Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Live recording recommendations (MD)...PLEASE!!!

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
Anonymous
January 25, 2005 10:21:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
rehearsals - 5% of time.

Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
order are as follows:

I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
for live recording.
2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
"computer-type" speakers.

Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
create via Audacity or Messer).

Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
THANKS!!!
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 1:18:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
>
> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).

Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 2:35:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

<chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>
> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> order are as follows:
>
> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> for live recording.
> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> "computer-type" speakers.
>
> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> create via Audacity or Messer).
>
> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> THANKS!!!
>
-------------

Just about all of my students are having problems with their Sony's
My Sharp MT877 has never let me down
Sharp is hard to find in the states... Ebay has them at times
Couldn't pay me to buy another sony product. I have had 4 Sony products die
on me.

Tons of info here
http://www.minidisc.org/

http://www.minidisc.org/equipment_browser.html

Harry Jacobson
www.harryj.net
Related resources
January 26, 2005 7:04:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

chlebsco@enter.net wrote:
> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>
> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> order are as follows:
>
> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> for live recording.
> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> "computer-type" speakers.
>
> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> create via Audacity or Messer).
>
> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> THANKS!!!


The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.

It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony). I
think they will sell a pro version with simple mic level adjustment and
balanced audio etc.

However, I use an external mic amp, Behringer UltraGrain Pro MIC2200
($75 after rebate) and two ECM8000 ($35 each after rebate) "measurement"
microphones, so lacking mic level adj isn't an issue. The result is
excellent for church chorus with organ music. There are portable mixer
that you can get in place of MIC2200.

Transfer to PC is no brainer. It's done by USB. It's slow (I feel that
it's longer than realtime) but no attention needed.

I got the Sony MZ-NHF800 ($199) at DataVision.
January 26, 2005 7:11:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

chris wrote:
> chlebsco@enter.net wrote:
>
>> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
>> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
>> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
>> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>>
>> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
>> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
>> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
>> order are as follows:
>>
>> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
>> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
>> for live recording.
>> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
>> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
>> "computer-type" speakers.
>>
>> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
>> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
>> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
>> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
>> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
>> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
>> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
>> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
>> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
>> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
>> create via Audacity or Messer).
>>
>> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
>> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
>> THANKS!!!
>
>
>
> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
>
> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony). I
> think they will sell a pro version with simple mic level adjustment and
> balanced audio etc.
>
> However, I use an external mic amp, Behringer UltraGrain Pro MIC2200
> ($75 after rebate) and two ECM8000 ($35 each after rebate) "measurement"
> microphones, so lacking mic level adj isn't an issue. The result is
> excellent for church chorus with organ music. There are portable mixer
> that you can get in place of MIC2200.
>
> Transfer to PC is no brainer. It's done by USB. It's slow (I feel that
> it's longer than realtime) but no attention needed.
>
> I got the Sony MZ-NHF800 ($199) at DataVision.


It's dataviz.com. You have to click "get the best price" icon to see the
price.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 7:11:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 23:11:55 -0500, chris wrote
(in article <fMEJd.11133$rp1.8190@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>):

> Subject: Re: Live recording recommendations (MD)...PLEASE!!!
> From: chris <someone@somewhere.net>
> Date: Today 11:11 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.audio.minidisc, rec.music.makers, rec.music.makers.guitar,
> rec.audio.pro, rec.audio.opinion
>
> chris wrote:
>> chlebsco@enter.net wrote:
>>
>>> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
>>> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
>>> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
>>> rehearsals - 5% of time.

Core Audio has a stereo rig that uses a custom front end and a PDA to record
up to 24/96. It uses little 1 GB memory chips that are the size of postage
stamps.

http://www.core-sound.com/Mic2496.html

I'm reviewing one now. SO far, so good!

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 10:26:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

I've done a about a ton of research on this topic....the only way to go is
one of Sony's "higher-end" Hi-MD players like the MZNH-900 or the NH-1 Hi-MD
(do not get the sony hi-md 800, cheaper but no outputs), or the Nomad
Jukebox 3 30gb mp3 player....both will do uncompressed 16-bit sound and have
USB outs....I personally would go with the latter, it's cheaper, especially
considering the cost of hi-MD discs (especially 30 of them) and it has
better features IMHO....it also has firewire and a 98dB SNR.....If you
really want to get a good sound you should also buy an external mic pre.
Preamp selection is of course very important, and will vary depending on if
you need phantom power and whether or not you need a battery powered device.

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



<chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>
> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> order are as follows:
>
> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> for live recording.
> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> "computer-type" speakers.
>
> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> create via Audacity or Messer).
>
> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> THANKS!!!
>
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 11:28:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
> spyro wrote:
> > I have also tested the NH-1 and it does allow adjustment on the
> > fly...from the remote...which is backlit.....so this is the PERFECT unit
> > for live recording...I am switchiong to it from DAT
> >
> > Patrick Neve wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
> >>
> >>> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
> >>> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
> >>>
> >>> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.
>
> I downloaded and read the NH-1 manual. The procedure to adjust the
> recording level is the same as the older MD models. Pause, Press Menu,
> use jog dial to make changes, and press Pause to resume. I don't see
> anything about on-the-fly adjustment. It would not make sense that Sony
> wouldn't mention that if there's a easier way to do it.

Here's the deal. THe default mode is AGC. YOu must have the unit in
rec-pause in order to change that to manual rec level. Once you're there,
you un-pause to resume recording. On the NH-1, there is a four position
joystick thingie.. moving it up and down adjusts your listening volume,
and forward and back adjusts the record volume.
It is a minor invonvenience that you must do this little ritual every time
before you want to record in manual rec level mode.. but it only takes a
few seconds, and yes, the rec level is adjustable on-the-fly. I do it all
the time. Not only from the remote, but from the unit itself, either one.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 11:57:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

<chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com

> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> rehearsals - 5% of time.

> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> MD for recording quality of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> order are as follows:

According to you, you've never tried any of the newer available options for
portable recording.

(1) Consumer-oriented hard drive or flash-based portable digital audio
recorders
(2) Pro-oriented hard drive or flash-based portable digital audiorecorders
(3) Laptop-based portable recorders

> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> for live recording.

Nahh. MD is based on perceptual coding - the slightly messy business of
throwing away a high percentage of available audio information in order to
minimize storage requirements. I guess you haven't noticed the rise of
capacity and drop in cost of Flash and hard-drive based storage options.
Therefore, there is arguably no real need to throw away audio data for
portable recording because there's plenty of room for uncompressed PCM
(i.e., CD quality).

> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).

These days it's easy to transfer recordings to a PC or Mac for editing. The
transfers can take place at a rate that is several times real time. As you
point out later on, some of the best editing tools around run on PCs and
Macs.

> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> "computer-type" speakers.

Not a problem. Ditto for headphones

> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just
> 2, like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).

Having been there and done that, there's nothing like a small console to
help you take care of level setting, live monitoring and the like. If you
are not bootlegging, then this isn't a problem, or a source of major cost.
If you are bootlegging, there are portable non-MD options (some described by
other contributors to this thread) that may cost a little more, but really
work.

> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.

See above.

> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.

See above.

> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)

See your retailer.

> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necessarily HAVE to be digital,
> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> create via Audacity or Messer).

See above.

> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> THANKS!!!

My portable rig is composed of a Nomad Jukebox 3 and a Behringer MXB 1002
mixer, plus microphones. 20 GB capacity, all battery powered if need be, 5
mic inputs, headphone jack, decent-sized controls, CD quality uncompressed
audio, and high speed bi-directional pure digital transfers of standard
format audio files using USB or Firewire. High quality portable playback,
and right your price range. I transfer the files to a XP PC running Adobe
Audition for editing and production including burning CDs for distribution.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 1:57:03 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

chris wrote:

> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony). I
> think they will sell a pro version with simple mic level adjustment and
> balanced audio etc.


You know... As it happens no matter what mics I'm using with my NHF800 I
can have on the fly mic adjustment

The SoundProfessional low-cost binaurals I run through a battery
box/pre-amp (Also from SoundProfessionals) with adjustable gain

The professional grade XLR Dynamics run through a Tapco 6306 (Which has
enough knobs to make most folks happy) so I have on the fly gain controls

The only time I would not have that is if in full stealth (interview)
mode and for that I want ALC anyway.

(The battery box/preamp is also a stealth device it's very small,
smaller than the recorder in fact, the Tapco is much larger being a
"Studio" or "Stage" type device)
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 6:29:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Oooops, in my prior post...I noted 800 for $290 w 2 yr
warranty....price is actually $255...so difference between it an NH1 w/
5-yr is $115.
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 7:04:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Thanks for all responses. Now a couple of things....
Looking at Sony 800, 900 & NH1...Sharp not really available here in
U.S., also, rep told me USA division doesn't handle, won't
support...would bite to have to send half way around the world for
support...my last was a Sharp...it was good while it lasted.

Is in-device editing a possibility on Nomad Jukebox 3 ? Don't want to
have to upload to edit (combine, divide, move, erase), I'm trying to
stay OFF of the computer with this solution.

Suggestions re: flash, hard-drive & laptop solutions don't fit one or
more of my parameters for capacity (HI-MD much better), portability,
convenience or the budgetary constraint.

About level-setting with a mixer...yeah, I do use a Behringer MX602
(??? I believe that's the model), though I'd only really ever want to
"have" to use it while I'm recording at home. Don't want to lug it
along to a choir rehearsal. I'm tryin' to keep this ***simple***,
folks.

Found the 800 w/a 2-yr and the NH1 w/a 5(!)-yr warranty...prices are
$290 & $370, respectively when all is said and done. First option would
fit the bill, but for $80 more I'd get 3 more years peace of mind, plus
whatever else the NH1 offers over the 800...is it really worth it???

Chris...that on-the-fly editing with the 800 really works, eh? You made
the adjustment while recording, and monitored it ???
January 26, 2005 10:15:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Jonny Durango wrote:
> I've done a about a ton of research on this topic....the only way to go is
> one of Sony's "higher-end" Hi-MD players like the MZNH-900 or the NH-1 Hi-MD
> (do not get the sony hi-md 800, cheaper but no outputs), or the Nomad
> Jukebox 3 30gb mp3 player....both will do uncompressed 16-bit sound and have
> USB outs....I personally would go with the latter, it's cheaper, especially
> considering the cost of hi-MD discs (especially 30 of them) and it has
> better features IMHO....it also has firewire and a 98dB SNR.....If you
> really want to get a good sound you should also buy an external mic pre.
> Preamp selection is of course very important, and will vary depending on if
> you need phantom power and whether or not you need a battery powered device.
>
> --
>
> Jonny Durango
>
> "Patrick was a saint. I ain't."
>
> http://www.jdurango.com
>
>
>
> <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
> news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
>>live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
>>steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
>>rehearsals - 5% of time.
>>
>>Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
>>recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
>>MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
>>order are as follows:
>>
>>I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
>>1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
>>for live recording.
>>2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
>>3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
>>"computer-type" speakers.
>>
>>Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
>>4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
>>like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
>>5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
>>6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
>>7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
>>8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
>>nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
>>analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
>>quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
>>create via Audacity or Messer).
>>
>>Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
>>I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
>>THANKS!!!


