Edirol R1 / R-1 Portable Recorder MAJOR PROBLEM

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

http://www.soundsketcher.com/

i have this and the built in mic works fine under loud conditions.

it also hasa smart card and usb...

The overall sound is not that great but nothing is distorted and you
can always hear all the instrument. For practice it is all I need....

Now for taping shows I always thought the Edriol was the best, but
maybe not......

You could try getting one of those sony stereo condensor mics that have
the 1/8 jack.


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.d [...] 48680&rd=1



That might fix your distortion problem...

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

In article <1122491111.620548.72670@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> googlemyass@undertone.com writes:

> I recently purchased an Edirol R1 portable recorder to record jam
> sessions with my band. Just FYI, the internal mics ARE NOT suitable for
> very loud sound sources as I had hoped.

> The audio is severely distorted no matter what input gain
> setting I use, even when the level meter is far below hitting it's
> maximum value.

> If anyone has any ideas for how to fix the Edirol (muffling?) let me
> know, or else I will be returning the unit.

Turn it upside down. Move it farther away. Turn down your band. With
no input attenuator there's nothing you can do. I doubt that you could
get anyone to modify it for you.

If you use an external mic and preamp and go in to the line input,
you can use the controls on the preamp to set the record level
properly. But I recognize the value of having everything
self-contained. As long as you want to use the internal mics, you'll
have to rely on acoustical ways to attenuate the input level.

--
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

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

In article <1122515207.798950.59140@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> nowater@supernerd.com.au writes:

> You are doing something wrong or the device is
> not working properly. If the meter is mowhere near its max then
> attenuation is sufficient and you should not be hearing distorted
> output.

He's having a common problem with recroders like this. My Nomad
Jukebox 3 is the same. When the audio coming in (in this case from the
built-in mics being close to a loud source) is high enough so that the
input stage clips, when you turn down the record level, you're just
making a more accurate recording of already distorted audio.



--
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

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

In article <fbCdnTGDH8cRk3TfRVn-vw@comcast.com> jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net writes:

> There's got to be some kind of material that you could physically place
> over the mic that would attenuate the signal without coloring the sound
> too horribly. Can anyone think of a relatively "flat" substance or material?

Yes. Air. About 20 feet of it. The Inverse Square law works wonders. I
don't know of any practical acoustic attenuator that has reasonably
flat frequency response.

--
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

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

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 19:23:55 -0700, Jonny Durango
<jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net> wrote:

>....and
>most concerts/venues keep everything inside right around 110db.

"Doctor, when I hit myself on the head with this
hammer, it hurts. Can you fix the hammer?"

No magic bullets, Mon. Sorry; ain't happen'n.

Chris Hornbeck

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

In article <afudndFcR_1XD3TfRVn-3Q@comcast.com> jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net writes:

> Ah yes, but unfortunately air isn't a very good attenuator You
> could probably get the same relative attenuation with a piece of .005"
> paper than you would with 20' of air.

But what would it do to the frequency response? I know the tales of
tissue paper over the tweeters of NS10 speakers to tame the high
frequency response, but that's not quite the same thing. Distance is a
great attenuator. Alternately, you could replace the air with a lower
density gas, but that woudl make it hard to breathe.

> most practice spaces don't have 5 extra feet of space let lone 20....and
> most concerts/venues keep everything inside right around 110db.

That doesn't sound like what the R1 was designed to record. The people
in that space, with that sound level, should be wearing ear plugs.

> How about those fancy expensive earplugs that claim very flat response
> like the Etymotic (sp?) ER-15's? What are they made of?

Rubber, with carefully crafted holes. Want to drill ear-shaped holes
in your R1 to install ear plugs? It would be more practical to modify
the electronics, and far more effective. But that's not a job for an
amateur. You could try sticking some gaffer tape over the microphones,
though, and see what it sounds like.


--
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

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

Arny Krueger wrote:
>
>
> Mic attenuators anybody?
>
> Shure, Proco, and Audio Technica have 'em.
>


I think the original poster was talking about the built-in mics.

Jonny Durango

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

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 10:34:30 GMT, "Lorin David Schultz"
<Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote:

>> I don't know of any practical acoustic attenuator that has reasonably
>> flat frequency response.
>
>Hell, we can do it for light, why not sound? Why isn't there an ND
>filter for audio?

Probably could be done, but might need to be similarly
large compared to a wavelength. Acoustic "lenses" and
such need to be at least comparable to a wavelength.

Interesting question; thanks,

Chris Hornbeck

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

Josh <googlemyass@undertone.com> wrote:

>If anyone has any ideas for how to fix the Edirol (muffling?) let me
>know, or else I will be returning the unit.

You might consider a set of our Low Cost Binaural mics with the low sensitivity
option. Under $100.

http://www.core-sound.com/lcmics.htm



--
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