Shiny new portable recorder.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Guide community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
G

Guest

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1122548045k@trad

> A 1 GB card would probably be about the equivalent in
terms of
> recording time, but that's (just guessing here) about $25
per card,

Just looked, it seems that 1 GB flash is still up in the
$50-75 range.

1 GB is about 90 minutes of 16/44 stereo, right?

> plus the darn things are so small you can't write
anything on them
> except maybe for an index number, so how do you know
what's on each
> card?

If you want something bigger to write on, stuff each card in
a paper envelope.

> I know that professional news photographers are all using
digital
> cameras with flash cards. I wonder what kind of failure
rates they
> have?

I went swimming a couple of weeks ago in our community's
ozinated swimming pool for over an hour with a 256 meg Lexar
Jumpdrive USB flash memory device on my pocket key ring. I
dried it out by hanging it in front on my PC's PS for about
half a day. This extended drying may not have been needed.
The LED stopped working but the memory reads and writes just
fine.

It's been dipped ans showered with it a few times since, and
I just shook it off and used it.

BTW, my use of this flash memory device is rough enought
that the nomenclature is significantly worn off after 3
months. I've also had to repair a break in its rubber
keyring holder, but the memory itself keeps working.
 
G

Guest

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

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:25:08 +0200, Mike Rivers wrote:


> In article <7obge1538mjuacg0eg2m34rscm2e94vl3u@4ax.com>
> jff@ix.netcom.com writes:
>
>> The Edirol R1 works fine with 8 GB CF cards, although in 2 GB max
>> pieces.
>
> As far as recording goes, I have no problem with a 2 GB limit. There are
> always places to break, at least for the things I record. What's nice
> about using, for example, cassettes, is that you can record one set on a
> cassette, you change tapes at the end of the set, and you've only
> invested a couple of dollars. A $50 tape budget can cover a weekend and
> you don't have to worry about recycling the media.
>
> A 1 GB card would probably be about the equivalent in terms of recording
> time, but that's (just guessing here) about $25 per card, plus the darn
> things are so small you can't write anything on them except maybe for an
> index number, so how do you know what's on each card?

If you want to record a weekend, use 2 flashcards and a hard disk like:
http://www.cooldrives.com/usb-on-the-go-enclosure-usb-otg.html
While recording one card transfer the other to the disk.
Except for the exact file creation date, you don't have much info.

I have not seen much about the quality of preamps and conversion yet. Has
anyone seen and or used this microtrack? What about quality?

--
Chel van Gennip
Visit Serg van Gennip's site http://www.serg.vangennip.com
 
G

Guest

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

In article <3ksah9FvatigU1@individual.net> chel@vangennip.nl writes:

> If you want to record a weekend, use 2 flashcards and a hard disk like:
> http://www.cooldrives.com/usb-on-the-go-enclosure-usb-otg.html
> While recording one card transfer the other to the disk.

No. Just plain NO. I don't want to have to do anything but remove the
"cassette" and pop another one in its place. I don't want to have to
think about anything else until live gets back to normal pace.
Sometimes I have trouble remembering to hit the Record button. You
expect me to back up files, trust what I did without verifying it, and
then, delete the original? You have more faith in me than I do.

> Except for the exact file creation date, you don't have much info.

I could have a couple of pages full of notes as to what's recorded on
there. At festivals, we have other people to do this so we (the
engineers) don't have to worry about it. They write down the
performer, the song titles, the instruments, who's playing what if
they switch around, and they'll go up to the performers after the set
to fill in the blanks if they miss a song title or aren't sure of how
to spell it. The log and the media have to get together and be able to
be kept together. And the loggers don't all carry computers, so it's
hand written on real paper, and usually stays that way for 50 years.

> I have not seen much about the quality of preamps and conversion yet. Has
> anyone seen and or used this microtrack? What about quality?

