Freesound Forums

Just a note Edirol are in the process of launching a nice new 4 channel recorder, 2 sets of stereo mics on any given source sounds like a nice idea...

http://www.edirol.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=314&Itemid=438

http://www.dv247.com/assets/news/dv247/Edirol-R-44.jpg
Edirol R-44 key features:

Lightweight 1.3kg compact body
4 Channel Recording
Solid-State field recorder
Up to uncompressed 24-bit / 192 kHz linear PCM (Stereo)
Selectable sample rates and bit depths
On-board effects
Supports SDHC large capacity media
AA batteries for 4 hours of recording

Edirol R44 Solid-State Field Recorder Overview

The R44 is designed for professional use within a very conveniently sized package. It allows capture of up to 4 channels of uncompressed audio with selectable bit depths (16-bit or 24-bit) and sampling frequencies (44.1kHz/48kHz/88.2kHz/96kHz). The Edirol (by Roland) R44 employs SD cards or large capacity SDHC cards as the recording media. No moving parts enables the most silent and reliable operation possible.

Although the R44 from Edirol (Roland) is compact, all the necessary functions are included. Built-in high quality microphones and speakers make recording and monitoring without external devices possible.

A Pre-Record function on the Edirol R44 ensures you never miss that important moment again as it buffers input signals for a certain amount of time. When the REC button is pressed, the material from the previous few seconds (selectable) is included. This also helps reduce sound bites at the beginning of a recording by not having to start the recorder too early.

The Edirol R44 combo input jacks (4) supports the connection of both XLR and 1/4 inch plugs. XLR inputs are equipped with phantom power. Eleven steps of input sensitivity enable the connection of various devices with a variety of inputs levels from microphones to musical instruments. High quality analog circuitry in the preamp ensures superior recording results.

The high contrast, high response organic LED screen, viewable from wide angles ensures fluid operation in field recording situations. The high response of level meters makes precise level adjustments possible. All the necessary switches and knobs are located on the top and front panels. Self-lit buttons on all the key controls enable clear-cut recording operations.

The Control Sync terminal enables synchronized operation of 2 units. Control the second unit from the master by simply connecting two with a stereo mini cable. The master unit can remotely control REC standby, REC start and REC stop of the slave unit. This function enables 8-channel recording in a compact space and at an affordable price.

The Edirol R-44 from Edirol (Roland)can be mounted on computers with a simple USB 2.0 connection. It is seen as an USB storage device on a computer. You can copy data back and forth with a simple drag & drop operation.

The Edirol / Roland R44 can be operated with 3 types of power supply, AC adaptor, external battery and AA batteries. Four hours of operation is possible with NiMH or alkaline batteries (at 16-bit/44.1kHz stereo. No phantom power and pre-record disabled).

digifish

My first reaction: that and a core sound tetramic! mobile ambisonics.
looks like an interesting recorder option, will it be < 1k $$ ?

afaict
My first reaction: that and a core sound tetramic! mobile ambisonics.
looks like an interesting recorder option, will it be < 1k $$ ?

Street price will be about $780 USD

And there is already a preamp waiting for it:

http://www.rme-audio.de/en_products_quadmic.php

:lol:

Yep, looks nice, but, as usual, Roland (Edirol) wants too much for it ($800 list !!??).

Why would we spend $800 list when we can buy the Fostex MR8 MKII for $300, or the original MR8 for even less?! I read the specs on the R-44, and watched a NAMM video demo done by a Roland guy, and I don't see any feature besides maybe the sync capability (to use 2 R-44's as a single 8-track), and the High Capacity SD memory card capability, that would make it worth buying. Plus, that HC SD card capability is geared towards recording whole songs, i.e. an hour or two of time.....so do we need all that for sound-capture, for $700 or $800 ?

Plus, I keep my MR8 in a foam-lined, semi-indestructable (hard-shell) briefcase, where just opening the lid allows me access to all needed recording controls and jacks (except On/Off on the back)....so I don't have to remove it from the case to record.....all controls are on the top-face of the unit......

