Hello
I would like to record some live flute and piano music. Some of the
flute music is solo and some is accompanied by the piano. I am looking
for a portable recorder rather than a computer laptop solution due to
cost issues and some portability issues.
I have considered purchasing one of the new Hi-MD minidisc recorders,
the MZ-NH1. It records non-compressed 16bits/44.1khz - just like a CD.
Although this is a good sample rate, I am concerned that the sample rate
isn't high enough for my editing purposed (DAT can records at 48khz. as
opposed to just 44.1khz)
Then I began considering an analogue solution after I read a research
paper [1] about the "warmth" of analogue recordings.
The analogue recorder used in this research paper was a Nagra 4S, a
large tape reel recorder. I could look for a used one on ebay but surely
there must be some manufacturer who makes newer analogue recorders,
isn't there?
No, basically there isn't anyone making inexpensive analog recorders
I am aware that analogue recorders may not have the dynamic range of
digital technology but I am looking for a solution that considers both
"warmth" as well as dynamic range. Therefore an analogue recording would
be acceptable even though this decision may lead to a small sacrifice in
dynamic range.
The sacrifice isn't so much in dynamic range. The reason that analog sounds(how
I hate this expression) "warm" is due to the slight compression of the higher
frequencies, the slight head bump on the lower frequencies , plus the small
amounts of distortion that are added in the analog process.
Now here is where my situation is a little unique:
What I find useful about the Nagra 4S is the 60 Hz pilotone signal it
can record onto the tape which is useful for synchronizing to film (for
double system sound) because the tape medium never advances at perfectly
consistant rates. Its used for speed correction in post production. This
is a more technical detail, however for some purposes this would be a
useful feature for me.
Why? The speed accuracy of the Nagra is excellent and the pilot tone does not
really have any use other than future synchronization fro film or vidouse . it
isn't all that accurate, but works for film or video where the synchroniztion
is 24 or 30 frames per second.
Which portable analogue recorders could be recommended under $500?
Used Nagra , but not a 4s and not probably in stereo.
Here are my considered options:
A new portable cassette-tape recorder (analogue)? Are these still
produced? Which are considered the most advanced today?
A cassette is crap for your purposes. 50 dB s/n ratio at best unless you want
to deal with the artifacts of a noise reduction system.
An old used Nagra 4S (its analogue).
Excellent sound if you can get the tape and keep it aligned.
MZ-NH1 Hi-MD minidisc (its digital)
The preamps are crappy. A lot of the bad rep that digital gets is due to bad
preamps, cheap microphones and distortion from bad a/d conversion.
wait until DVD digital audio recorders arrive - but I am sure they, like
minidiscs, will also be "less warm" than an analogue solution. (I have
heard DVD digital audio recorders might have a very high sample rate -
more than 48khz maybe)
And the same crappy sound/ video synch that is offered in DVD. Boom then flash.
High sample rates on much equipment are an easy way to utilise cheaper AD/DA
conversion.
Using well designed gear , it is unlikely thatyou can hear the difference.
I must also consider the availability of recording media and parts and
so I would prefer a recorder that is more modern rather than something
that is no longer made and difficult to find recording media and parts
for. Also, maintaining an old used analogue recorder (cleaning the heads
and demagnetizing) might prove to be difficult and expensive.
Cleaning heads consists of cotton swabs and alcohol, demagnatizing heads is
really simple and used demagnatizers are available for about $20.00
Eventually (within a year), I would later digitize the analogue
recording into my computer desktop station which is at another location.
One more step to induce artifacts and distortion
For certain applications I might also have to adjust the sound track and
so I am looking for a solution that can withstand some editing
adjustments and resampling. (i.e. for NTSC video applications I will
have to lengthen the entire sound track length 0.1%). Therefore if a
digital recording solution is used it will have to be the highest
possible sampling rate (i.e. a 48khz. recording would be better than a
44.1khz .recording)
You can't hear the difference unless you have a really bad resampling system.
If that is the case, use really good AD/DA convertors and do it in analog.
(I am not much interested in DAT because for film work I read that DAT
doesn't "resolve" in sync as easily or as well as a Nagra 4S due to the
inconsistency of DAT tape speed)
There is no inconsistancy in DAT tape speed that you can hear. I have had
excellent results synching DAT to Video without any system of resolving.
I worked on a well known PBS series using DAT and film and there was no Time
Code at all.
I might end up just going with the Hi-MD minidisc solution as it is the
simplest solution but I thought I would first consider seriously an
analogue recording solution, but I need some advice which analogue
recorders could be used today.
High quality is a lot more than the recording medium.
I use a DAT recorder, but I send it a signal which is form a pair of Schoeps
microphones, a Great River preamp , a Crane Song HEDD for A/D conversion.
The sound is excellent, and I record at 44.1 so I don't need to convert again
going into my computer.
I have done a lot of analog recording in the past, but haven't turned those
machines on for any reason in the last 5 years except to transfer old tapes to
digital.
Any suggestions?
Thank you kindly.
--
Mike
Richard H. Kuschel
"I canna change the law of physics."-----Scotty
|