I don't see lacking line out on the Sony 800 matter at all as all
transfer is done by USB. The Nomad Jukebox 3 is cheap and is fast but is
old too. Can you still find a new one? What new models in the nomad
series have audio input?
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 10:15:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

> I don't see lacking line out on the Sony 800 matter at all as all
> transfer is done by USB.

My mistake, the 600 is the one to stay away from! Has headphone outs but
that's it....you could use headphone outs but I'm sure the headphone amp is
horrible in these little things, probably terrible SNR

> The Nomad Jukebox 3 is cheap and is fast but is
> old too.

So is the U47, what's your point?

> Can you still find a new one?

Cambridge Soundworks has them on clearance for $199...it doesn't say whether
they are new or refurbished....I know used and refurbs go for around $150

http://www.cambridgesoundworks.com/store/category.cgi?i...
CNTDTF_D3

> What new models in the nomad
> series have audio input?

Beats me....the main thing about the JB3 is the great 98 dB SBR, 16-bit
audio, reliable DAC and low price tag

--

Jonny Durango

"Patrick was a saint. I ain't."

http://www.jdurango.com



"chris" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:g%RJd.47$p%1.16@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Jonny Durango wrote:
> > I've done a about a ton of research on this topic....the only way to go
is
> > one of Sony's "higher-end" Hi-MD players like the MZNH-900 or the NH-1
Hi-MD
> > (do not get the sony hi-md 800, cheaper but no outputs), or the Nomad
> > Jukebox 3 30gb mp3 player....both will do uncompressed 16-bit sound and
have
> > USB outs....I personally would go with the latter, it's cheaper,
especially
> > considering the cost of hi-MD discs (especially 30 of them) and it has
> > better features IMHO....it also has firewire and a 98dB SNR.....If you
> > really want to get a good sound you should also buy an external mic pre.
> > Preamp selection is of course very important, and will vary depending on
if
> > you need phantom power and whether or not you need a battery powered
device.
> >
> > --
> >
> > Jonny Durango
> >
> > "Patrick was a saint. I ain't."
> >
> > http://www.jdurango.com
> >
> >
> >
> > <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
> > news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> >>live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> >>steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> >>rehearsals - 5% of time.
> >>
> >>Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> >>recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> >>MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> >>order are as follows:
> >>
> >>I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> >>1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> >>for live recording.
> >>2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
> >>3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> >>"computer-type" speakers.
> >>
> >>Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
> >>4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2,
> >>like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
> >>5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
> >>6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
> >>7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
> >>8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
> >>nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> >>analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> >>quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> >>create via Audacity or Messer).
> >>
> >>Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> >>I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> >>THANKS!!!
>
>
> I don't see lacking line out on the Sony 800 matter at all as all
> transfer is done by USB. The Nomad Jukebox 3 is cheap and is fast but is
> old too. Can you still find a new one? What new models in the nomad
> series have audio input?
Anonymous
January 26, 2005 10:28:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

chlebsco@enter.net writes:

> Thanks for all responses. Now a couple of things....
> Looking at Sony 800, 900 & NH1...Sharp not really available here in
> U.S., also, rep told me USA division doesn't handle, won't
> support...would bite to have to send half way around the world for
> support...my last was a Sharp...it was good while it lasted.
>
> Is in-device editing a possibility on Nomad Jukebox 3 ? Don't want to
> have to upload to edit (combine, divide, move, erase), I'm trying to
> stay OFF of the computer with this solution.
>
> Suggestions re: flash, hard-drive & laptop solutions don't fit one or
> more of my parameters for capacity (HI-MD much better), portability,
> convenience or the budgetary constraint.
>
> About level-setting with a mixer...yeah, I do use a Behringer MX602
> (??? I believe that's the model), though I'd only really ever want to
> "have" to use it while I'm recording at home. Don't want to lug it
> along to a choir rehearsal. I'm tryin' to keep this ***simple***,
> folks.
>
> Found the 800 w/a 2-yr and the NH1 w/a 5(!)-yr warranty...prices are
> $290 & $370, respectively when all is said and done. First option would
> fit the bill, but for $80 more I'd get 3 more years peace of mind, plus
> whatever else the NH1 offers over the 800...is it really worth it???
>
> Chris...that on-the-fly editing with the 800 really works, eh? You made
> the adjustment while recording, and monitored it ???

Stick with the '800. It is a bit clunky, but it takes standard AA batteries,
either NiMH or Alkaline. You can take several batteries/disks with you for
long recording sessions. BTW, I got approx 2.5hrs of recording (PCM, on HiMD
media) and equivalent playback on one 2300mAh AA cell. And there was still
juice left in the thing. To be safe though, start each disk with a fresh AA
battery.

BTW, shouldn't the '800 model be something like $200 even? Buy as cheap as
possible and save the rest for mics.

Oh yeah, yes all the HiMD models have adjustable levels while recording. You
just have to set to manual level control first.

Richard
January 27, 2005 3:23:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

I have also tested the NH-1 and it does allow adjustment on the
fly...from the remote...which is backlit.....so this is the PERFECT unit
for live recording...I am switchiong to it from DAT

Patrick Neve wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
>
>>The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
>>supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
>>
>>It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).
>
>
> Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.
January 27, 2005 3:23:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

spyro wrote:
> I have also tested the NH-1 and it does allow adjustment on the
> fly...from the remote...which is backlit.....so this is the PERFECT unit
> for live recording...I am switchiong to it from DAT
>
> Patrick Neve wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
>>
>>> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
>>> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
>>>
>>> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.


