Digital Dictation Recorder for flute practice

[headwizer]

I am using my Panasonic microcassette dictation recorder for taping my playback. The sound quality is horrible and I have a feeling that I will soon wear out the tape and possibly the Rewind/Play controls.

There are some digital dictation machines on the market for less than $100 (often as little as $50 retail) with recording times of several hours. I am sure that the fidelity will not be as good a minidisc or other music recording system, but the players are cheaper and very compact. Sony has premium model with a 16kHz sampling rate (which should give a frequency response to 8kHz), so I assume that lesser machines have an inferior frequency response. Has anyone tried a digital dictation machine for flute practice? Any recommendation for a particular model with very good sound quality?

[fantomas]

the media makes a difference, the microphone even more.
Save some money and get a good quality flute microphone by Shure, cardioid condenser that picks up mid range very well, and use it with your computer, you can record at good quality. If the microphone is good it will come with a gold plated plug. If you are going to go for quality MiniDisc might be a good choice, however a MP3 player like the newer Iriver HP-320 340 should give you plenty of recording time at very good quality. Plus, you don't have to buy media. If you are just recording to remember tunes you are improvising or practicing go for this:
http://reviews.cnet.com/iRiver_H10_5GB_ ... ml?tag=top

[Wombat]

For the price you are quoting, or just a bit more, you could probably get a little four track digital recorder on eBay—16 bit which is as good as CD quality. You could also pick up a decent condensor mic fairly cheaply—Rode NT3 are not expensive and they are all you will ever need. The advantage of a four track is that you can lay down backing tracks if you want to hear how you would sound in a band or duo setting.

It sounds to me as though you are not making very good use of your available funds.

[Lambchop]

I am sure that the fidelity will not be as good a minidisc or other music recording system, but the players are cheaper and very compact. Sony has premium model with a 16kHz sampling rate (which should give a frequency response to 8kHz), so I assume that lesser machines have an inferior frequency response. Has anyone tried a digital dictation machine for flute practice? Any recommendation for a particular model with very good sound quality?

Interesting that you mentioned this today. There was a post on another board about nearly the same thing. I've plagiarized some of it here for you. (An overwhelming percentage of the people who populate that board are musicians and I've never, ever heard of any of them even giving a single thought to recording an instrument in a digital system.)

Digital systems don't actually record the whole range of sounds, with some systems being worse than others. (The cheap ones, for instance.) Your average physician--the person for whom they are designed--dictating into one of them will come out sounding like a cartoon character (Sylvester the Cat) at best or sound effects from "The Exorcist" at worst.

Here's why. This is the sampling frequency/quality of various audio types:

8,000 Hz (8 KHz) Telephone Quality

11,025 Hz (11 KHz) Poor AM Radio Quality

22,050 Hz (22 KHz) Near FM Radio Quality

44,100 Hz (44 KHz) CD Quality

Digital systems aren't going to record the full spectrum of sound, either. They're going to whack off the high frequencies, in part because the higher breathy and sibilant sounds interfere with a transcriptionist's (the person on the other end from the physician) ability to hear. Cheaper systems are going to whack more frequencies off the top than the pricier ones, but the pricier ones are going to deliberately filter them out.

You're a lot better off going with a good computer recording system, and I think you'll save on both money and aggravation.

[fantomas]

if you want to go tru pro, get a small DAT recorder and a nice mic. But there you are looking at 500 or more. In lower ranges the computer is usually the best solution. I use it for the guitar with acceptable results.

[Wombat]

if you want to go tru pro, get a small DAT recorder and a nice mic. But there you are looking at 500 or more. In lower ranges the computer is usually the best solution. I use it for the guitar with acceptable results.

For $500 you could get a 16 track Fostex on eBay. I think you can do much better than this.

[burrenbabe]

I have an Olympus DS100 player and its excellent!! It costs around the price you mentioned $100 or so, record yourself or at sessions etc download the recording into your PC for critique or in my case to delete and start again!! :roll: It also makes for ease of emailing tunes, which I do alot!

[MarcusR]

Edirol R-1, Portable 24-Bit WAVE Recorder & Player



or if you need four channels, get the R4



and hey, money is just some printed paper.
Go for it!

/MarcusR

[MarcusR]

[quote="Peggy
Here's why. This is the sampling frequency/quality of various audio types:

[quote]

Considering audio quality, the Audio Data Rate = Bit Depth x Sampling Frequency is a better measure.
The Bit Depth defines the digital "length" used to represent a given sample. 1 Bit (2^1) will give only
two choices of representation (like blow or not blow) and the more bits that are available, the more accurate representation.

Sampling frequency is less important than Bit depth i many cases. To be able to correctly sample a waveform the sampling frequency need to be twice the highest frequency component. And as the human ear in the best case can hear frequencyes up to 20 kHz a sampling frequency 44kHz is in most cases more than enough. For acoustical music less of the higher frequencis are used but the samples can be quite complex. Reduced sample rate will therefore have less effect than increased bit depth as a wider variety of representations can be used.

-->
Normal CD audio is 16 bit and 44.1 kHz
DAT 18-20 Bit and 48.3 kHz
DVD audio 24 bit and 96 kHz

/MarcusR

[BillChin]

I own a Sony Voice recorder, the latest model is the ICD-ST25 for about $150 retail. I have the older model and a Sony ECM mic and that cost me about $110. It is a great setup. The negatives are that the sampling rate is low and memory limited. The positives are tiny size, always on, and USB transfer, and for me those features fit my needs very well. I bring it virtually everywhere.

For recording practice, a used MiniDisc recorder would give the most bang for the buck and some portability. You can probably get one, plus a mic for well under $100 on ebay. If portability is not an issue you might try using your computer to record, if you have a mic and a soundcard (not integrated sound).

There are many MP3 player/recorders under $100 that may be suitable. A MiniDisc is going to have better sound quality. There is the new HiFiMD that allows USB transfer to the computer, but that is more like $200 to start.
+ Bill