Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
[email protected] outsor@city-net.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 122
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

Describes a project, how to use a computer for an audio server.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/te...l?ref=business

  #2   Report Post  
lememynap lememynap is offline
Banned
 
Location: Mauritius
Posts: 3
Send a message via ICQ to lememynap
Default

Hi nice topic you have going there!
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Rob Tweed Rob Tweed is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

Made a number of superb recordings using my iBook laptop/Audacity.
Only stopped using it because I graduated to first the Korg MR-1 and then the
MR-1000. and I now record in 2.8 MHz DSD (not so many things to remember when
getting set up to record).


Interesting - I see the MR-1000 is now discontinued though. Any
recommendations as to what you'd consider if purchasing a field
recorder now? The Zoom H4N seems to be getting good reviews for
example.

Rob

---

Rob Tweed
Company: M/Gateway Developments Ltd
Registered in England: No 3220901
Registered Office: 58 Francis Road,Ashford, Kent TN23 7UR

Web-site: http://www.mgateway.com
Twitter: @rtweed

  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:15:12 -0700, Rob Tweed wrote
(in article ):

Made a number of superb recordings using my iBook laptop/Audacity.
Only stopped using it because I graduated to first the Korg MR-1 and then
the
MR-1000. and I now record in 2.8 MHz DSD (not so many things to remember
when
getting set up to record).


Interesting - I see the MR-1000 is now discontinued though. Any
recommendations as to what you'd consider if purchasing a field
recorder now? The Zoom H4N seems to be getting good reviews for
example.



As I understand it the MR-1000 is still available. It's the MR-1 that has
been discontinued - in fact, it's been replaced by the MR-2 which is smaller,
lighter, less fragile and about $200 (list) cheaper than the MR-1. But,
according to Korg's website there are still MR-1s available. I have been
told, (even though I have no direct experience with it) that the MR-2 sounds
better than the MR-1. If that's true, great, but the main advantage would be
(to me) that the hard-drive has been replaced by SDHD cards. A much better
idea for a number of reasons.

I have a H4N. I use it as a back-up recorder. I thinks the recordings sound
fine, but the build quality of the Zoom products seems chintzy to me and they
only do 24/96 while the Korgs do DSD as well as 24/96 and 24/192 and with the
included Korg "Audiogate" software, one can convert the DSD recording to any
PCM format you want from 24/192 all the way down to MP3.

I'd definitely look at the Korg MR-2 over the Zoom H4N were I you.

http://www.korg.com/mr2
  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
rtweed rtweed is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

On Jul 14, 1:05=A0am, Audio Empire wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:15:12 -0700, Rob Tweed wrote
(in article ):

Made a number of superb recordings using my iBook laptop/Audacity.
Only stopped using it because I graduated to first the Korg MR-1 and t=

hen
the
MR-1000. and I now record in 2.8 MHz DSD (not so many things to rememb=

er
when
getting set up to record).


Interesting - I see the MR-1000 is now discontinued though. =A0Any
recommendations as to what you'd consider if purchasing a field
recorder now? =A0The Zoom H4N seems to be getting good reviews for
example.


As I understand it the MR-1000 is still available. It's the MR-1 that has
been discontinued - in fact, it's been replaced by the MR-2 which is smal=

ler,
lighter, less fragile and about $200 (list) cheaper than the MR-1. But,
according to Korg's website there are still MR-1s available. =A0I have be=

en
told, (even though I have no direct experience with it) that the MR-2 sou=

nds
better than the MR-1. If that's true, great, but the main advantage would=

be
(to me) that the hard-drive has been replaced by SDHD cards. A much bette=

r
idea for a number of reasons.

I have a H4N. I use it as a back-up recorder. I thinks the recordings sou=

nd
fine, but the build quality of the Zoom products seems chintzy to me and =

they
only do 24/96 while the Korgs do DSD as well as 24/96 and 24/192 and with=

the
included Korg "Audiogate" software, one can convert the DSD recording to =

any
PCM format you want from 24/192 all the way down to MP3.

I'd definitely look at the Korg MR-2 over the Zoom H4N were I you.

http://www.korg.com/mr2


Many thanks for the advice and info!

Unfortunately, from searching around, it really does seem that you
can't get the MR-1000 any more in the UK, at least not new.

The MR2 is about twice the cost of the H4N, and lacks the extra pair
of XLR inputs + phantom power for alternative/ additional mics. I
guess I'd need to decide if the benefit of DSD was really worth it -
at this point I'm not convinced it would be, at least for me - the H4N
looks like a very nice and flexible package for the money, albeit as
you say, somewhat chintzy.

I wonder if I could ask some further advice/recommendations? For
general purpose high quality stereo pair recording, what mics would
you recommend these days? I've been considering a matched pair of
Rode NT5 or NT55 mics.

And would the mic pre-amps built into the H4N be reasonable to use, or
alternatively I have a small Behringer Xenyx mixer - would its mic pre-
amps be better?

Rob





  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Arny Krueger[_4_] Arny Krueger[_4_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 854
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

"rtweed" wrote in message
...