I downloaded and read the NH-1 manual. The procedure to adjust the
recording level is the same as the older MD models. Pause, Press Menu,
use jog dial to make changes, and press Pause to resume. I don't see
anything about on-the-fly adjustment. It would not make sense that Sony
wouldn't mention that if there's a easier way to do it.
January 27, 2005 3:23:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

chris wrote:
> spyro wrote:
>
>> I have also tested the NH-1 and it does allow adjustment on the
>> fly...from the remote...which is backlit.....so this is the PERFECT
>> unit for live recording...I am switchiong to it from DAT
>>
>> Patrick Neve wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
>>>
>>>> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
>>>> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB disc.
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.
>
>
>
> I downloaded and read the NH-1 manual. The procedure to adjust the
> recording level is the same as the older MD models. Pause, Press Menu,
> use jog dial to make changes, and press Pause to resume. I don't see
> anything about on-the-fly adjustment. It would not make sense that Sony
> wouldn't mention that if there's a easier way to do it.


I turn the jog dial on the 800 during recording and it does set the
recording level on the fly - Not mentioned anywhere in the manual -
Brovo Sony!!
Anonymous
January 27, 2005 5:44:05 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:

> Having been there and done that, there's nothing like a small console to
> help you take care of level setting, live monitoring and the like. If you
> are not bootlegging, then this isn't a problem, or a source of major cost.
> If you are bootlegging, there are portable non-MD options (some described by
> other contributors to this thread) that may cost a little more, but really
> work.

Since I use a small console to help take care of level setting (Tapco
6306) I have to fully agree with you, it's fantastic. Depending on the
recording job I may feed it to a FMAudio RNC-1, that can then feed any
of my Mini-Disc recorders or my computer shold I choose (Crystal Audio
on the computer)
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 12:28:15 AM

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

james of tucson wrote:
> On 2005-01-26, chlebsco@enter.net <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote:
>
>
>> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
>> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
>> for live recording.
>
>
> Maybe an overall win, with price, size, media cost, battery life, etc.,
> factored in. But "THE BEST" for live recording would be an
> exaggeration. Len will tell you the PDAudio is the best (he might be
> right), Nomad JB3 users will have their say, I'm still partial to my
> Sony D8 DAT, which is way better than my Sony MD, still others will
> insist that you use a laptop with a good converter device.

Still others of us will say that the Sound Devices 744T now claims that honor.
January 28, 2005 1:07:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

when I trailled it even the guy in the store didn't know this and came
across it by accident.....works very well.
Probably the best alternative to DAT recording for live shows I have
seen......that isn't ultra expensive....and is stealthy...

chris wrote:
> chris wrote:
>
>> spyro wrote:
>>
>>> I have also tested the NH-1 and it does allow adjustment on the
>>> fly...from the remote...which is backlit.....so this is the PERFECT
>>> unit for live recording...I am switchiong to it from DAT
>>>
>>> Patrick Neve wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 26 Jan 2005, chris wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The old MD is not sufficient. The new Hi-MD from Sony is great. It
>>>>> supports uncompressed linear PCM for up to 94mins on a single 1GB
>>>>> disc.
>>>>>
>>>>> It doesn't allow on-the-fly mic level adjustment (shame on Sony).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sure it does. At least the NH-1 does.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I downloaded and read the NH-1 manual. The procedure to adjust the
>> recording level is the same as the older MD models. Pause, Press Menu,
>> use jog dial to make changes, and press Pause to resume. I don't see
>> anything about on-the-fly adjustment. It would not make sense that
>> Sony wouldn't mention that if there's a easier way to do it.
>
>
>
> I turn the jog dial on the 800 during recording and it does set the
> recording level on the fly - Not mentioned anywhere in the manual -
> Brovo Sony!!
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 11:48:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Arny Krueger wrote:
> <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
> news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> > I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily
for
> > live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical,
some
> > steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> > rehearsals - 5% of time.
> >
> > Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> > recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold
on
> > MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in
priority
> > order are as follows:
> >
> > I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> > 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE
BEST
> > for live recording.
>
> Nahh. The best that MD can achieve is parity with other uncompressed
PCM
> recorders.

I don't perceive this as a bad thing...hey, it can do what this other
device (I must admit, I don't really know anything about "other
uncompressed PCM recorders", though) offers, right?


> > 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
>
> Always a PITA compared to editing on a computer. If you can move your

> recording onto a computer in a reasonable amount of time, with a
reasonable
> amount of effort, you're far better off doing the editing there.

Can do this via USB, though unsure of transfer rate, though I can't
imagine it'll be too bad...my files won't be all that large.

> Besides, you want to replicate your finished work, right? What MD can
burn
> CDs?

None I know of, but, once I upload to my PC, I'm golden.

> > 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> > "computer-type" speakers.
>
> All this takes is standard line level outputs, which just about
everything
> has. They are often disguised as headphone jacks, but they work just
fine
> for the purpose.
>
> > Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
>
> > 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not
just 2
> > like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
>
> All you need is a recording device with enough dynamic range and the
ability
> to intelligently set headroom.
>
> > 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
>
> See above.
>
> > 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
>
> See above.
>
> > 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
>
> That's between you and the retailer, in the final analysis.
>
> > 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be
digital,
> > nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> > analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss
of
> > quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> > create via Audacity or Messer).
>
> It's a solved problem with most modern alternatives.
>
> > Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I
think
> > I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 -
$300.
> > THANKS!!!