...on the R-44, Inputs are on the side, and Level controls are on the front, so it has to be removed from any case before operation. When Field recording, being able to use the unit within it's case is my preference. They'll probably come out with some sort of soft case with flaps that open up on the front and side, but a "case" like that doesn't offer the protection mine does.

But, at least they're paying attention to our market

Stenn

Stenn
Yep, looks nice, but, as usual, Roland (Edirol) wants too much for it ($800 list !!??).

Why would we spend $800 list when we can buy the Fostex MR8 MKII for $300, or the original MR8 for even less?! I read the specs on the R-44, and watched a NAMM video demo done by a Roland guy, and I don't see any feature besides maybe the sync capability (to use 2 R-44's as a single 8-track), and the High Capacity SD memory card capability, that would make it worth buying. Plus, that HC SD card capability is geared towards recording whole songs, i.e. an hour or two of time.....so do we need all that for sound-capture, for $700 or $800 ?

You seem to have missed the fact that the R-44 has 2 extra mic inputs (4 in total), can record 4 channels simultaneously (rather than 2 for the MR8 MK2) and has better noise & dynamic range specs. This forum/site is primarily aimed at location/field recording and so the R-44 is not to be compared to a bedroom multitrack recorder.

I'd like to get one to run 2 sets of stereo mics at the same time. Omni and Cardioid, rather than having to make the decision up front.

digifish.

digifishmusic

Stenn
Yep, looks nice, but, as usual, Roland (Edirol) wants too much for it ($800 list !!??).

Why would we spend $800 list when we can buy the Fostex MR8 MKII for $300, or the original MR8 for even less?! I read the specs on the R-44, and watched a NAMM video demo done by a Roland guy, and I don't see any feature besides maybe the sync capability (to use 2 R-44's as a single 8-track), and the High Capacity SD memory card capability, that would make it worth buying. Plus, that HC SD card capability is geared towards recording whole songs, i.e. an hour or two of time.....so do we need all that for sound-capture, for $700 or $800 ?

You seem to have missed the fact that the R-44 has 2 extra mic inputs (4 in total), can record 4 channels simultaneously (rather than 2 for the MR8 MK2) and has better noise & dynamic range specs. This forum/site is primarily aimed at location/field recording and so the R-44 is not to be compared to a bedroom multitrack recorder.

I'd like to get one to run 2 sets of stereo mics at the same time. Omni and Cardioid, rather than having to make the decision up front.

digifish.

hock: Uh....NO, I didn't miss anything.....since this forum/site is "...primarily aimed at location/field recording..." then I doubt many of us are going to be doing too much recording with 4 separate mics all at the same time, unless you're talking about recording a band setup maybe. What I see a lot of discussion about here on this forum is what single stereo mic to use, who likes what best, such as the Rode NT4, so the 4-at-once scenario you dream of doesn't sound typical of the majority of us here as "field recordists." I know I'm often happy with a single omni, ....it's all according to what you're doing.....and what your biases are.

The MR8 is far from being a mere "bedroom recorder," so don't judge a book by the portastudio cassette recorder it replaces.....just because that's the product it was envisioned to replace, doesn't mean I can't use it for a completely different purpose like field recording, and get great results. It's sound quality is decent enough (even it's built-in mic), and the fact that it can be battery-powered definitely lends itself to field recording of ambient soundfields, which is what I'm into (like the guy elsewhere here on the forum talking about recording his morning bus-commute and the fascinating sounds and conversations captured there).

I'm not saying there's nothing better, such as the Edirol, I'm saying I'm not willing to pay the arm and leg those other models demand, and I'd like to hear that the Edirol is actually, audibly $600 better sounding..... and I definitely don't like the control layout of the Edirol compared to the MR8. When I see members here asking advise on and considering Zooms, I'd say the Fostex MR8 does an amazing job of cramming a LOT of features into an extremely affordable, solid-state/no-moving-parts package, comparatively dirt-cheap.

