* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
LINGUIST List logo Eastern Michigan University Wayne State University *
* People & Organizations * Jobs * Calls & Conferences * Publications * Language Resources * Text & Computer Tools * Teaching & Learning * Mailing Lists * Search *
* *
LINGUIST List 16.2710

Tue Sep 20 2005

Sum: Solid-state Recorders

Editor for this issue: Jessica Boynton <jessicalinguistlist.org>


To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
Directory
        1.    Marc Brunelle, Solid-state Recorders


Message 1: Solid-state Recorders
Date: 17-Sep-2005
From: Marc Brunelle <mbrunellumich.edu>
Subject: Solid-state Recorders


Regarding query: http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2639.html

I would like to thank the following people for their sharing their
experience/expertise with solid-state recorders:

Mark Jones
Claire Bowern
Paul Fallon
Bartlomiej Plichta
Matt Goldrick
Ron Artstein
Harry Feldman
Stephan Schmid
Sarah Cutfield
Wayne Cowart
Robert Felty
Miquel Simonet
And one anonymous contributor

First, almost all contributors have pointed out that the Marantz PMD-660 is
more portable and cheaper than the PMD-670.

It seems that the complicated menus of the earlier generation of Marantz
(680/690) haven't been improved. The Edirol has user-friendly settings,
but doesn't have a level meter, which can be a serious problem. One person
also reports that the Edirol input levels are very low, even with an
external microphone. Besides, while the Marantz has both XLR and 1/8"
microphone jacks, the Edirol only has 1/8", which restricts the range (and
quality) of external microphones that can be used with it.

Both machines record on Compact Flash cards (up to 2G). The cards can
easily be changed. The Edirol offers only one sampling rate (44.1H),
whereas Marantz has two possible settings (44.1/48Hz). A great feature of
the Marantz is that it comes with a universal adapter (110/220 volts),
which is very convenient for fieldwork outside North America. However, it
seems to be heavier than the the Edirol (1.1 pounds without batteries vs.
10 ounces with batteries).

Other models have also been mentioned:

-Denon
-M-audio microtrack
-Sound Devices 722

Some of them are reviewed at the following URLs:
http://www.vermontfolklifecenter.org/res_audioequip.htm
http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/resource/audio/recording.html

Although most contributors are satisfied with the recording quality of both
Edirol and Marantz recorders, Bartlomiej Plichta is concerned that neither
is adequate for detailed phonetic work because of their high noise levels
(see http://bartus.org for a review, sample files and possible solutions).

Marc Brunelle
Dept. of Linguistics
University of Michigan

Linguistic Field(s): Phonetics


Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue




Please report any bad links or misclassified data

LINGUIST Homepage | Read LINGUIST | Contact us

NSF Logo

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.