You appear to be very knowledagable, for this I thank you for your
input...bear in mind the level of sophistication of my application (see
my "middle-aged guy, practicing classical guitar in his basement" riff,
elsewhere located on this post).
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 12:46:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

<chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily for
> live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical, some
> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>
> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold on
> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in priority
> order are as follows:
>
> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE BEST
> for live recording.

Nahh. The best that MD can achieve is parity with other uncompressed PCM
recorders.

> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).

Always a PITA compared to editing on a computer. If you can move your
recording onto a computer in a reasonable amount of time, with a reasonable
amount of effort, you're far better off doing the editing there.

Besides, you want to replicate your finished work, right? What MD can burn
CDs?

> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> "computer-type" speakers.

All this takes is standard line level outputs, which just about everything
has. They are often disguised as headphone jacks, but they work just fine
for the purpose.

> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...

> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2
> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).

All you need is a recording device with enough dynamic range and the ability
to intelligently set headroom.

> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.

See above.

> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.

See above.

> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)

That's between you and the retailer, in the final analysis.

> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be digital,
> nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.: real-time,
> analog is fine, though I don't want to experience noticeable loss of
> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> create via Audacity or Messer).

It's a solved problem with most modern alternatives.

> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I think
> I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 - $300.
> THANKS!!!
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 1:18:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

I'd be more complimentary, actually, and rather than refer to you as an
"old codger", I'd call you an "anti-Luddite", as opposed to most of us
folks, as we advance in our years.

Arny Krueger wrote:
> <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
> news:1106930924.076162.40960@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> > Arny Krueger wrote:
> >> <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
> >> news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> >>> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used
primarily
> >>> for live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly
classical,
> > some
> >>> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary
Choir
> >>> rehearsals - 5% of time.
> >>>
> >>> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
> >>> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm
sold
> > on
> >>> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in
> >>> priority order are as follows:
> >>>
> >>> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
> >>> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE
> >>> BEST for live recording.
> >>
> >> Nahh. The best that MD can achieve is parity with other
uncompressed
> >> PCM recorders.
>
> > I don't perceive this as a bad thing...hey, it can do what this
other
> > device (I must admit, I don't really know anything about "other
> > uncompressed PCM recorders", though) offers, right?
>
> I'm addressing your claim that MD IS THE BEST for live recording in
the
> context of sound quality and purity. Fact is, it is at best a peer.
>
> >>> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).
>
> >> Always a PITA compared to editing on a computer. If you can move
your
> >> recording onto a computer in a reasonable amount of time, with a
> >> reasonable amount of effort, you're far better off doing the
editing
> >> there.
>
> > Can do this via USB, though unsure of transfer rate, though I can't
> > imagine it'll be too bad...my files won't be all that large.
>
> Again, at best MD is one among peers.
>
> >> Besides, you want to replicate your finished work, right? What MD
> >> can burn CDs?
>
> > None I know of, but, once I upload to my PC, I'm golden.
>
> Agreed, and that's my point. If you are going to transfer your audio
to a PC
> to burn it, what's wrong with editing it there, as well? Nothing
that I can
> see, given how powerful even the mediocre PC audio editors are.
>
> >>> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
> >>> "computer-type" speakers.
>
> >> All this takes is standard line level outputs, which just about
> >> everything has. They are often disguised as headphone jacks, but
> >> they work just fine for the purpose.
>
> >>> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...
>
> I see no differentiation.
>
> >>> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not
just 2
> >>> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or
so).
> >>
> >> All you need is a recording device with enough dynamic range and
the
> >> ability to intelligently set headroom.
>
> >>> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.
>
> >> See above.
>
> >>> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.
>
> >> See above.
>
> >>> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
> >>
> >> That's between you and the retailer, in the final analysis.
>
> >>> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be
> >>> digital, nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.:
> >>> real-time, analog is fine, though I don't want to experience
> >>> noticeable loss of
> >>> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
> >>> create via Audacity or Messer).
>
> >> It's a solved problem with most modern alternatives.
> >>
> >>> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I
> >>> think I should be able to get this done for somewhere between
$200 -
> > $300.
> >>> THANKS!!!
>
> > You appear to be very knowledagable, for this I thank you for your
> > input...bear in mind the level of sophistication of my application
> > (see my "middle-aged guy, practicing classical guitar in his
> > basement" riff, elsewhere located on this post).
>
> I guess you can put me in the category of "Old codger (58 yrs) who
keeps
> up-to-date with the more modern tools because they are easier to work
with
> and he's basically lazy."
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:35:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Hello,

I tried to find the info of 16bit sound (as you say) for Nomad
Jukebox.. "3" and "c", but didn't find anywhere in their website or
amazon, etc. Could you tell me where I could find ??

I am debating over Nomad or Hi-MD. Since I mainly use Mac, Nomad is
very attractive... I record organ musics and singing, lute, etc.
(live.)

marta
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 2:39:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

sorry, I meat this as a reply to Jonny in the earlier posting.
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 3:58:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

<chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
news:1106930924.076162.40960@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> Arny Krueger wrote:
>> <chlebsco@enter.net> wrote in message
>> news:1106709692.906004.158420@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
>>> I'm in the market again for a new MD recorder to be used primarily
>>> for live recording my practice sessions on guitar (mostly classical,
> some
>>> steel string)- 95% of time, and Adult Christian Contemporary Choir
>>> rehearsals - 5% of time.
>>>
>>> Prior recording devices used were: monaural, handheld cassette
>>> recorder, then MD, then Digital Voice Recorder. In short, I'm sold
> on
>>> MD for recording quaulity of live recordings. My criteria, in
>>> priority order are as follows:
>>>
>>> I believe all MD recorders probably have the following...
>>> 1.) Quality (accuracy, purity) of recording - I believe MD IS THE
>>> BEST for live recording.
>>
>> Nahh. The best that MD can achieve is parity with other uncompressed
>> PCM recorders.