If you're still talking about the M-Audio flash card recorder,
nobody's seen it yet with the exception perhaps of some testers, and
they don't talk until at least the product is actually available.
You'll just have to be patient. I doubt that they're fabulous, and
they can't be very bad with today's technology. But as we've discussed
here before (and like the person with the R1 who's getting distortion
when he's recording his loud band up close) if the record level
control is on the digital side of the A/D converter, it's really only
good for turning things up, not turning them down.



--
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
 
G

Guest

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

On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:54:47 +0200, Mike Rivers wrote:

> In article <3ksah9FvatigU1@individual.net> chel@vangennip.nl writes:
>
>> If you want to record a weekend, use 2 flashcards and a hard disk like:
>> http://www.cooldrives.com/usb-on-the-go-enclosure-usb-otg.html While
>> recording one card transfer the other to the disk.
>
> No. Just plain NO. I don't want to have to do anything but remove the
> "cassette" and pop another one in its place. I don't want to have to
> think about anything else until live gets back to normal pace. Sometimes
> I have trouble remembering to hit the Record button. You expect me to
> back up files, trust what I did without verifying it, and then, delete
> the original? You have more faith in me than I do.

Even with casettes you will have to do something to store it. Puting a CF
module in a device and press one button should be possible.

>> Except for the exact file creation date, you don't have much info.
>
> I could have a couple of pages full of notes as to what's recorded on
> there. At festivals, we have other people to do this so we (the
> engineers) don't have to worry about it. They write down the performer,
> the song titles, the instruments, who's playing what if they switch
> around, and they'll go up to the performers after the set to fill in the
> blanks if they miss a song title or aren't sure of how to spell it. The
> log and the media have to get together and be able to be kept together.
> And the loggers don't all carry computers, so it's hand written on real
> paper, and usually stays that way for 50 years.

If this are your requirements, you need a DAW in a laptop with firewire
or USB soundcard. Ad a scanner for the documentation. Just write the
exact time of the performace on the paper befor scanning ;-)

--
Chel van Gennip
Bezoek Serg van Gennip's site http://www.serg.vangennip.com
 
G

Guest

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote:
>
> when I go off on a field trip, I like to minimize the amount of stuff
> that I have to carry with me, as well as the amount of stuff that I
> have to hook up in order to make a recording.


If you take your laptop with you on the road anyway, why not just use
that? An outboard interface isn't going to represent any more cartage
than a portable recorder.

--
"It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
- Lorin David Schultz
in the control room
making even bad news sound good

(Remove spamblock to reply)
 
G

Guest

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

In article <0lmGe.171188$tt5.81708@edtnps90> Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca writes:

> If you take your laptop with you on the road anyway, why not just use
> that? An outboard interface isn't going to represent any more cartage
> than a portable recorder.

The laptop stays in the hotel room. It's there to check e-mail and
entertain myself surfing the web when I wake up at 6 AM and the
festival doesn't start until 11. That isn't always the ideal
configuration for recording audio.

There may not be enough room for a laptop-based recording system at
the PA console. You have the computer taking up about a square foot,
then you have the external audio interface (that usualy has a fairly
short leash so you can't put it anywhere, it needs to be fairly close
to the computer), and with a several gigabytes a day being stored, I'd
want to use an external disk drive. The power supply usually ends up
on the ground. The recorder that I use now (Jukebox 3) or the new
recorders I'm looking at are complete in one package, with the
possible exception of the power supply, and have about half the
footprint of a laptop computer.

Besides, how easy is it to see a laptop LCD screen in the bright sun?
And do laptop computers keep working when the sun is beating down on
them? Mine gets bloody hot just sitting on a shelf in the house when
it's on all day. And then how easy is it to see the keyboard after the
sun goes down?


--
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
 
G

Guest

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

"Peter A. Stoll" <Lyn1Stoll_spamdel@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xns969E547DA8513Haifa10Kulim07Michel@216.196.97.138...
> mrivers@d-and-d.com (Mike Rivers) wrote in news:znr1122252322k@trad:
>
> > Microdrives are expensive,
> > fairly small capacity, and according to some digital camera folks,
> > aren't very reliable.
>
> I'd skip the microdrives, buy a just barely big enough Compact Flash card
> now, and count on progress to help later.
>

You can only count on 'progress' to give you a replacement system to
purchase later. By the time there are significantly larger cards, Edirol or
another vendor will have superceded this unit with a model that will support
the larger cards and this unit will not be upgraded in a meaningful way.
That is the nature of all computer-based technology. practicing the myth of
'upgradability' or 'scalability' is at best a stopgap measure. Always was
and always will be.

