Journalistic/media Recording: Dat Or Hi-md?

[icie]

I am new to the Hi-MD (and indeed MD) format in general, and I have had little experience in doing live recordings.

Soon, I will be recording a talk-show like program for a college course.

The equipment provided is based on DAT (Digital Audio Tape). Of course it comes with a fairly high quality cardio microphone with leads and adapters. So this question is not about "which microphone to buy".

Rather, should I replace the DAT machine and tapes with my Hi-MD unit (MZ-RH10)? I guess the real question here is ease of use and final quality.

Main Question: Which is higher quality (for those with experience working with both mediums): DAT, or PCM on HiMD?

With DAT, we will have to record from the tape into the editing machines via analogue leads: mini jack to RCA to jack adapters to allow plugging in the cables into the amp for input.

If I were to use Hi-MD, it would involve uploading via USB to my laptop, converting into WAV using the inbuilt SonicStage WAV converter, then transferring the files over into the editing machines (Apple G5's).

At least that's how I think it will work. I'm kinda going along bit by bit with the Japanese SS 3.0. The only thing which gets me with Hi-MD is the restriction on "only uploading once". A worst-case situation would be accidentally erasing an entire day's worth of recording work with a technical glitch.

Another thing which I think gives Hi-MD the advantage is the relatively easy track demarcation. Whereas with DAT there are digital time markers on the tape, the Hi-MD divides recordings into groups and then into tracks within each group. Seems easier to look for things this way rather than copying down track times and synching with beginning time.

[A440]

You've pretty much summed it up yourself. Track marking is a great advantage of MD.

It was a journalist who introduced me to MD, and now that I'm aware of them, I see lots of journalists using them.

Whether it's DAT or MD, PCM is PCM--the only difference is the MD's mic preamp. Since you can stay all-digital with MD, you're trading the very minor preamp noise for the very minor digital-analogue-digital transfer noise. No one should notice either one on the radio.

If you want to be ultra-safe with your recordings, you can still do a realtime copy that's digital:

Connect via USB, play back through Sonic Stage and record with the TotalRecorder soundcard recorder in realtime. Look at the uploading FAQs.

And then you can upload via SonicStage once you have the safety.

When I've had occasional upload problems with SonicStage 3.0, it hasn't destroyed the track on the disc. It has tagged the track as uploaded but left it playable on the disc to be rescued, if necessary, by TotalRecorder.

The MD asks you a few times if you really want to erase something, so you have to really work at accidentally erasing a day's recording. The one-upload restriction is a pain, but MD has a lot of convenience factors in its favor.

Why not try recording some inessential stuff with your RH10 and see if you like the new way of working? If your DAT habits are really ingrained, then you might want to stay with it, but I suspect you'll become an MD convert.

[greenmachine]

Whether it's DAT or MD, PCM is PCM--the only difference is the MD's mic preamp.

With DAT you can select the sample rate and on some rare units even the resolution (Bit depth).

[Christopher]

You don't need to use the Japanese Sonicstage, you can download our Sonicstage 3.1 installer from the Downloads section and use that..

[cbud]

If you are using Apple PowerMac G5s, they have built in digital inputs. So, If your DAT has a digital output, your recording could remain all digital. If the DAT does not, analogue from a DAT into a Mac still sounds great, especially at 16bit 48khz.

Do you have a PowerMac or an iMac? iMacs don't have digital in-puts. What type of DAT do you have? Most have digital outputs if you have the proper cable.

Why are you using an amp before you go into the G5? I go from my Sony DAT home deck (analogue) into my G4 and don't need an amp at all.

The RH-10 is good, but you will need to add a PC into the mix, which will add money and time. Uploading from a MD via USB is faster then real time, but not by much (~1.5 in PCM mode). Then you have to transfer it to the Mac, which can be a pain. In the end, realtime with the DAT will be faster then USB with the MD, and if it is digital, it will sound the same, if it is analogue, it will still sound great, I doubt you would tell the difference.

When recording, the MD tends to add track marks where it seems fit. So, you might have to go back and reorganize track marks anyway. I do all track mark editing after I convert to WAV.

I would stick with the DAT. You can record in higher sound quality and you most likely have an optical out (unlike MD) and can go straight to the G5.

If you need to record for more then 120 minutes (DAT Max) without swithcing tapes, then MD might be the choice.

Edited May 14, 2005 by cbud

[ozpeter]

My main gripe with using Hi-MD for location recording is that the machines are too small for their own good. Physical ergonomics and the need to rummage in menus for basic settings are significant downsides. If however you are happy to use the hi-MD's AGC for level control (enabling one-button recording), and you can get a practical connection from the mics to the tiny socket on the MD, then the actual sound quality is fine, and you've got the potential for longer recording times and faster downloads.