The MR2 is about twice the cost of the H4N, and lacks the extra pair

of XLR inputs + phantom power for alternative/ additional mics. I
guess I'd need to decide if the benefit of DSD was really worth it -
at this point I'm not convinced it would be, at least for me - the H4N
looks like a very nice and flexible package for the money, albeit as
you say, somewhat chintzy.

I have a friend who teaches an audio production class that makes heavy use
of H4Ns for student lab projects. He's had good results and good reliability
of the H4N.

I wonder if I could ask some further advice/recommendations? For

general purpose high quality stereo pair recording, what mics would
you recommend these days? I've been considering a matched pair of
Rode NT5 or NT55 mics.


I do a lot of coincident pair recordings with a Rode NT4 which is just a
repackaged pair of NT5s. It is IMO just fine.

And would the mic pre-amps built into the H4N be reasonable to use, or

alternatively I have a small Behringer Xenyx mixer - would its mic pre-
amps be better?

The H4N and the Xenyx mic inputs are probably pretty comparable - they might
even use the same chips. The H4N lacks the mixer circuitry, so it has the
advantage of a simpler signal path.

  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 19:54:02 -0700, rtweed wrote
(in article ):

On Jul 14, 1:05=A0am, Audio Empire wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 14:15:12 -0700, Rob Tweed wrote
(in article ):

Made a number of superb recordings using my iBook laptop/Audacity.
Only stopped using it because I graduated to first the Korg MR-1 and then the
MR-1000. and I now record in 2.8 MHz DSD (not so many things to remember when
getting set up to record).


Interesting - I see the MR-1000 is now discontinued though. Any
recommendations as to what you'd consider if purchasing a field
recorder now? =A0The Zoom H4N seems to be getting good reviews for
example.


As I understand it the MR-1000 is still available. It's the MR-1 that has
been discontinued - in fact, it's been replaced by the MR-2 which is smaller,
lighter, less fragile and about $200 (list) cheaper than the MR-1. But,
according to Korg's website there are still MR-1s available. I have been
told, (even though I have no direct experience with it) that the MR-2 sounds
better than the MR-1. If that's true, great, but the main advantage would be
(to me) that the hard-drive has been replaced by SDHD cards. A much better
idea for a number of reasons.

I have a H4N. I use it as a back-up recorder. I thinks the recordings sound
fine, but the build quality of the Zoom products seems chintzy to me and they
only do 24/96 while the Korgs do DSD as well as 24/96 and 24/192 and with the
included Korg "Audiogate" software, one can convert the DSD recording to any
PCM format you want from 24/192 all the way down to MP3.

I'd definitely look at the Korg MR-2 over the Zoom H4N were I you.

http://www.korg.com/mr2


Many thanks for the advice and info!

Unfortunately, from searching around, it really does seem that you
can't get the MR-1000 any more in the UK, at least not new.


What about the MR-2000, the rack version of the MR-1000, is it still
available in the UK?

The MR2 is about twice the cost of the H4N, and lacks the extra pair
of XLR inputs + phantom power for alternative/ additional mics. I
guess I'd need to decide if the benefit of DSD was really worth it -
at this point I'm not convinced it would be, at least for me - the H4N
looks like a very nice and flexible package for the money, albeit as
you say, somewhat chintzy.

I wonder if I could ask some further advice/recommendations? For
general purpose high quality stereo pair recording, what mics would
you recommend these days? I've been considering a matched pair of
Rode NT5 or NT55 mics.


Either the NT-5M or the NT-55M would be an excellent choice, though
pricy. Here in the US a matched pair (M) of these mikes is over $400.
Have you looked at the Behringer C-4s? A a matched pair of those costs
less than $100 here in the States and I think that for the money, they
can't be beat. They are comparable in specs to the Rode mikes you
mention. But, if you have your heart set on the Rodes, go for it, they
are an excellent choice. (BTW, for general purpose mikes, the NT-55M
would be the better of the two, as the NT-5N seems to be made rather
specifically for a drum-kit. Don't know what the differences are but
the fact that Rode recommends the NT-55 for GP recording, and both
models are similar in price, you'll probably be better off with the
matched pair of 55s.

And would the mic pre-amps built into the H4N be reasonable to use, or
alternatively I have a small Behringer Xenyx mixer - would its mic pre-
amps be better?


Absolutely, The Behringer Xenyx mike amps are FAR better than the HN4.
The HN4 is OK using it's line inputs , but I find the mike amps to be
a bit noisy and more than a little colored.

By the way, I have a lot of Behringer gear including two mixers. Their
stuff seem well made (for the money) and is excellent sounding. The
Xenyx mike preamps are quiet, have lots of adjustable gain, and sound
superb. You could make a pro-quality recording with any of them,
release it to the world, and nobody would be able to tell that you
used an inexpensive mixer.

