Is there a simple machine - that isn't a laptop - dedicated to making location recordings? I.e. a digital/HDD version of a Revox/Uher tape-recorder.

All I'm looking for is a Sony or equivalent box and a good quality mike - with approximate prices, if known. Thanks.

Would a digital voice recorder be good enough on quality grounds? My definition of quality would be 'good enough' when played back through a Naim stereo system.

A lot of good recordings can be made with a Sony MiniDisc recorder. You can use Pro/SemiPro mikes etc.

Sir needs one of these:

http://www.edirol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=313&Itemid=390

I have the previous R4Pro which is hard disc based and is utterly superb.

£500 ish need to do a lot of outside recording to justify that. Looks like a good product though.

Thanks Jon, I guess that is what I would ideally like!

Mind you, it's only £100 more than the cost of the single Powerline I haven't had to buy yet...

Not sure Sony still make the minidisc machines, and the current tech would be SD cards etc. The ICD-UX80 recorder with an external mike could be surprising.

quote:

Not sure Sony still make the minidisc machines

I think the Higher capacity ones are still sold,but there's usually plenty on E-Bay.
New tech new prices though, how much recording are you wanting to do?

BTW Sony still make 1 MD portable player/recorder the MZ-RH1 using HiMD (1Gb)discs see Sony W/S for details.

Minidisc is rather dead, so a SD/CF card recorder would be a more future proof choice. I'va got the Zoom H2 and am rather satisfied with it, other options would be Microtrack II, Edirol R-9 or others. But usually all these recorders are better in recording louder events, so outside recording with low input levels could be a noise problem.

The Edirol looks like a superb product and that's what I would probably go for now. I used to have a Sony minidisc recorder wuth a professional adapter (as used by BBC radio) which gave it a better power supply and mic input etc. (also made it a lot bulkier/heavier!). I don't think the company that made the adapter is still in business. My advice would be to ring your local radio station and ask them what they use for recording in the field.

Regards,

Peter

The Zoom H2 looks to be exactly what I want, at only £150 but offering high audio quality, specially designed built-in mics, and SD storage capability. Can't see any point in looking further! Thanks.

PS Just had a look at the Edirol R-09 specs so now I have to make my mind up!

You can not get much better than the Korg MR-1000. Can make 192k/24 and DSD, 2xDSD on its internal 40 GB Hard Drive.

The Sony MD1 DAT recorder is a fine portable, although now probably discontinued.

If you want to spend a bit more on real pro stuff have a look at the Core Sound
www.core-sound.com
PDAudio Mic 24/96 A/d converter and PDA Interface which can be used with suitable IPAQ or similar PDA to record to SD card

I use both of the above and am very pleased with the results

eddie

Rupert Bear,

The Zoom H2 was compared against the Edirol R-09HR and a couple of other machines (forget which) in HIFICRITIC in a group test of easily portable machines. The Edirol (£250) came out top for sound quality, robustness and general useability. The other two machiens were also around the £250/£300 mark and came in for slight criticisms of their sound quality and interfaces. The H2 was the only one below £200 and was criticized for its lack of sound quality. The H2 has a bigger £250 brother called the H4. I don't understand why 'Critic chose the H2 other than it was cheap. The R-09HR was particularly praised for sound quality (I think the Marantz was the only one to be close). IIRC, the R-09HR was recommended by Tony Faulkner (recording engineer of some repute) in another article about recording technologies. Work a long look. If you're not familiar with the brand name, Edirol is the same company as Roland, of electric piano fame, so they know what they're about...

Zoom H2.

I've got one, Ken Christianson (who does the Naim Label recordings) has one–nearly every jazz guy I know has one. They are a GREAT portable, personal location recorder for the money, just under $200 in the U.S.

They will record 24-bit/96kHz (though I'd use 88.2kHz/24-bit if CD replay was your ultimate destination) in stereo, but will also do surround (90° + 110° spreads)–the Edirol is just not as flexible.

I wish I had had one of these in the 1990s for industrial sample gathering–but I now use one of these for basic surround-sound recording.

Forget HIFICRITIC–for those of us who are musicians and record on a regular basis, this is a great Swiss army knife on a budget.

David,

The HIFICRITIC review mentioned the surround capability but they were rather unimpressed by it. However, they did allow that the 120 degree(?) spread gave you more options if you needed the wider spread for stereo recording (I forget the exacvt reasons why this could be a good thing).

Thanks for all these ideas. I have to say I'm tempted by the Edirol as it looks the best interface with a true audio system - there was talk somewhere of the Zoom H2 having problems with its line out or line in - signal overload not easy to detect?

I do however like the fact that it (the H2) looks like a real microphone and obviously majors on this aspect.

Both these machines seem to take the place of the discontinued Sony DAT and minidisc units. I'm just surprised that Sony don't seem to have an equivalent machine at this level.

The Korg is too big & expensive by the way - a studio beast.

I'm lucky enough to do this for a living. After using everything under the sun, this is the closest thing to a take-anywhere, record-anything setup:

http://www.sounddevices.com/products/index.html#digital

Two quality microphones into a 702 or 722, a bit of clever microphone placement and you can enjoy location recordings that wipe the floor with a lot of commercial recordings.

If the 7-series are too expensive, look up the Fostex FR2LE. I'd take external mics over an Edirol or Zoom any day.

The Naim Label 'True Stereo' recordings employ the same principle, but are recorded onto tape rather than hard disk.

Try the Olympus LS10 with built -in microphones and no moving parts. Costs about 400 Euro here in Germany.

Bob

If you feel the Edirol makes better sense, go for it–IMHO most Roland / Edirol gear tends toward a softer, more round presentation, if in fact that's what you're after, a bit sweet on top.

Never had any problems with level issues on the Zoom, as I (like any other professional) tend to test-record a fair bit before I go out into the field with a new tool. It probably is a bit brighter than some of the other devices, but this can be addressed by placement. The supplied power supply is slightly better than battery power.

I don't typically use the Zoom's analogue outputs for playback, only for field acquisition–this might be what tripped up the reviewers, in fact–as I don't expect a $200 digital device to grant absolute fidelity upon playback.

I have had the R-09 for a bit over a year and have enjoyed using it to record my kids and my bluegrass band some. I haven't compared it to others but I have been very impressed by the sound from its onboard mics. Never tried better external mikes into it. I like that the new HD version has a remote control. Having to put down my bass to start and stop it or distracting my kids songs or stories by fidgeting with the device would be a thing of the past.

c

of course, if one was doing this properly you would have: