Earlier models in the Olympus DM series were =91voice recorders=92, which u=
sually translated into highly filtered bass response, grittier sounding hig=
hs, and other features aimed at the transcription crowd.
Looking at the manual for this model, that frequency response =91voice tail=
oring=92 is now an optional menu item, so you can turn it off. You can also=
deactivate the 'voice-activated' recording start control and the automatic=
volume control. So that=92s all good.
There are no signal-to-noise specs in the manual, so these preamps may not =
be as quiet in this model as in the LS series. But at $100 it=92s probably =
worth an experiment.
16-bit 44.1k is not a bad spec for nature recording, 24 bit would be nice b=
ut is not crucial. WAV is definitely a good idea, and this has that (PCM).
This model actually uses three built-in mikes, probably two cardioids at th=
e sides and an omni mid. With the omni included they say bass response goes=
down to 20 Hz=85or there is a mode you can set that uses just the side mik=
es with low end dropping at 70 Hz. Oddly, if you plug in an external mike t=
he low end drops at 40 Hz.
One nice touch: this model can now recharge NiMH AAA batteries when plugged=
in with its own charger or via USB from a computer.
=97Flawn Williams
> Olympus DM-620?
> Posted by: naturalcontemplative
> Date: Tue Sep 16, 2014 1:55 pm ((PDT))
>
> Has anyone here used the Olympus DM-620 recorder? On paper it looks very =
similar to the discontinued LS-7, except it is only a 16 bit recorder.
>
>
> I would not use it with external microphones. I am looking for an inexpen=
sive recorder with timer (can't afford a SongMeter) for recording presence =
of birds in the absence of humans. This looks like it could do the job for =
just a little over US$100. Some people spoke highly of the LS-7 so I wonder=
if this recorder is also better than one might expect from an inexpensive =
recorder.
>
>
> Many thanks.
>
|