I've played with a lot of the Chinese condenser mikes available these
days and most are excellent for their price. My favorite, at the
moment, is the Aventone CK-40 -

http://avantoneaudio.com//ck40.htm

It is a "copy" of the famous (and heart achingly expensive) Telefunken
ELA M 270 stereo mike where the two capsules are situated one atop the
other and the top one will rotate with respect to the body of the
microphone (and the lower capsule) through ~180 degrees. Both capsules
are very big (35 mm in diameter) and and are switchable in pattern
from cardioid to omni or figure-of-eight. I use mine in both X-Y and
M-S pattern and get great results. The main advantage that the CK-40
has over its Telefunken "cousin" (other than price) is that the latter
is tube, and the CK-40 is FET (which I prefer). The bass I get from
the Aventone CK-40 has to be heard to be believed!

I also have a pair of Behringer B-2pros, a pair of Behringer C-4s, a
pair of SM Pro Audio C01s a Pair of Sony C37Ps, and a pair of Sony C22
electrets.

I I use them all and all the time. I've had the Sonys for more than 30
years, and while I don't use them as much as I do the others, I still
do use them. (the C37's sound a little "coloured" to my ears compared
to the more modern Chinese mikes and are definitely noisier).

  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 11:04:44 -0700, Arny Krueger wrote
(in article ):

"rtweed" wrote in message
...


The MR2 is about twice the cost of the H4N, and lacks the extra pair

of XLR inputs + phantom power for alternative/ additional mics. I
guess I'd need to decide if the benefit of DSD was really worth it -
at this point I'm not convinced it would be, at least for me - the H4N
looks like a very nice and flexible package for the money, albeit as
you say, somewhat chintzy.

I have a friend who teaches an audio production class that makes heavy use
of H4Ns for student lab projects. He's had good results and good reliability
of the H4N.

I wonder if I could ask some further advice/recommendations? For

general purpose high quality stereo pair recording, what mics would
you recommend these days? I've been considering a matched pair of
Rode NT5 or NT55 mics.


I do a lot of coincident pair recordings with a Rode NT4 which is just a
repackaged pair of NT5s. It is IMO just fine.

And would the mic pre-amps built into the H4N be reasonable to use, or

alternatively I have a small Behringer Xenyx mixer - would its mic pre-
amps be better?

The H4N and the Xenyx mic inputs are probably pretty comparable


Actually they aren't comparable. The Xenyx preamps are much quieter and
sound better. I wouldn't use the H4N with a ribbon mike, but the the
Behringer Xenyx preamps work fine with the old stereo ribbon B&O "Beomike" I
have.


- they might
even use the same chips. The H4N lacks the mixer circuitry, so it has the
advantage of a simpler signal path.


I've used the H4N alone with just a pair of condensers plugged into it and
it's OK; a little noisy, perhaps, and not as "clean" sounding as a recording
made on the H4N through it's high-level inputs.

  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
rtweed rtweed is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

Well I'm going to take your advice so I've ordered a pair of the
Behringer C4s - at that price they're certainly worth a try, and I can
always go for the Rodes at a later date. I too have several Behringer
items - the Xenyx mixer I mentioned before and an A500 power amp which
I've been very pleased with. I've also ordered an H4N.

So it will be interesting to compare this new combo with recordings
I've previously made using a standard laptop + Audacity + Emu 0404USB
and a pair of trusty vintage Calrec CM652 mics (
http://www.saturn-sound.com/Curio's/calrec,_some_old_favorites.htm )

BTW that Aventone CK40 looks very interesting but almost impossible to
find in the UK. Other Aventone mics are more readily available,
interestingly enough from a dealer who is just down the road from me:
http://www.micsdirect.com/avantone.htm Have you tried any of them out
and/or any comments about them?

Rob

  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.high-end
Audio Empire Audio Empire is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,193
Default Low Cost and Hi-Fi: Building a Player

On Sat, 16 Jul 2011 10:00:34 -0700, rtweed wrote
(in article ):

Well I'm going to take your advice so I've ordered a pair of the
Behringer C4s - at that price they're certainly worth a try, and I can
always go for the Rodes at a later date. I too have several Behringer
items - the Xenyx mixer I mentioned before and an A500 power amp which
I've been very pleased with. I've also ordered an H4N.

So it will be interesting to compare this new combo with recordings
I've previously made using a standard laptop + Audacity + Emu 0404USB
and a pair of trusty vintage Calrec CM652 mics (
http://www.saturn-sound.com/Curio's/calrec,_some_old_favorites.htm )

BTW that Aventone CK40 looks very interesting but almost impossible to
find in the UK. Other Aventone mics are more readily available,
interestingly enough from a dealer who is just down the road from me:
http://www.micsdirect.com/avantone.htm Have you tried any of them out
and/or any comments about them?

Rob


Unfortunately, the CK-40 is the only Aventone mike model that I have seen,
let alone used.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another cost of war Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! Audio Opinions 0 February 1st 08 02:28 AM
FS: DENON CD Player DCD-3520 - Cost $1500 New robotron -x- Marketplace 1 October 2nd 06 05:33 PM
CD Player - features vs. cost Pete AF High End Audio 1 November 9th 05 04:25 AM
what's the lowest-cost "good" tube preamp and lowest-cost "good tube compressor? xy Pro Audio 21 May 14th 04 04:29 PM
Cost of building a studio? Beauchampent Pro Audio 7 November 27th 03 02:35 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"