Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

digital audio recorder

Tags:
  • Pro Audio
  • Audio
Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
September 4, 2004 6:06:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface that
can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27 hours
or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card or
microdrive installed and the sample rate. USB for interface to upload to
computer.

Bob

--
Drive fast and eat cheese.

More about : digital audio recorder

Anonymous
September 4, 2004 1:30:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net> sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:

> How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface that
> can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27 hours
> or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card or
> microdrive installed and the sample rate. USB for interface to upload to
> computer.

How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
does it cost? And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
faster interface than USB?

Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 4, 2004 8:57:04 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094298523k@trad...
>
> In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
>
> > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface
that
> > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27
hours


What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?

Why mono?

You want a word clock or will mtc do?

> > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card
or
> > microdrive installed and the sample rate.

What was 27 hours about?

> USB for interface to upload to
> > computer.
>
> How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
> does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> does it cost?

You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it, and you
won't be able to for many years, if ever.

>And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> faster interface than USB?
>

Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?

I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's looking for
something real.

jb

> Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Related resources
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 5:23:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

actually I was thinking 27 hours for 16 bit 48k as absolute maximum
recording time on a cf hd. The most you could get on existing hard drives
would be about 12 .5 track hours at 192k 24bit 250 gigabyte hard drive. I
think that the 3.5 inch ata hard drive is the most economical medium. USB
was only in consideration of the fact that all new pcs have one. An hour of
recording is probably adequate, that drive is under 50 dollars. I think the
drive module should be a seperate thing from the mic preamp digitizer.

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094298523k@trad...
>
> In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
>
> > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface
that
> > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27
hours
> > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card
or
> > microdrive installed and the sample rate. USB for interface to upload to
> > computer.
>
> How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
> does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> does it cost? And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> faster interface than USB?
>
> Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 5:46:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close as
possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other interface
options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital domain.
The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the user,
depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
performance.

I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some analog. My mic
preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.

Bob


"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
>
> "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> >
> > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> >
> > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
interface
> that
> > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27
> hours
>
>
> What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
>
> Why mono?
>
> You want a word clock or will mtc do?
>
> > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card
> or
> > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
>
> What was 27 hours about?
>
> > USB for interface to upload to
> > > computer.
> >
> > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
> > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> > does it cost?
>
> You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it, and
you
> won't be able to for many years, if ever.
>
> >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > faster interface than USB?
> >
>
> Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
>
> I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's looking for
> something real.
>
> jb
>
> > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.
> >
> > --
> > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 10:38:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com> opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:

> > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> >
> > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface
> that
> > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27
> hours
>
>
> What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> Why mono?

The trick is the part about "can be synchronized to as many other same
devices as desired." So you have a bunch or mono recorders
synchronized to give you as many tracks as you need. Modular digital
multitrack recorder taken to the exterme - where the "module" is one
channel.

> You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it, and you
> won't be able to for many years, if ever.

That's why I was asking the question. Maybe a flash card that's
"affordable" in a couple of years can do an hour at 192 kHz 24-bit
mono (about 2 GB).


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 3:40:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

sycochkn <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote:

>How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic interface that
>can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to 27 hours
>or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash card or
>microdrive installed and the sample rate. USB for interface to upload to
>computer.

You might have a look at our PDAudio system. With an external hard
drive (e.g., Addonics Pocket ExDrive with an HP Dual PCMCIA Expansion
Pack) or an external USB drive (when using a Toshiba PDA) you can get
more than 20 hours of recording time at up to 192 KS/s. Two channels
for the moment and mono when Live2496's author at Gidluck Mastering adds
that feature.

Mic2496 is a fine mic pre/A-to-D for it but you could also use a Grace
Designs Lunatec V3.

The only thing you'll be missing is external word clock.
--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 3:40:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Len Moskowitz wrote:

>
> Mic2496 is a fine mic pre/A-to-D for it but you could also use a Grace
> Designs Lunatec V3.
>
> The only thing you'll be missing is external word clock.

Len, that's something I wish you would consider. Wordclock
chainability could be a very signifigant feature for
relatively low cost options such as yours.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 3:51:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I <moskowit@panix.com> wrote:

>You might have a look at our PDAudio system. With an external hard
>drive (e.g., Addonics Pocket ExDrive with an HP Dual PCMCIA Expansion
>Pack) or an external USB drive (when using a Toshiba PDA) you can get
>more than 20 hours of recording time at up to 192 KS/s. Two channels
>for the moment and mono when Live2496's author at Gidluck Mastering adds
>that feature.
>
>Mic2496 is a fine mic pre/A-to-D for it but you could also use a Grace
>Designs Lunatec V3.
>
>The only thing you'll be missing is external word clock.

