Freesound Forums
M Audio 24/96 Better to Wait
Started September 26th, 2005 · 10 replies · Latest reply by dobroide 19 years ago
Ok, here is some information on the M Audio 24/96.
A bit disappointing isnt it? I guess people should wait til things are sorted out with the device.
Rob
*sigh* what a useless review.
first of all, the softwatre bugs, those aren't that important. that's what firmware upgrades are for!
secondly, the most important part (the recording quality) isn't reviewed. c'moooooooooooon...
the 16-bit-only recording from SPDIF, that's rather scary though.
- bram
Bram
*sigh* what a useless review.first of all, the softwatre bugs, those aren't that important. that's what firmware upgrades are for!
secondly, the most important part (the recording quality) isn't reviewed. c'moooooooooooon...
the 16-bit-only recording from SPDIF, that's rather scary though.
- bram
1. Sure, you can presume that they will provide fixes for this in the future, but there are no guarantees, remember the how deal with EMU and their drivers that never got to the promised 2.0... (the aps, the project that started the infamous APSlive drivers).
2. I cant find it at the moment but the review thread i posted a couple days ago had a link to a review which showed some very bad freq plots of the left channel.
Cheers
Anton2. I cant find it at the moment but the review thread i posted a couple days ago had a link to a review which showed some very bad freq plots of the left channel.
Cheers
Do you mean this?: http://home.rustradio.org/~rdvdijk/microtrack/
The guy who made the noise floor analysis says 'weird', and indeed it is! Can a manufacturer release a completely new product with such a strange behavior? Amazing...
Hey, all I am saying is that it is best to wait a while until they sort things out. It is quite possible that they can fix up the SPDIF 16 bit problem through a software upgrade. I really want that function to work as it would incredibly useful.
The fact it does not really provide 48 volt phantom power is disconcerting but I can live with that as I probably would not use the preamps.
Unless they sort things out they will have to change the name to Micro Track "Sort of Weird L Channel Almost 24/96 Only 30 Volt Phantom Power" Recorder.
Rob
I think they fixed most of the bugs they were speaking about before.
The noise might still be an issue, of course!
Has anyone seen a GOOD review of it yet?
- bram
I have decided to leave it on the shelf. Anyone interested in this machine (as I was) should know this before deciding:
1) the phantom power it provides is non-standard 30V. While for some mics this should not represent a problem, in other cases there can be troubles. For example, a guy on audiofanzine.fr reports random level changes when using MT phantom + Rode NT4. Being personally interested in this same mic/recorder combination, I investigated a bit: manufacturer states power requirements for NT4 are either P48(38V52V), P24 (20V-26V), P12 (10.8V-13.2V), or 9V with internal battery. It looks like the Microtrack's 30 V result in random shifts between P48 and P24, hence level oscillations (Maybe a reader more technologically skilled than I could confirm this explanation?)
2) according to a nature sound recordist which has tested the machine, unless you have a low-noise, expensive high sensitivity mic (20mV and above), the Microtrack is not well suited to record low leves sources (http://www.dandugan.com/downloads/MicroTrack_Input_Noise.pdf)
cheers
yet another review of the MT2496, in this case a favourable one. It includes noise and gain analyses, images, a bunch of data on usability and more. Impressive review!
http://www.sonicstudios.com/mt2496rv.htm
*sigh* I was hoping to see it in this one, but:
what all these guys forget is to record 10 minutes of "silence"/"noise" and then do an AVERAGE of the spectrum to see the noise level. I mean, doing the noise-detection in one FFT frame is silly!!
- bram