> Kingston Elite Pro CF cards are an example of a fast enough major card
> which is widely available in the 2 Gb size for about $100. (two hours
> recording time at 24/44.1) The 4GB size can be had easily for $230.

The upshot is that those will only get cheaper, so if one buys this unit
now, they will be able to get more cards for it later at fractions of the
price. For a while, at least.

jb
 
G

Guest

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1122394566k@trad...

> If it was for in-house use, it wouldn't be that much of a problem. But
> when I go off on a field trip, I like to minimize the amount of stuff
> that I have to carry with me, as well as the amount of stuff that I
> have to hook up in order to make a recording. This is why I'm looking
> for something that doesn't need to be unloaded before I can get back
> to work. It's also why I'm looking for something that has usable mic
> inputs so I don't have to carry an outboard preamp if I'm not
> recording from an existing mixer.
>

The marantz solid state recorders have pre's, but it's still using a small
flash card.

Maybe if we complain long and loudly enough about things that don't exist
but should somebody else will make them.

jb
 
G

Guest

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

"reddred" <opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com> wrote in
news:XPmdnbDMrJdvDnDfRVn-tw@adelphia.com:

> "Peter A. Stoll" <Lyn1Stoll_spamdel@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:Xns969E547DA8513Haifa10Kulim07Michel@216.196.97.138...
>> I'd skip the microdrives, buy a just barely big enough Compact Flash
>> card now, and count on progress to help later.
>>
>
> You can only count on 'progress' to give you a replacement system to
> purchase later. By the time there are significantly larger cards,
> Edirol or another vendor will have superceded this unit with a model
> that will support the larger cards and this unit will not be upgraded
> in a meaningful way. That is the nature of all computer-based
> technology. practicing the myth of 'upgradability' or 'scalability' is
> at best a stopgap measure. Always was and always will be.

I lived, breathed, and worked semiconductors as applied to computers
professionally from 1974 to 2004. Though plenty of upgrade stories were
exaggerated, and some even bogus, you are overstating the general case. CF
has so far met the upgrade promise over a fair number of powers of two
(I've seen 16 Mbyte, and I've bought 4 Gbyte--256x is a pretty large range,
I'd say). I'd say digital electronics in many cases and dimensions
provided a more practical and smoother upgrade path than anything that
happened in the analog tape world, to give a nearby comparison.

>> Kingston Elite Pro CF cards are an example of a fast enough major
>> card which is widely available in the 2 Gb size for about $100. (two
>> hours recording time at 24/44.1) The 4GB size can be had easily for
>> $230.
>
> The upshot is that those will only get cheaper, so if one buys this
> unit now, they will be able to get more cards for it later at
> fractions of the price. For a while, at least.
>
> jb

Well, I don't know whether the unit ostensibly providing a topic for this
thread has a limitation on some threshold of CF card size, but the standard
is well defined, and for enough money the answer is testable now, with 8 GB
CF cards somewhat easy to find, though very expensive, and at last one 12
GB card out there, obscenely expensive (recently reduced from $9999 list to
$4999 list). Right now the 2GB Kingston is about at the minimum of the
$/byte curve for reasonably fast cards. That minimum is likely to move
down and out for some time yet.

Peter A. Stoll
former IC design person
 
G

Guest

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

In article <XPmdnbDMrJdvDnDfRVn-tw@adelphia.com> opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:

> The upshot is that those will only get cheaper, so if one buys this unit
> now, they will be able to get more cards for it later at fractions of the
> price. For a while, at least.