> I don't perceive this as a bad thing...hey, it can do what this other
> device (I must admit, I don't really know anything about "other
> uncompressed PCM recorders", though) offers, right?

I'm addressing your claim that MD IS THE BEST for live recording in the
context of sound quality and purity. Fact is, it is at best a peer.

>>> 2.) In-device editing (divide, combine, erase & move tracks).

>> Always a PITA compared to editing on a computer. If you can move your
>> recording onto a computer in a reasonable amount of time, with a
>> reasonable amount of effort, you're far better off doing the editing
>> there.

> Can do this via USB, though unsure of transfer rate, though I can't
> imagine it'll be too bad...my files won't be all that large.

Again, at best MD is one among peers.

>> Besides, you want to replicate your finished work, right? What MD
>> can burn CDs?

> None I know of, but, once I upload to my PC, I'm golden.

Agreed, and that's my point. If you are going to transfer your audio to a PC
to burn it, what's wrong with editing it there, as well? Nothing that I can
see, given how powerful even the mediocre PC audio editors are.

>>> 3.) Ability to output to a pair of 120v-AC-powered stereo
>>> "computer-type" speakers.

>> All this takes is standard line level outputs, which just about
>> everything has. They are often disguised as headphone jacks, but
>> they work just fine for the purpose.

>>> Now this is where things start to get differentiated...

I see no differentiation.

>>> 4.) Ability to select various recording levels (preferably, not just 2
>>> like I'm finding, I'm more interested in something like 15 or so).
>>
>> All you need is a recording device with enough dynamic range and the
>> ability to intelligently set headroom.

>>> 5.) On-the-fly mic level adjustment.

>> See above.

>>> 6.) Ability to monitor w/phones while recording.

>> See above.

>>> 7.) Extended warranty coverage. (likely retailer-dependent)
>>
>> That's between you and the retailer, in the final analysis.

>>> 8.) Ability to output to PC - doesn't necesesarily HAVE to be
>>> digital, nor does it have to be via hi-speed transfers, 1x, i.e.:
>>> real-time, analog is fine, though I don't want to experience
>>> noticeable loss of
>>> quality with what I wind up with on my computer (will most likely
>>> create via Audacity or Messer).

>> It's a solved problem with most modern alternatives.
>>
>>> Please suggest specific models, retailers, sites, if possible. I
>>> think I should be able to get this done for somewhere between $200 -
> $300.
>>> THANKS!!!

> You appear to be very knowledagable, for this I thank you for your
> input...bear in mind the level of sophistication of my application
> (see my "middle-aged guy, practicing classical guitar in his
> basement" riff, elsewhere located on this post).

I guess you can put me in the category of "Old codger (58 yrs) who keeps
up-to-date with the more modern tools because they are easier to work with
and he's basically lazy."
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 5:59:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

marta wrote:
>
> I tried to find the info of 16bit sound (as you say) for Nomad
> Jukebox.. "3" and "c", but didn't find anywhere in their website or
> amazon, etc. Could you tell me where I could find ??

The NJB3 is (unfortunately) now a has-been product. Plenty of used ones available, however.

Try the Yahoo Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/njb3tapers/&gt;




> I am debating over Nomad or Hi-MD. Since I mainly use Mac, Nomad is
> very attractive.

Maybe not, since it won't transfer files to a Mac.

Increase your budget a bit and you might want to look at an Edirol R-1
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 8:19:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

> Maybe not, since it won't transfer files to a Mac.
>
> Increase your budget a bit and you might want to look at an Edirol
R-1

Thank you for the info. Is it true that Jukebox doesn't transfer files
to Mac ???? Jukebox "c" says that it connects to Mac...
In fact I have been researching on R-1: it was my first choice
initially, and the answer is no: I saw several people complaining
about noise...

marta
Anonymous
January 28, 2005 9:41:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:59:27 -0800, Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net>
wrote:

>Edirol

Is it just me? ...everytime I read that name I think it's some kind of
laxative or something.

Al
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 5:03:00 AM

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

In article <1106961548.898907.24900@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
asaeda@math.uiowa.edu (marta) wrote:

> Thank you for the info. Is it true that Jukebox doesn't transfer files
> to Mac ???? Jukebox "c" says that it connects to Mac...

I've used a Creative Jukebox with a Mac for years, it works fine, support
for it is built into iTunes.
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 5:20:59 AM

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

marta schrieb:
> Hello,
>
> I tried to find the info of 16bit sound (as you say) for Nomad
> Jukebox.. "3" and "c", but didn't find anywhere in their website or
> amazon, etc. Could you tell me where I could find ??
>
> I am debating over Nomad or Hi-MD. Since I mainly use Mac, Nomad is
> very attractive...

Hello,

I'd rethink that. There is no way to get transfer the music from the
Nomad to the Mac. Although the Jukebox 3 has the right connectors
(USB/Firewire), data can only be transferred using software which is
only available for PCs.

However, I suggest a device which also works with the Mac: I recently
bought an Archos Gmini-400 hard-disk based music player/recorder/MPEG4
player. It has a surprisingly good analog line input, and records
uncompressed WAV at 16 bits/44.1 kHz. I've used it for several live
classical recordings with an external preamp and condenser mics. The s/n
ratio is around 86 dB, which leaves enough headroom above the room noise
floor. Input gain can be adjusted on the fly while recording. The level
meter isn't labelled; experience so far tells me that the first (of
three) red bars means about -10 dB ;) 

The Gmini 400 has a 20 GB 1.8 inch hard disk and appears as a hard drive
when attached to a Mac or a PC. The transfer speed via USB 2.0 is very
fast at around 14 MB/sec.