And the Lunatec V3 provides a word clock output.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 6:09:58 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

2 gig flash card is 250 to 300 at the moment. I am going to get one for the
digital recorder that I have now. It has been a while since I bought hard
drives. The last one I bought was 10 gigs for 50 dollars.

bob

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094343971k@trad...
>
> In article <fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com>
opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:
>
> > > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > >
> > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
interface
> > that
> > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to
27
> > hours
> >
> >
> > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> > Why mono?
>
> The trick is the part about "can be synchronized to as many other same
> devices as desired." So you have a bunch or mono recorders
> synchronized to give you as many tracks as you need. Modular digital
> multitrack recorder taken to the exterme - where the "module" is one
> channel.
>
> > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it, and
you
> > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
>
> That's why I was asking the question. Maybe a flash card that's
> "affordable" in a couple of years can do an hour at 192 kHz 24-bit
> mono (about 2 GB).
>
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 7:48:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Kdu_c.537$ip2.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close as
> possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other interface
> options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
> assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital domain.
> The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the user,
> depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
> performance.
>

Not sure I follow entirely. Do you intend to use the USB to connect to
external drives/readers which function as a recording device?

jb


> I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some analog. My
mic
> preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.
>
> Bob
>
>
> "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
> >
> > "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> > news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> > >
> > > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > >
> > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
> interface
> > that
> > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up to
27
> > hours
> >
> >
> > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> >
> > Why mono?
> >
> > You want a word clock or will mtc do?
> >
> > > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash
card
> > or
> > > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
> >
> > What was 27 hours about?
> >
> > > USB for interface to upload to
> > > > computer.
> > >
> > > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
> > > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> > > does it cost?
> >
> > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it, and
> you
> > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
> >
> > >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > > faster interface than USB?
> > >
> >
> > Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
> >
> > I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's looking for
> > something real.
> >
> > jb
> >
> > > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.
> > >
> > > --
> > > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 8:32:19 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

And for about 25 dollars the flash interface from target, if the output is
usb. I was looking at the pd audio. I only saw a stereo version. 250 dollars
did not sound bad at all.

Bob

"Len Moskowitz" <moskowit@panix.com> wrote in message
news:chfcmq$1mj$1@panix2.panix.com...
> I <moskowit@panix.com> wrote:
>
> >You might have a look at our PDAudio system. With an external hard
> >drive (e.g., Addonics Pocket ExDrive with an HP Dual PCMCIA Expansion
> >Pack) or an external USB drive (when using a Toshiba PDA) you can get
> >more than 20 hours of recording time at up to 192 KS/s. Two channels
> >for the moment and mono when Live2496's author at Gidluck Mastering adds
> >that feature.
> >
> >Mic2496 is a fine mic pre/A-to-D for it but you could also use a Grace
> >Designs Lunatec V3.
> >
> >The only thing you'll be missing is external word clock.
>
> And the Lunatec V3 provides a word clock output.
>
> --
> Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
> Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
> Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
> moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 9:01:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Word clock would also allow the sample rate to be determined by the clock
generator.

Bob


"Bob Cain" <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote in message
news:chfe2r01qcn@enews2.newsguy.com...
>
>
> Len Moskowitz wrote:
>
> >
> > Mic2496 is a fine mic pre/A-to-D for it but you could also use a Grace
> > Designs Lunatec V3.
> >
> > The only thing you'll be missing is external word clock.
>
> Len, that's something I wish you would consider. Wordclock
> chainability could be a very signifigant feature for
> relatively low cost options such as yours.
>
>
> Bob
> --
>
> "Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
> simpler."
>
> A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 9:01:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

sycochkn wrote:

> Word clock would also allow the sample rate to be determined by the clock
> generator.

Which ideally would be the first device in the chain should
it not be receiving a clock from another source.


Bob
--

"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no
simpler."

A. Einstein
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 11:52:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Being able to use an external usb recording device would probably be the
best choice.

