Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

440 Forums _ Comments _ PMD620 hand-held compact field digital recorder

Posted by: News Sat 8 Dec 2007, 12:39

Comments about:

http://www.macmusic.org/news/view.php/lang/en/id/5928/

Posted by: renderingtodeath Sat 8 Dec 2007, 12:39

Man, what an oldtimer...still only 41/48 khz...pffft

Posted by: Mac Daddy Sun 9 Dec 2007, 13:30

renderingtodeath, {Man, what an oldtimer...still only 41/48 khz...pffft}

renderingtodeath... It ain't the size, it's how you use it.

You can have the biggest, baddest, latest and greatest... Don't mean a thing if it don't swing....

USB, FIREWIRE. 41, 48, Dual Drives, Software, etc., etc., etc.

Does anyone actually "Create" music anymore.

There are seven notes in music... Not counting Sharps's and Flat's. Does it really matter if someone is working on OS9, OSX? Does it matter if you have the latest Software or Hardware, it can possibly help, but it does not matter if your playing sucks and your compositions are weak.

Don't change a working system just for a new "Gadget" that will screw up your workflow?

41-48?! Can anyone at our level tell the difference? Without sophisticated "Testing Devices" and a Lab Of Sound Engineers Technicians, who are NOT Musicians. Spare the Loop Poop.

I guess I'm one of those "Oldtimers", but, I know how to play "For Real". Drag & Drop does not get my respect. Clicking and Double Clicking "Ain't Music". Pffft.

Could you please provide a 'Link' where I can hear what you are speaking about? Until that happens... Pleeeeeeeeeeeze.

Posted by: lepetitmartien Mon 10 Dec 2007, 07:05

renderingtodeath, save if you have a very good system/studio, you won't really hear 96 kHz samplerate or more, BUT you will sure eat up memory real estate, not to mention CPU and other issues. Samplerate only betters the available frequency range, it can have some interests but not for all, and certainly not for for everything. Moreover I don't know if it's the case, but take the clock of the converter is ultra-precise at 44 and 48 kHz but not at 96, what do you think it'll give?

The bit thing is, provided you work in 44 or 48 (this one for video in mind), much more important has it conditions dynamics and the noise floor. You'll benefit from a 24/44 recording way way way more than from a 16/44, 16/48, 16/96 etc.

In all, Marantz choice is right.

One interesting point is the memory size possible of the beast, up to 2 TB!

Posted by: Mac Daddy Tue 11 Dec 2007, 11:50

{lepetitmartien, Monday December 10, 2007. 07:05
renderingtodeath, save if you have a very good system/studio, you won't really hear 96 kHz samplerate or more, BUT you will sure eat up memory real estate, not to mention CPU and other issues. Samplerate only betters the available frequency range, it can have some interests but not for all, and certainly not for for everything. Moreover I don't know if it's the case, but take the clock of the converter is ultra-precise at 44 and 48 kHz but not at 96, what do you think it'll give?

The bit thing is, provided you work in 44 or 48 (this one for video in mind), much more important has it conditions dynamics and the noise floor. You'll benefit from a 24/44 recording way way way more than from a 16/44, 16/48, 16/96 etc.

In all, Marantz choice is right.

One interesting point is the memory! size possible of the beast, up to 2 TB!}

lepetitmartien, thank you. I wish I could have expressed myself like you did, with 'Facts and Figures'... I agree with you 100%.

Just because you have a fast car does not mean you can race in 'Formula 1', takes a 'Team'. Just because you have the "Newest Gear" does not AUTOMATICALLY improve your actual Recording or playing... It might sound a little better, but it won't automatically get you a Grammy or MTV Award...

Only great playing, great compositions, great connections or great luck does that. No one cares what computer, hardware or software you used...