The lithium-ion battery should be good for more than four hours of
recording time, but I never actually tried to reach the limit - I
usually carry an external battery box along just to be sure. The Gmini
400 records up to 2 GB sized files, but you can make longer recordings
by pressing a "Next File" button, which seamlessly creates a new file
while recording. It also seamlessly plays back WAV files (but not MP3s).

Compared to the Jukebox 3, it "only" has an analog line in.
Unfortunately, it is also a 3.5mm minijack through a supplied clunky
adapter which attaches to a special connector on the device (it looks
like the remote control connector on some Sharp minidisc recorders).

Archos sells a remote control which plugs into that connector, so I am
going to buy this and butcher it in order solder two XLR connectors to
the remote cable. Right now I am using a home made miniplug to XLR
adapter cable wired to hook up to the preamp (thanks Rane, for the
excellent Rane Notes on interfacing balanced/unbalanced equipment!).

Save for the digital input (and exchangeable battery), I think the Gmini
400 could be a good substitute for the Jukebox 3. If anybody would like
to hear sample clips of recordings made with the Gmini 400, feel free to
e-mail me.

Peter
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 12:54:23 PM

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

Mike Rivers wrote:

> I thought iTunes was new last year. What have you been doing with it
> in the previous "years"?


ha ha ha
at least 4 years old, but then you users of windows would not realize
this as it is new to your platform

dale
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 1:49:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

play_on wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:59:27 -0800, Kurt Albershardt <kurt@nv.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Edirol
>
>
> Is it just me? ...everytime I read that name I think it's some kind of
> laxative or something.
>
> Al


You could say that, Laxitives make things move smoother, and Edirol
products sure make data move more smoothely into your computer
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 3:36:44 PM

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

In article <memo.20050129020329.1952G@feynman.morton.org.uk> dmorton@well.com writes:

> I've used a Creative Jukebox with a Mac for years, it works fine, support
> for it is built into iTunes.

I thought iTunes was new last year. What have you been doing with it
in the previous "years"?

Of course you can do real time audio transfers between the Jukebox and
any computer with an audio interface, but that's not what most people
mean when they talk about "support."

The last time I upgraded the Real Player it wanted to "support" my
Jukebox, but I wouldn't let it. It might even be better than the
Windows utility that Creative Labs provides with the Jukebox, but I
don't trust Real Player to do anything but play Real files that I feed
to it manually.


--
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
January 29, 2005 3:36:45 PM

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

Mike Rivers wrote:
> In article <memo.20050129020329.1952G@feynman.morton.org.uk> dmorton@well.com writes:
>
>
>>I've used a Creative Jukebox with a Mac for years, it works fine, support
>>for it is built into iTunes.
>
>
> I thought iTunes was new last year. What have you been doing with it
> in the previous "years"?



That's the iTunes music store and/or the windoze version. iTunes has
been a great Mac jukebox application for years.
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 7:21:01 PM

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

"Peter Schneider" <pschneider+usenet@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:cteodg$lu4$1@news.hispeed.ch


> I'd rethink that. There is no way to get transfer the music from the
> Nomad to the Mac. Although the Jukebox 3 has the right connectors
> (USB/Firewire), data can only be transferred using software which is
> only available for PCs.

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93548

shows iTunes support for other members of the Nomad family. I wonder if the
omission of the NJB3 is unintentional?
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 7:56:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

Kurt Albershardt wrote:
> marta wrote:
>
>> I tried to find the info of 16bit sound (as you say) for Nomad
>> Jukebox.. "3" and "c", but didn't find anywhere in their website or
>> amazon, etc. Could you tell me where I could find ??
>
>
> The NJB3 is (unfortunately) now a has-been product. Plenty of used ones
> available, however.
>
> Try the Yahoo Group <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/njb3tapers/&gt;

TS also has an FAQ <http://www.taperssection.com/yabbse/index.php?board=14;action=display;threadid=16338>
Anonymous
January 29, 2005 10:25:08 PM

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

In article <1107021263.189664.313880@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> dallen@frognet.net writes:

> [iTunes] at least 4 years old, but then you users of windows would not realize
> this as it is new to your platform

You got me there! I first heard of it this go-around.

--
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
January 30, 2005 12:17:00 AM

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

In article <znr1107002350k@trad>, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote:

> I thought iTunes was new last year. What have you been doing with it
> in the previous "years"?

iTunes shipped on MacOS in 2001. Before that I used SoundJam from Casady &
Green.

> Of course you can do real time audio transfers between the Jukebox and
> any computer with an audio interface, but that's not what most people
> mean when they talk about "support."

When I say support for the Creative Jukebox is built into iTunes, I mean
proper support.

When you plug the Jukebox into a Mac, using a USB cable, the jukebox
appears in the left hand 'Source' column in iTunes. You can then drag and
drop files to and from the Jukebox, and they're transferred over the USB
cable.

As I type this I'm looking at iTunes 4.7.1 running on MacOS 10.3.7 moving
files from a Creative Jukebox model DAP6G02 (bought in Europe, where
Creative had trouble with the 'Nomad' name, so they have slightly
different model numbers/nomenclature).
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 12:17:01 AM

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

David Morton wrote:
> In article <znr1107002350k@trad>, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote:
>
>
>> Of course you can do real time audio transfers between the Jukebox and
>> any computer with an audio interface, but that's not what most people
>> mean when they talk about "support."
>
>
> When I say support for the Creative Jukebox is built into iTunes, I mean
> proper support.
>
> When you plug the Jukebox into a Mac, using a USB cable, the jukebox
> appears in the left hand 'Source' column in iTunes. You can then drag and
> drop files to and from the Jukebox, and they're transferred over the USB
> cable.
>
> As I type this I'm looking at iTunes 4.7.1 running on MacOS 10.3.7 moving
> files from a Creative Jukebox model DAP6G02 (bought in Europe, where
> Creative had trouble with the 'Nomad' name, so they have slightly
> different model numbers/nomenclature).