But probably not for as long as the recorder would otherwise last. As
an example, the motherboard used in the Mackie HDR24/96 and MDR24/96
had a BIOS that didn't recognize drives larger than 32 GB. That's
plenty of disk space for any reasonable studio project, but required
multiple drives (and a break to switch them) for recording a long
event using all 24 tracks. In addition, as the price of larger drives
fell, the price of 20-30 GB drives stabilized, and eventually dealers
stopped stocking them. In order to get a "small" disk drive, you had
to find an on-line seller and usually buy an OEM package. Nothing
wrong with that, but it was a pain if you didn't keep a couple of
drives on the shelf for that last-minute project.

They eventually came up with an updated BIOS chip that supports drives
up to 120 GB, but now it's the 160 and 200 GB drives that we see
dropping in price, and 120 GB and smaller drives are starting to
disappear from retail shelves.

The recorder, however, is just as good as it was when it was new, but
eventually it will become a fixed-media machine. Even analog tape,
after a scare, is making a manufacturing comeback. And it's easier to
modify an analog tape recorder to work with modern tape formulations
than it is to write new BIOS code for a discontinued computer
motherboard.




--
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
 
G

Guest

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

In article <5KOdnd-Un4umBHDfRVn-jg@adelphia.com> opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:

> Maybe if we complain long and loudly enough about things that don't exist
> but should somebody else will make them.

They are, and do. But there are few of us complaining so that there
are only few devices made that suit our requirements. Few
manufacturers + small demand = not low cost. Like they say, "pick two
of the three."

--
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
 
G

Guest

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

In article <Xns96A4EFE7C90Haifa10Kulim07Michel@216.196.97.138> Lyn1Stoll_spamdel@comcast.net writes:

> I lived, breathed, and worked semiconductors as applied to computers
> professionally from 1974 to 2004. Though plenty of upgrade stories were
> exaggerated, and some even bogus, you are overstating the general case. CF
> has so far met the upgrade promise over a fair number of powers of two
> (I've seen 16 Mbyte, and I've bought 4 Gbyte--256x is a pretty large range,
> I'd say).

Red was talking about the devices that use the cards, not the cards
themselves. Just because a device takes a 2 GB card which was large at
the time the device was designed doesn't mean that it will take a
16 GB card when such cards become available. And the way things go,
the availability of 16 GB cards will eventually result in the
non-availability of 2 GB cards.

That's the way it goes.


--
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
 
G

Guest

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

On or about 27 Jul 2005 18:12:48 -0400, Mike Rivers allegedly wrote:

>
> In article <8747-42E78883-7@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net> Audioetc@webtv.net writes:
>
> > Actually you can't. The Sound Devices 722
> > 2 track hd recorder has a street price of $2375.
>
> That's sure a big change from the original plan. I've just been
> watching the development, not the price. I guess I'll stick with my
> Jukebox 3 for a while yet.
>
>
> --
> 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

Noel Bachelor noelbachelorAT(From:_domain)
Language Recordings Inc (Darwin Australia)
 
G

Guest

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

On or about 27 Jul 2005 18:12:48 -0400, Mike Rivers allegedly wrote:

> In article <8747-42E78883-7@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net> Audioetc@webtv.net writes:
>
> > Actually you can't. The Sound Devices 722
> > 2 track hd recorder has a street price of $2375.
>
> That's sure a big change from the original plan. I've just been
> watching the development, not the price. I guess I'll stick with my
> Jukebox 3 for a while yet.

Have a play with one, Mike. I would not be surprised if you start looking
for ways to stretch your budget to be able to afford it. (I realise you
no longer have a regular income to stretch, though.) It's the best
portable recorder I've ever used. Results are outstanding.

I've shown them to several people who thought it was out of their pocket
range. After a good look at it, or better still, a play with it, most
have decided maybe it might not be so far out of their reach.

In a way, this may cause us some inconvenience, as if the demand
increases, it can mean longer delays in us getting the machines we need.
So far we've got 7 of them, with another currently on order.