Stenn

hock: Uh....NO, I didn't miss anything.....since this forum/site is "...primarily aimed at location/field recording..." then I doubt many of us are going to be doing too much recording with 4 separate mics all at the same time, unless you're talking about recording a band setup maybe. What I see a lot of discussion about here on this forum is what single stereo mic to use, who likes what best, such as the Rode NT4, so the 4-at-once scenario you dream of doesn't sound typical of the majority of us here as "field recordists." I know I'm often happy with a single omni, ....it's all according to what you're doing.....and what your biases are.

Come on, you are changing tack now. You asked where the extra $$$ was going (after listing a bunch of 2 track competition) and I explained quite clearly. I (for one) will be doing 4 channel field recording for important material.

Those that don't need or want 4 channels will clearly see that this recorder is not for them. You are comparing the wrong recorders to the R-44.

digifish.

wow - location sound recordist dream

Robert Altman will cream on this...

I'd rather capture 4 actors voices sperately than muck around with a location mixer....

whens this puppy out? I WANT one!

800 sounds good to me!

hope the stuck the price into preamps - my one critism of the RC09 is slightly hissy pre's in real quiet conditions

Me,too, but I wonder what it will sound like! :?:

hello guys...just a silly question; does it accept line-level input/s or is it purely mic-level? i'm thinking of getting one from b&h once it arrives this april. i couldn't find any specs of it accepting line-level. 800USD isn't bad for a 4-track recorder. i sure hope that it can accept line-level though.

thanks!

mark

sagmaw
hello guys...just a silly question; does it accept line-level input/s or is it purely mic-level? i'm thinking of getting one from b&h once it arrives this april. i couldn't find any specs of it accepting line-level. 800USD isn't bad for a 4-track recorder. i sure hope that it can accept line-level though.

thanks!

mark

It does both.

digifish

I worked with EDIROL R-4Pro, and it's amazing sound quality. But... what about SD/SDHC cards in R-44... It seems not so stable format... and maby one day they will gone?
Ofcorse, I'll still have USB But...
EDIROL R-4Pro with 80GB hard disc or R-44 with SD/SDHC cards (64 MB - 8 GB)???
Recording Time using 8 GB SDHC card :
24 bit/192kHz - 115 minutes and only stereo, not aviable for 4 channels... It's sad :cry:
What r u thinking about these cards? :roll:

lostxsoul
I worked with EDIROL R-4Pro, and it's amazing sound quality. But... what about SD/SDHC cards in R-44... It seems not so stable format... and maby one day they will gone?
Ofcorse, I'll still have USB But...
EDIROL R-4Pro with 80GB hard disc or R-44 with SD/SDHC cards (64 MB - 8 GB)???
Recording Time using 8 GB SDHC card :
24 bit/192kHz - 115 minutes and only stereo, not aviable for 4 channels... It's sad :cry:
What r u thinking about these cards? :roll:

By the time you can no longer buy SD cards it will be time to get a new machine You could also ask the same question of the HDD in the R4-Pro, when it breaks will there be a replacement? I am sure there will.

Seriously, Micro SD is the latest format and can be put inside a standard SD adapter...I'd say that given the number of cameras, mobile phones and other devices that use SD and Micro SD there is no chance of it dissapearing any time soon.

BTW: 16 and 32 GB SHDC cards are available.

EDIT: I also think 24 bit 192 kHz is silly It's a marketing gimmick, 96 kHz would be more than enough for any ultrasonic recording you need to do...and even 96 kHz isn't useful unless you plan to transpose the sample down into the audible range. At 96 kHz you will also need mics that capture more than 48 kHz...I know of very few that get anywhere near that.

I have been closely following the 16 bit 44.1 kHz vs all other formats for many years. I came across a paper by David Griesinger (Lexicon DSP engineer) and this lead me to his site, very interesting (although cluttered) ...

http://world.std.com/~griesngr/

There's a lot of text...but 1/2 way down...

