purchased mine from Doug Oade (oade.com) with the "super mod"=
which supposedly uses quieter pre-amps than the stock unit. I have never t=
ried a stock unit so I can't say for sure there is a difference. I have use=
d the 661 in a lot of different applications and conditions and except for =
2 occasions it has worked as it should.
> > > > > > In the two occasions that it failed, it was raining very hard a=
nd the recorder got wet. It seems water can get between the buttons on the =
front panel and cause erratic behavior (like a particular button is being p=
ressed over and over rapidly, for example). In both cases I placed the reco=
rder in my food dehydrator, set on low, and left it to dry over night. Now =
it works perfectly well again. I should add that in both cases the rain was=
extremely heavy and I was in the rain for extended periods of time and I'm=
really surprised that there was not more damage.
> > > > > > My main complaint with it is that there are not two separate kn=
obs for gain adjustment. For a stereo pair where you only need to change th=
e gain for both at once its fine, but often I have two lav mics on people a=
nd it is a two hand job to change the gain on one channel and almost always=
you will change the gain on the other as well. If you happen to have espec=
ially large fingers it might even be more annoying.
> > > > > > But really, for me it has been an excellent recorder standing u=
p to my particular abuses very well.
> > > > > > Here is a recording I am particularly fond of: http://www.frees=
ound.org/people/Corsica_S/sounds/184797/
> > > > > > Tim
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Jun 1, 2013, at 10:17 PM, shooze53 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello folks,
> > > > > > > I have a question regarding the quality and durability of the=
Marantz recorders. I have in the past owned the ZOOM H4n and Tascam DR100-=
mkII recorders. Both have their strengths I suppose, but those strengths ar=
e not the durability of the switches and controls. The Tascam I had for app=
rox. 6 months, and it was suitable for some situations using onboard microp=
hones, but the rotary wheel started to fail, and the power switch was alway=
s a little questionable from the very beginning. I returned it, unsatisfied=
.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am now considering purchase of the PMD661 Marantz recorder =
for field recording, (as well as other uses, ie. interview and live music r=
ecording) Does anyone have experience using the Marantz product? If so, any=
comments as to durability and ease of use, and sound quality would be very=
useful and helpful in my decision to purchase.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > i am on a limited budget, but am willing to spend what is nee=
ded to obtain both high grade audio, and durable hardware.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks in advance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scott
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|