TheRebelNC

Hi all, In order to compare the noise and gain specs for the Edirol R-09HR and MZ-RH1, I contacted the author of the Wildlife Sound Recording Society's review of the Edirol, Mr Richard Mudhar. Via the society, Mr Mudhar kindly sent me the following details, which I'm posting here in case they're of use to others... HIMD are more sensitive: -66dBu for 0dBFS relative to -47dBu for the Edirol. Noise is similar: -116dBu for HiMD, -115dBu for the Edirol, the difference is less than the margin of error.

Thanks for the thoughtful posts, A440 and tekdroid; sounds like good advice. I agree with A440's comments about the added layer of software and the redundancy of ATRAC. Your report of a SonicStage bug is not the first I've heard; it doesn't fill one with confidence, does it?! And if even an MD aficionado suggests that I skip MD, then I have to take notice! Consistent with your suggestion, I already have an iRiver T60, but was thinking the MZ-RH1 could take its place for portable and 'expandable' use (especially given its line-out, allowing me to hook it up to my hi-fi). Perhaps I should instead get a FLAC player with a large capacity for my hi-fi, and retain the T60 for portable use. Next step is to find out how the Sony and Edirol compare on their self-noise and gain characteristics. And still a major consideration is the fact that the Sony is between 1/3 (used but in perfect condition) and 2/3 (brand new) of the price of the Edirol. Even the 2/3 price leaves enough to fund both the ATR55 and ECM-MS907 (used). It seems increasingly clear that, logistically at least, the Edirol is more appropriate for my needs. I'm in no great rush, so the PCM-M10 may be released before I make a purchase. That'll make things interesting!

Thanks for the heads-up a440. You're quite right about the mics' responses, but music will be an infrequent recording subject for me, and the MS907 seemed the best compromise within my budget since it seemed to have many favourable reviews. Without wishing to go too off-topic, can anyone suggest a mic of similar price that would be sensitive to frequencies down to about 50Hz, and be suitable for recording ambient/spread-out sounds in stereo? The ATR-55 will be used specifically for isolating subjects from ambient sounds, so its frequency response is less of a concern. Thanks ozpeter for the article on 24/96 recordings. Very informative. Indeed, I searched further, and found two more articles along the same lines: http://old.hfm-detmold.de/eti/projekte/dip..._paper_6086.pdf http://www.bostonaudiosociety.org/bas_spea...bx_testing2.htm With respect to minidiscs, I only recently discovered that Sony dropped support for ATRAC a while back; this makes it harder to prefer the minidisc. Moreover, the non-standard battery is another drawback. Does anyone know if the RH1's battery is likely to become obsolete sooner rather than later?

Hi all, Many thanks for the helpful replies. That link to the comparison was exactly what I was looking for, but my searches had failed to reveal it. I had come across the Wildlife Recording website before, and I'll give the site a plug here since I found it very informative. I'm currently borrowing a Sony MZ-R5ST and am quite impressed with it, which is why I thought I'd check out MD rather than go straight to a new solid state recorder. However, I was quite unaware of the PCM-M10; I'll check it out since it looks promising. I prefer a flat response, so I never use megabass and EQ. In fact, I rejected the Olympus LS-10 because it seemed to have a roll-off below 100Hz, even when the low-cut filter was turned off! The comments about the Edirol reminded me to pay more attention to track ID features! As an aside, I've read a number of posts on various sites claiming that 24/96 is something of a marketing gimmick on portable recorders because that level of sampling resolution is beyond the quality of the electronics found in this standard of recorder. Actually, 24/96 is probably overkill for my needs, and listeners to my recordings will not have players capable of that resolution. having said that, I'd be interested to hear any thoughts of how discernible this high resolution is for amateur applications? Of course, I appreciate that the answer will vary between subjects and listeners, so I'm just inviting 'generalised' comments. Thanks again, everyone.

Hi all, My first post, so please be gentle! I'm considering purchasing a Sony MZ-RH1 or an Edirol R-09HR, and was hoping that some kind soul could advise me on the relative merits of these machines. The Sony is about 80 UKP cheaper than the Edirol, which helps. I've read a lot of reviews on both machines, but haven't been able to find any direct comparisons (and A/B samples), and the reviews of the Sony are somewhat dated. The main use will be recording; my typical subjects being wildlife, speech, and (occasional) music. I'm keen to have a flat and wide frequency response (aren't we all?!), especially since much of my music features deep bass vocals. I'll use PCM format mainly, and the Audio Technica ATR55 shotgun mic and Sony ECM-MS907 stereo mic. Low noise and high gain would be important since some of my subjects will be distant or just quiet. In addition to recording, I'm hoping to use the Sony as an alternative to my (iRiver T60) MP3 player on the grounds of the Sony's (apparently) better fidelity, and the ability to change media so that I don't have to buy a new player whenever I've filled my existing one! Does anyone have an opinion on the quality of the Edirol as a /player/? Scarcity of MD discs should not be too problematic (I think) because I'll be archiving my recordings to computer, and my MP3 collection is not so large that I'll need an indefinite supply of discs. Opinions greatly appreciated. Cheers.