Bob

"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zs2dnZK-S7IU8abcRVn-qg@adelphia.com...
>
> "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Kdu_c.537$ip2.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close as
> > possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other interface
> > options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
> > assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital
domain.
> > The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the user,
> > depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
> > performance.
> >
>
> Not sure I follow entirely. Do you intend to use the USB to connect to
> external drives/readers which function as a recording device?
>
> jb
>
>
> > I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some analog. My
> mic
> > preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.
> >
> > Bob
> >
> >
> > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
> > >
> > > "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> > > news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> > > >
> > > > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > > >
> > > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
> > interface
> > > that
> > > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up
to
> 27
> > > hours
> > >
> > >
> > > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> > >
> > > Why mono?
> > >
> > > You want a word clock or will mtc do?
> > >
> > > > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the flash
> card
> > > or
> > > > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
> > >
> > > What was 27 hours about?
> > >
> > > > USB for interface to upload to
> > > > > computer.
> > > >
> > > > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or microdrive
> > > > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> > > > does it cost?
> > >
> > > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it,
and
> > you
> > > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
> > >
> > > >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > > > faster interface than USB?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
> > >
> > > I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's looking
for
> > > something real.
> > >
> > > jb
> > >
> > > > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have any.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > > > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > > > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > > > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > > > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 11:52:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:j8K_c.1023$ip2.733@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Being able to use an external usb recording device would probably be the
> best choice.
>
> Bob
>

Sounds neat. The only issue I see, if you intend to go with mono devices, is
that you would need several different recording devices.

jb



> "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:zs2dnZK-S7IU8abcRVn-qg@adelphia.com...
> >
> > "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:Kdu_c.537$ip2.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close as
> > > possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other interface
> > > options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
> > > assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital
> domain.
> > > The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the
user,
> > > depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
> > > performance.
> > >
> >
> > Not sure I follow entirely. Do you intend to use the USB to connect to
> > external drives/readers which function as a recording device?
> >
> > jb
> >
> >
> > > I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some analog.
My
> > mic
> > > preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> > >
> > > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
> > > >
> > > > "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> > > > >
> > > > > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > > > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > > > >
> > > > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
> > > interface
> > > > that
> > > > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired. up
> to
> > 27
> > > > hours
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> > > >
> > > > Why mono?
> > > >
> > > > You want a word clock or will mtc do?
> > > >
> > > > > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the
flash
> > card
> > > > or
> > > > > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
> > > >
> > > > What was 27 hours about?
> > > >
> > > > > USB for interface to upload to
> > > > > > computer.
> > > > >
> > > > > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or
microdrive
> > > > > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how much
> > > > > does it cost?
> > > >
> > > > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do it,
> and
> > > you
> > > > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
> > > >
> > > > >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > > > > faster interface than USB?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
> > > >
> > > > I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's looking
> for
> > > > something real.
> > > >
> > > > jb
> > > >
> > > > > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have
any.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > > > > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > > > > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > > > > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > > > > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 3:22:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

One recording device per channel. It need not be very expensive unless you
need a lot of recording time or demand the smallest physical package
possible.
Bbob

"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:17idnYH_JLY6B6bcRVn-vQ@adelphia.com...
>
> "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:j8K_c.1023$ip2.733@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > Being able to use an external usb recording device would probably be the
> > best choice.
> >
> > Bob
> >
>
> Sounds neat. The only issue I see, if you intend to go with mono devices,
is
> that you would need several different recording devices.
>
> jb
>
>
>
> > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:zs2dnZK-S7IU8abcRVn-qg@adelphia.com...
> > >
> > > "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > news:Kdu_c.537$ip2.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > > Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close as
> > > > possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other
interface
> > > > options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
> > > > assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital
> > domain.
> > > > The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the
> user,
> > > > depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
> > > > performance.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Not sure I follow entirely. Do you intend to use the USB to connect to
> > > external drives/readers which function as a recording device?
> > >
> > > jb
> > >
> > >
> > > > I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some analog.
> My
> > > mic
> > > > preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.
> > > >
> > > > Bob
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In article <pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > > > > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser mic
> > > > interface
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as desired.
up
> > to
> > > 27
> > > > > hours
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> > > > >
> > > > > Why mono?
> > > > >
> > > > > You want a word clock or will mtc do?
> > > > >
> > > > > > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the
> flash
> > > card
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
> > > > >
> > > > > What was 27 hours about?
> > > > >
> > > > > > USB for interface to upload to
> > > > > > > computer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or
> microdrive
> > > > > > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how
much
> > > > > > does it cost?
> > > > >
> > > > > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do
it,
> > and
> > > > you
> > > > > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
> > > > >
> > > > > >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > > > > > faster interface than USB?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's
looking
> > for
> > > > > something real.
> > > > >
> > > > > jb
> > > > >
> > > > > > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have
> any.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > > > > > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > > > > > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > > > > > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > > > > > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 3:27:18 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Besides you can buy as many or as few channels as you need. And add on as
you need more. You can even buy a couple of spares in case something breaks
at the worst possible time.