Noel Bachelor noelbachelorAT(From:_domain)
Language Recordings Inc (Darwin Australia)
 
G

Guest

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

In article <42ec9779.603872853@news.bigpond.com> ChangeMe@bigpond.com writes:

> > > The Sound Devices 722

> Have a play with one, Mike. I would not be surprised if you start looking
> for ways to stretch your budget to be able to afford it.


I do play with them whenever I see one on a table at a trade show. It
does much more than I want, and it's still a little more difficult to
do simple things than I'd like. I'd put up with (and probably
eventually learn my way around) the deep user interface if the price
was lower. I really can't justify owning a portable recorder at that
price however. I can have a lot more fun spending that much money in
other places.

> So far we've got 7 of them, with another currently on order.

"We" has more money than "I."

--
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
 
G

Guest

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

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 14:52:40 -0700, Jonny Durango
<jonnydurango1BUSH_FROM_OFFICE@comcast.net> wrote:

-----------------------8<----------------------------
>I agree....a 2 or 4GB CF card is plenty for most ppl, myself included,
>especially considering the battery will probably die before you use 4
>gigs. I could understand for people who record musical festivals or
>shows in which multiple bands are playing, or long lectures and such,
>but I think the average "taper" records less than an hour or two at a
>time and would rather have something they can throw in the pocket for
>spur-of-the-moment recordings as opposed to lugging some big mechinal
>hard drive around that will record 40 hours of uncompressed audio.
>
>I think we've all run in to that situation, somewhere, it could be
>anywhere at any time where there is a sound or something so incredible
>that we pray that something like the microtracker would fall from the
>heavens into our hands. Anyway, I applaud M-Audio and hope in the final
>version they put more thought into the gain stages and level monitoring.
>
>Jonny Durango

-- It make me smile a little, when I put the Minidisc with 4 Hi MD
disc, a microphone with its bracket and an connection cable for line
recording, in my pockets. This equals to >15 Kg Revox and 4 tapes @
1000 m I forrmerly used for recording a concert, always connected to
someone's console.
With 1 GB HiMD, you can record about 1 hr 20 mins in 44/16 PCM. This
will do for the most of standard happenings. Now, one of these
minidisc media must have an physical imperfection or so as nearly at
the end of recording (obligatory using the Curious Sonic Stage
software for transfer), the transfer ended up with an error message
("Internal Error", not mentioning where, in the software, the MD
device or media). Using the line-out transfer, I've found a series of
short glitches near the end of the recording, where some speech is
recorded. These glitches could be handled as classical tape drop-outs
as each of them is of a short duration. Obviously, this particular
HiMD disk has to be marked as bad. Perhaps reformatting would help but
I have yet to see. Nevertheless, for a typical event you'd need one
disk only. The batteries last well and you have the time left to
review the recording at site.

Now I've seen that Sony has in their 3.2 version of their Sony Stage,
generously enabled for own-made recordings, to be transferred (ie.
"uploaded " or "downloaded" I dont know) unlimited times instead of
only once. Thank you, Sony, I'm touched. Now I want more, Sony. I want
a driver to enable me drag and drop like all other portable media, not
more not less, do you dig it, Sony?


Edi Zubovic, Crikvenica, Croatia
 
G

Guest

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1122893111k@trad...
>
> In article <XPmdnbDMrJdvDnDfRVn-tw@adelphia.com>
opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:
>
> > The upshot is that those will only get cheaper, so if one buys this unit
> > now, they will be able to get more cards for it later at fractions of
the
> > price. For a while, at least.
>
> But probably not for as long as the recorder would otherwise last. As
> an example, the motherboard used in the Mackie HDR24/96 and MDR24/96
> had a BIOS that didn't recognize drives larger than 32 GB. That's
> plenty of disk space for any reasonable studio project, but required
> multiple drives (and a break to switch them) for recording a long
> event using all 24 tracks. In addition, as the price of larger drives
> fell, the price of 20-30 GB drives stabilized, and eventually dealers
> stopped stocking them.

Once a product gets past the 'sweet spot' in the upgrade cycle, it's only a
matter of time. That's all fine, if it were only computer equipment, but the
real problem with the planned obsolescence business model is that it's taken
over everything, from shoes to houses.