That's a first generation Jukebox with a 6G drive, which iTunes did support (since there was no iPod at the time.) It has serious limitations as a live recording device.
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 12:17:01 AM

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

In article <memo.20050129211704.1952I@feynman.morton.org.uk> dmorton@well.com writes:

> When you plug the Jukebox into a Mac, using a USB cable, the jukebox
> appears in the left hand 'Source' column in iTunes. You can then drag and
> drop files to and from the Jukebox, and they're transferred over the USB
> cable.

Then why do so many people say that the Jukebox isn't supported by the
Mac? Maybe it's because Creative doesn't offer Mac software, so Mac
people don't bother to try the support that they already have on their
computers.

> As I type this I'm looking at iTunes 4.7.1 running on MacOS 10.3.7 moving
> files from a Creative Jukebox model DAP6G02 (bought in Europe, where
> Creative had trouble with the 'Nomad' name, so they have slightly
> different model numbers/nomenclature).

I'm wondering if the Jukebox 3 is something different. Are you
Mac/Jukebox folks using iTunes with a Jukebox 3?



--
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
January 30, 2005 12:17:02 AM

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

Mike Rivers wrote:
> In article <memo.20050129211704.1952I@feynman.morton.org.uk> dmorton@well.com writes:
>
>
>> When you plug the Jukebox into a Mac, using a USB cable, the jukebox
>> appears in the left hand 'Source' column in iTunes. You can then drag and
>> drop files to and from the Jukebox, and they're transferred over the USB
>> cable.
>
>
> Then why do so many people say that the Jukebox isn't supported by the
> Mac? Maybe it's because Creative doesn't offer Mac software, so Mac
> people don't bother to try the support that they already have on their
> computers.
>
>
>> As I type this I'm looking at iTunes 4.7.1 running on MacOS 10.3.7 moving
>> files from a Creative Jukebox model DAP6G02 (bought in Europe, where
>> Creative had trouble with the 'Nomad' name, so they have slightly
>> different model numbers/nomenclature).
>
>
> I'm wondering if the Jukebox 3 is something different.


It is, and Apple has no interest in supporting iPod competitors. iTunes has supported a variety of flash-based portables for years but I wonder what will happen now that Apple is in the space?
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 1:44:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.audio.minidisc,rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.opinion (More info?)

wow, that was really great. Thank you ^^;
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 4:38:00 AM

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

In article <362o4kF4petajU3@individual.net>, kurt@nv.net (Kurt
Albershardt) wrote:

> That's a first generation Jukebox with a 6G drive, which iTunes did
> support (since there was no iPod at the time.)

iTunes supports later models too
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93548
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 4:38:01 AM

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

David Morton wrote:
> In article <362o4kF4petajU3@individual.net>, kurt@nv.net (Kurt
> Albershardt) wrote:
>
>
>> That's a first generation Jukebox with a 6G drive, which iTunes did
>> support (since there was no iPod at the time.)
>
>
> iTunes supports later models too
> http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93548

All of which predate the NJB3.
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 4:47:00 AM

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

In article <znr1107033944k@trad>, mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote:

> Then why do so many people say that the Jukebox isn't supported by the
> Mac?

Why ask that question of me? I'm the one pointing out that many of the
Creative Jukebox models
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=93548 *do* work.

> Maybe it's because Creative doesn't offer Mac software, so Mac
> people don't bother to try the support that they already have on their
> computers.

Who says we don't?
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 5:40:23 AM

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

Mike Rivers <mrivers@d-and-d.comedy> wrote:

> I thought iTunes was new last year.

Thinking will cause that.

> What have you been doing with it in the previous "years"?

Many things, not including buying songs online? It's a thought.

--
ha
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 5:40:24 AM

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

David Morton wrote:

> (Mike Rivers) wrote:

> > I thought iTunes was new last year. What have you been doing with it
> > in the previous "years"?

> iTunes shipped on MacOS in 2001. Before that I used SoundJam from Casady &
> Green.

> > Of course you can do real time audio transfers between the Jukebox and
> > any computer with an audio interface, but that's not what most people
> > mean when they talk about "support."

> When I say support for the Creative Jukebox is built into iTunes, I mean
> proper support.

> When you plug the Jukebox into a Mac, using a USB cable, the jukebox
> appears in the left hand 'Source' column in iTunes. You can then drag and
> drop files to and from the Jukebox, and they're transferred over the USB
> cable.

> As I type this I'm looking at iTunes 4.7.1 running on MacOS 10.3.7 moving
> files from a Creative Jukebox model DAP6G02 (bought in Europe, where
> Creative had trouble with the 'Nomad' name, so they have slightly
> different model numbers/nomenclature).

Wow. I cannot believe how many times I have been told oppositely! Thank
you. How long has this worked within OSX, as in since what versions?

--
ha
Anonymous
January 30, 2005 8:48:26 AM

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

Mike Rivers
> > [iTunes] at least 4 years old, but then you users of windows would
not realize
> > this as it is new to your platform
>
> You got me there! I first heard of it this go-around.
p.s.
firewire is an apple innovation!

dale
!