What devices are good for recording the sound tracks?
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
-
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:29 am
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
- Contact:
What devices are good for recording the sound tracks?
I've been looking over the MP3 recorders and digital recording devices on the market for use as my sound recorder for super 8 films. I have thought of just using the Lap top computer for location shooting, but it requires a sound man to operate while shooting. Then there is the small MP3 recorders that are cheep enough but have no range. Perhaps a mic pre-amp could be used with one.
What suggestions do you have?
What suggestions do you have?
-
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 7:10 pm
- Location: London
I would suggest a hi MD recorder http://www.sony.net/Products/Hi-MD/capacity.html http://www.minidisc.org
I think the plus points are -
Uncompressed PCM recording.
USB connection for direct transfer of recorded audio as wav. file to PC.
Cheap removable media, Standard MD discs can store 28 minutes of CD quality uncompressed audio and can be bought for as cheap as a dollar.
Can be used as a portable hard drive for backing up and transporting files
I think one if the biggest plus points with the format is that the media is so cheap you can keep the originals as backups for everything you do.
I think the plus points are -
Uncompressed PCM recording.
USB connection for direct transfer of recorded audio as wav. file to PC.
Cheap removable media, Standard MD discs can store 28 minutes of CD quality uncompressed audio and can be bought for as cheap as a dollar.
Can be used as a portable hard drive for backing up and transporting files
I think one if the biggest plus points with the format is that the media is so cheap you can keep the originals as backups for everything you do.
keep on truckin'
daniel
daniel
-
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:29 am
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
- Contact:
Yes...I think the mini disk from sony is a great product. I'm thinking that may be the one to use. However, I'm wondering about the microphone to use with it. I know that Sony makes a better quality mic that is designed for use with video cameras and MD's. It sells for about $200 at the electronics store. I think I could get a pro boom mic for less.
Hi,
the features of the new Hi-MD sound very nice... but I would need a device that could record at least three tracks: Two for the stereo-sound and one for recording the sync-signal from my camera. Until now I've only found tape-recorders that could do this (since I don't want to carry around my laptop). Any ideas?
Jörg
the features of the new Hi-MD sound very nice... but I would need a device that could record at least three tracks: Two for the stereo-sound and one for recording the sync-signal from my camera. Until now I've only found tape-recorders that could do this (since I don't want to carry around my laptop). Any ideas?
Jörg
-
- Posts: 245
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 7:10 pm
- Location: London
Definately go with HiMD model as the standard MD players lack the uncompressed recording and only allow tranfer digitally from a PC to a Disc - not the reverse plus no USB storage for files.
The Sony Sony MZ-RH910 goes for $199 on Amazon - I don't think you can get a standard MD recorder for that much less. Soome are advertised as NetMD - this is just downloading from a PC not any of the features that are really useful for soundtrack recording.
The Sony Sony MZ-RH910 goes for $199 on Amazon - I don't think you can get a standard MD recorder for that much less. Soome are advertised as NetMD - this is just downloading from a PC not any of the features that are really useful for soundtrack recording.
keep on truckin'
daniel
daniel
What is the actual quality of the PCM-recording of those Hi-MD-recorders?
Sony says:
LinearPCM/1.4Mbps
This sounds like the CD-format to me:
44.1kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Some other portable digital recorders (data found on the internet and hence might not be 100% correct):
DAT-recorders allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
(some of them even even work at 96 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels!)
Creative Nomad DAP Jukebox 3 allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Edirol R-1 MP3/WAV Recorder allows a maximum rate of
44.1 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels
Edirol R4 MP3/WAV Recorder allows a maximum rate of
96 kHz; 24 bit; 4 channels(!)
Marantz PMD 670 seems to allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Marantz PMD 671 allows a maximum rate of
96 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels
Mayah FM 001 Flashman Audiorecorder seems to allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
PMD 660 allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Denon DN-F20R allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 24bit; 2 channels
Etc. pp.
In other words: Are those Hi-MD-recorders really the best choice?