Bob

"sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:5dN_c.8312$w%6.4047@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> One recording device per channel. It need not be very expensive unless you
> need a lot of recording time or demand the smallest physical package
> possible.
> Bbob
>
> "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:17idnYH_JLY6B6bcRVn-vQ@adelphia.com...
> >
> > "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:j8K_c.1023$ip2.733@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > Being able to use an external usb recording device would probably be
the
> > > best choice.
> > >
> > > Bob
> > >
> >
> > Sounds neat. The only issue I see, if you intend to go with mono
devices,
> is
> > that you would need several different recording devices.
> >
> > jb
> >
> >
> >
> > > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > news:zs2dnZK-S7IU8abcRVn-qg@adelphia.com...
> > > >
> > > > "sycochkn" <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > > > news:Kdu_c.537$ip2.223@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> > > > > Why mono? The physical location of the recorder is to be as close
as
> > > > > possible to the input device. USB? because it is free. Other
> interface
> > > > > options are not discounted, such as 10gb ethernet. I am making the
> > > > > assumption that all signal processing is to be done in the digital
> > > domain.
> > > > > The device that is used for recording should be the choice of the
> > user,
> > > > > depending on the needs of the situation. Price depends on desired
> > > > > performance.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Not sure I follow entirely. Do you intend to use the USB to connect
to
> > > > external drives/readers which function as a recording device?
> > > >
> > > > jb
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I have about 12 years experience in digital design, and some
analog.
> > My
> > > > mic
> > > > > preamp had a noise floor of about 139dbm.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bob
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > > news:fM-dnZZK1e2stqfcRVn-ug@adelphia.com...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:znr1094298523k@trad...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article
<pq9_c.2336$N4.282@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>
> > > > > > sycochkn@earthlink.net writes:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > How about a mono 24 bit digital recorder with a condenser
mic
> > > > > interface
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > can be synchronized to as many other same devices as
desired.
> up
> > > to
> > > > 27
> > > > > > hours
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What do you mean 27 hours? 27 hours recording time in mono?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why mono?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You want a word clock or will mtc do?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > or up to 192 k sample rate, recording time depending on the
> > flash
> > > > card
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > microdrive installed and the sample rate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What was 27 hours about?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > USB for interface to upload to
> > > > > > > > computer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How about for under $300? And what kind of flash card or
> > microdrive
> > > > > > > does it take to record 27 hours of 192 kHz mono audio and how
> much
> > > > > > > does it cost?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You won't be able to get a flash card or microdrive that can do
> it,
> > > and
> > > > > you
> > > > > > won't be able to for many years, if ever.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >And for that much data, wouldn't it be smarter to use a
> > > > > > > faster interface than USB?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Good point. Firewire 2 maybe?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think the marantz flash recorder would satisfy him if he's
> looking
> > > for
> > > > > > something real.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > jb
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Either you're dreaming or teasing. Spill the beans if you have
> > any.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> > > > > > > However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> > > > > > > lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> > > > > > > you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> > > > > > > and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 2:42:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

sycochkn <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote:

>2 gig flash card is 250 to 300 at the moment. ...

A 2 GB compact flash card sells for under $200. A 4 GB card is around $550.

Hitachi just came out with a 10 GB PCMCIA hard drive. It's also selling
for under $200.



--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 2:43:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

sycochkn <sycochkn@earthlink.net> wrote:

>And for about 25 dollars the flash interface from target, if the output is
>usb. I was looking at the pd audio. I only saw a stereo version. 250 dollars
>did not sound bad at all.

If you're using a laptop, most recording applications can record in
mono, if that's what you prefer.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 2:45:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Bob Cain <arcane@arcanemethods.com> wrote:

>Len, that's something I wish you would consider. Wordclock
>chainability could be a very signifigant feature for
>relatively low cost options such as yours.

It's a function of the mic pre/A-to-D rather than the PDAudio-CF card.

We'll consider it for future versions of our Mic2496 and other products.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 9:15:15 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
> That's why I was asking the question. Maybe a flash card that's
> "affordable" in a couple of years can do an hour at 192 kHz 24-bit
> mono (about 2 GB).

perhaps use real-time lossless encoding (shorten / FLAC / etc) to reduce
the storage requirements?