"And now for something completely different... Being currently over 60, and having in my youth studied information theory, I have a low tolerance for claims that "high definition" recording is anything but a marketing gimmick. I keep, like the Great Randi, trying to find a way to prove it. Well, I got the idea that maybe some of the presumably positive results on the audibility of frequencies above 18000Hz were due to intermodulation distortion, that would covert energy in the ultrasonic range into sonic frequencies. So I started measuring loudspeakers for distortion of different types - and looking at the HF content of current disks. The result is the paper below, which is a HOOT! Anytime you want a good laugh, take a read.

Slides from the AES convention in Banff on intermodulation distortion in loudspeakers and its relationship to "high definition" audio.

http://world.std.com/~griesngr/intermod.ppt

Conclusions -

1. Adding ultrasonics to a recording technique does NOT improve time resolution of typical signals – either for imaging or precision of tempo. The presumption that it does is based on a misunderstanding of both information theory and human physiology.

2. Karou and Shogo have shown that ultrasonic harmonics of a 2kHz signal are NOT audible in the absence of external (non-human) intermodulation distortion. (This BTW: means they can't be heard in the real world and that filtering them from the recording is a good thing as they can only do harm).

3. Their experiments put a limit on the possibility that a physiological non-linearity can make ultrasonic harmonics perceptible. They find that such a non-linearity does not exist at ultrasonic sound pressure levels below 80dB.

4. All commercial recordings tested by the author as of 6/1/03 contained either no ultrasonic information, or ultrasonic harmonics at levels more than 40dB below the fundamentals.

5. Our experiments suggest that the most important source of audible intermodulation for ultrasonics is the electronics, not in the transducers.
Some consumer grade equipment makes a tacit admission of the inaudibility of frequencies above 22kHz by simply not reproducing them. Yet the advertising for these products claims the benefits of “higher resolution.”

6. Even assuming ultrasonics are audible, loudspeaker directivity creates an unusually tiny sweet spot, both horizontally and vertically.

7. A/B blind listening remains the gold standard for audio comparison.

digifish

i doubt any one over the age of 16 can hear above 17k!

and that age is probably dropping in direct proportion to the use of ipods and the like

for me 48K is more than enough...

so how's the hiss on this puppy?

is it really out?

martian
i doubt any one over the age of 16 can hear above 17k!

and that age is probably dropping in direct proportion to the use of ipods and the like

for me 48K is more than enough...

so how's the hiss on this puppy?

is it really out?

It's out...

The R-44 is definitely out, from a Japanese field-recordist...

http://www.digifishmusic.com/public/images/r-44.jpg
http://www.digifishmusic.com/public/images/surround.jpg

I have one arriving Monday

digifish

i wonder is he trying to record in 5.1?

where's the subwoofer mic

I think he may have issues with phase tho - cos it' only got 4 inputs - so 2 machines - it's press record on the count of 3?

If I have to do location sound on a film again I'm going to buy it... no way am I going to rent an external mixer....

will ask you next week what you think

btw those binaurals you recommended are working real good for me!

martian
i wonder is he trying to record in 5.1?

where's the subwoofer mic

I think he may have issues with phase tho - cos it' only got 4 inputs - so 2 machines - it's press record on the count of 3?

If I have to do location sound on a film again I'm going to buy it... no way am I going to rent an external mixer....

will ask you next week what you think

btw those binaurals you recommended are working real good for me!

Sub-mic (in the top pic) is leaning on the concrete fence.

digifish

hi digifish. did your unit arrive already? hows the quality?

thanks

mark

sagmaw
hi digifish. did your unit arrive already? hows the quality?

thanks

mark

I am actually quite blown away by it. Much more solid than I expected, the mic preamps are likewise much better than I was expecting (excellent).

I will post up some comparisons between the R-44 and Sound Devices MixPre mic-pres soon

http://www.digifishmusic.com/public/images/r44.jpg
http://www.digifishmusic.com/public/images/r44-night.jpg

digifish