Jörg
Sony says:
LinearPCM/1.4Mbps
This sounds like the CD-format to me:
44.1kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Some other portable digital recorders (data found on the internet and hence might not be 100% correct):
DAT-recorders allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
(some of them even even work at 96 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels!)
Creative Nomad DAP Jukebox 3 allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Edirol R-1 MP3/WAV Recorder allows a maximum rate of
44.1 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels
Edirol R4 MP3/WAV Recorder allows a maximum rate of
96 kHz; 24 bit; 4 channels(!)
Marantz PMD 670 seems to allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Marantz PMD 671 allows a maximum rate of
96 kHz; 24 bit; 2 channels
Mayah FM 001 Flashman Audiorecorder seems to allow a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
PMD 660 allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
Denon DN-F20R allows a maximum rate of
48kHz; 24bit; 2 channels
Etc. pp.
In other words: Are those Hi-MD-recorders really the best choice?
Jörg
spot on!jpolzfuss wrote:What is the actual quality of the PCM-recording of those Hi-MD-recorders?
Sony says:
LinearPCM/1.4Mbps
This sounds like the CD-format to me:
44.1kHz; 16 bit; 2 channels
uhmm.. best for what?In other words: Are those Hi-MD-recorders really the best choice?
as far as quality goes, they are pretty low end, although 44.1/16 is good enough for most purposes. but the mic preamps are rather noisy and the A/D convertors are not the best either.
the other annoying bit is that all video audio formats (digibeta/dv/dvd) are 48/16 so you have to apply some sample conversion.
but then again, you can have them for under 200bucks, the other formats you listed are most close or over the 1000 mark (the edirol and the nomad being thre exception, but they have their own issues).
and those MD recorders are *really* small :)
++ christoph ++
i think the differences between the recording formats listed above pale in to insignificance if you don't have both:
- a good sound man, to make use of that dynamic range.
- & a good quality mic
also do you really need 3 audio tracks?
usually i'd record dialogue in mono leaving the other track for sync.
do the things you want to be in stereo (ambience etc) actually need to be recorded dead in sync? just match it up in post?
- a good sound man, to make use of that dynamic range.
- & a good quality mic
also do you really need 3 audio tracks?
usually i'd record dialogue in mono leaving the other track for sync.
do the things you want to be in stereo (ambience etc) actually need to be recorded dead in sync? just match it up in post?
- monobath
- Senior member
- Posts: 1254
- Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2003 7:11 am
- Real name: Skip
- Location: 127.0.0.1
I have a Sony Walkman MZ-RH10 HiMD recorder. I'm on my second unit. The first one was DOA with respect to recording capability. All other functions were fine. The second one seems to be working OK.
I don't think this is a well-built device at all. Definitely nothing approaching professional quality. It is a cheap toy.
It is mostly plastic. It seems very delicate. It uses a weird gumstick battery. It is slow to start recording because it has to index to the next free location. The controls are pathetic. The menu system is slow to navigate through, very tedious. Each time you select an end option on a menu, it resets back to the beginning of the menu system instead of back one level.
Sound quality is fine to my non-discriminating ability to judge. But the device is really a piece of consumer gadget crap. I shoulda bought a Marantz PMD670. This little toy is a lot cheaper than a PMD670, but it was a waste of money in retrospect, so no real savings after all.
I don't think this is a well-built device at all. Definitely nothing approaching professional quality. It is a cheap toy.
It is mostly plastic. It seems very delicate. It uses a weird gumstick battery. It is slow to start recording because it has to index to the next free location. The controls are pathetic. The menu system is slow to navigate through, very tedious. Each time you select an end option on a menu, it resets back to the beginning of the menu system instead of back one level.
Sound quality is fine to my non-discriminating ability to judge. But the device is really a piece of consumer gadget crap. I shoulda bought a Marantz PMD670. This little toy is a lot cheaper than a PMD670, but it was a waste of money in retrospect, so no real savings after all.
-
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 7:29 am
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
- Contact:
we discussed this topic in a thread just a few months ago (fires up a complex search)...
viewtopic.php?t=8455&highlight=nagra+marantz+christoph
++ christoph ++
viewtopic.php?t=8455&highlight=nagra+marantz+christoph
++ christoph ++