--
Aaron J. Grier | "Not your ordinary poofy goof." | agrier@poofygoof.com
"someday the industry will have throbbing frontal lobes and will be able
to write provably correct software. also, I want a pony." -- Zach Brown
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 1:41:41 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <10jvpn3pggnnm4d@corp.supernews.com> agrier@poofygoof.com writes:

> perhaps use real-time lossless encoding (shorten / FLAC / etc) to reduce
> the storage requirements?

At the moment, it probably takes more processing horsepower than can
be packaged in a portable unit, but those things get smaller, cheaper,
and get lower power requirements as time goes on, so it may be a
viable approach.

One problem with a system like this is that we tend not to trust it,
regardles of documented test results (usually) conducted by someone
who wants to sell us the gear or the process or posted on a web page
somewhere based on who knows what measurements. The less you do to an
audio file in order to store and retrieve it, the better. (one more
argument for analog tape)


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 1:56:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I <moskowit@core-sound.com> wrote:

>A 2 GB compact flash card sells for under $200. A 4 GB card is around $550.
>
>Hitachi just came out with a 10 GB PCMCIA hard drive. It's also selling
>for under $200.

My apologies: the Hitachi drive I referred to is actually an older
external 2.5" hard drive with a PCMCIA (PC Card) interface. IBM used to
sell it as the TravelStar 10E. It is not an internally mounted (slot
mounted) PCMCIA hard drive.

By the way, 4 GB Compact Flash memory cards are about to break the $500
price point. You can buy a SanDisk 4 GB CF card on eBay right now for
$519. 2 GB CF cards are available for under $200.

--
Len Moskowitz PDAudio, Binaural Mics, Cables, DPA, M-Audio
Core Sound http://www.stealthmicrophones.com
Teaneck, New Jersey USA http://www.core-sound.com
moskowit@core-sound.com Tel: 201-801-0812, FAX: 201-801-0912
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 12:10:21 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094729414k@trad...
> The less you do to an audio file in order to store and retrieve it, the
better.
> (one more argument for analog tape)

Mike just ignores all the processing needed to convert analog signals to
magnetic domains and back again. Not to mention superimposing on HF, playing
with frequency response, etc etc etc.

TonyP.
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 12:10:22 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <41417db9$0$725$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> TonyP@optus.net.com.au writes:

> Mike just ignores all the processing needed to convert analog signals to
> magnetic domains and back again.

A coil of wire? Isn't this still in the Boy Scout Handbook? Or do
Boy Scouts start with a computer nowadays?


--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 12:10:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094820766k@trad...
>
> In article <41417db9$0$725$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>
TonyP@optus.net.com.au writes:
>
> > Mike just ignores all the processing needed to convert analog signals to
> > magnetic domains and back again.
>
> A coil of wire? Isn't this still in the Boy Scout Handbook? Or do
> Boy Scouts start with a computer nowadays?
>

http://www.teacherlink.usu.edu/tlresources/clipart/BSAM...

Can they build it out of sticks?

jb
Anonymous
September 12, 2004 4:35:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094820766k@trad...
> In article <41417db9$0$725$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>
TonyP@optus.net.com.au writes:
>
> > Mike just ignores all the processing needed to convert analog signals to
> > magnetic domains and back again.
>
> A coil of wire? Isn't this still in the Boy Scout Handbook? Or do
> Boy Scouts start with a computer nowadays?

Sorry, I made the mistake of assuming you were after HiFi. Which is pretty
crazy I guess for someone who thinks his tape recorder is better than his
Lynx.

TonyP.
Anonymous
September 12, 2004 4:35:47 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <41430d74$0$11059$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au> TonyP@optus.net.com.au writes:

> Sorry, I made the mistake of assuming you were after HiFi. Which is pretty
> crazy I guess for someone who thinks his tape recorder is better than his
> Lynx.

For playing tapes, yes.

Are you SURE you're not Phil Allison?

--
I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo
Anonymous
September 13, 2004 5:21:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1094923410k@trad...
>
> In article <41430d74$0$11059$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>
TonyP@optus.net.com.au writes:
>
> > Sorry, I made the mistake of assuming you were after HiFi. Which is
pretty
> > crazy I guess for someone who thinks his tape recorder is better than
his
> > Lynx.
>
> For playing tapes, yes.

Do you admit that your original statement that analog tape is "objectively
better" than digital, is bogus then?
(Other than for playing old tapes)

> Are you SURE you're not Phil Allison?

Lets see,
You're making the stupid statements.
You throw in red herrings.
You introduce straw man arguments.
You never admit you're wrong.
You abuse people who disagree with you.

Are you sure *YOU'RE* not Phil Allison?

TonyP.
!