> The recorder, however, is just as good as it was when it was new, but
> eventually it will become a fixed-media machine. Even analog tape,
> after a scare, is making a manufacturing comeback. And it's easier to
> modify an analog tape recorder to work with modern tape formulations
> than it is to write new BIOS code for a discontinued computer
> motherboard.
>

That's pretty much why I went with a PC for a tracking device as opposed to
the hdr's which were first appearing at the time. At least I can pull a part
out and don't have to upgrade the entire thing at one time. The main problem
is the cost of the interface, which pretty much takes away any price
advantage in using a PC over an HDR, but at least I can spread the cost out
over time.

jb
 
G

Guest

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

"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> wrote in message
news:znr1122893213k@trad...
>
> In article <5KOdnd-Un4umBHDfRVn-jg@adelphia.com>
opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:
>
> > Maybe if we complain long and loudly enough about things that don't
exist
> > but should somebody else will make them.
>
> They are, and do. But there are few of us complaining so that there
> are only few devices made that suit our requirements. Few
> manufacturers + small demand = not low cost. Like they say, "pick two
> of the three."
>

Well, I've got a big list. The marantz CF recorders are right on the money
for me as a piece of hardware, they don't sound bad and they are portable
and straightforward to use, but I feel as you seem to that the CF media is
too small. I'm not in dire need of one, so I can pretty much wait until I
can go buy 16 and 32 gig cards, and I'll see what hardware is there.

The whole issue of 'media workflow' that you brought up is interesting. I
don't mind recording to HD's, but I can't leave it there, even with
redundancy, and backing it all up to optical DVD's is a royal PITA. It's one
of those things that flies in the face of PC technology making workflow
simpler and faster, and what you end up with is people not bothering with
hardcopy and losing data.

jb
 
G

Guest

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

reddred wrote:

> Well, I've got a big list. The marantz CF recorders are right on the money
> for me as a piece of hardware, they don't sound bad and they are portable
> and straightforward to use, but I feel as you seem to that the CF media is
> too small. I'm not in dire need of one, so I can pretty much wait until I
> can go buy 16 and 32 gig cards, and I'll see what hardware is there.

Aren't there any self powered HD drive carriers that can
connect via a cable to the CF slot? There should be if
there aren't.


Bob
--

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

A. Einstein
 
G

Guest

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

In article <bJSdnZGbfqCiz3PfRVn-2g@adelphia.com> opaloka@REMOVECAPSyahoo.com writes:

> The whole issue of 'media workflow' that you brought up is interesting. I
> don't mind recording to HD's, but I can't leave it there, even with
> redundancy, and backing it all up to optical DVD's is a royal PITA. It's one
> of those things that flies in the face of PC technology making workflow
> simpler and faster, and what you end up with is people not bothering with
> hardcopy and losing data.

I don't mind using hard drives as removable/storage media for the HDR.
I might change my opinion if I try to open up a project that's been on
the shelf for a couple of years and the drive won't start up, but I'll
burn that bridge when I come to it.

I've always said that computers don't really make our jobs easier,
they just change the way we work. Word processors are a great example.
I used to write a rough draft, give it to the secretary (who knew how
to spell all the words right, even the technical ones) who would type
a drafte, maybe I'd make a couple of changes, and then it would be
typed as a final and the job would be done. With a word processor, I'm
the typist, the reviser, the coordinator of chamges suggested by
people who wouln't bother in the old model but know that it's on the
computer so it's easy to change, and then I'm expected to make it look
like a finished publication. Start to finish, it takes just a little
longer, but look at how much more we've accomplished. <g>





--
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
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Andrew_PDK Audio 1
D Audio 2
A Audio 1
R Audio 1
R Audio 2
Z Audio 3
J Audio 1
Q Audio 1
D Audio 3
F Audio 2
D Audio 1
G Audio 0
A Audio 1
I Audio 2
B Audio 1
E Audio 2
W Audio 3
S Audio 1
A Audio 3
G Audio 3

ASK THE COMMUNITY