Handheld digital recorders ?

[bitewerksMTB]

Looking at digital recorders for field recordings. What's everyone using? I'm specifically looking at the Tascam DR-07mkII or the DR-05 which is $50 cheaper. There's another that is 4 tracks & $50 more than then the DR07. Not sure I need 4 tracks. 2 is probably enough but 4 might be a nice option if/when my 4-track tape recorder dies.
Anyone use the Tascam(s)? Or recommend another brand that is around $100-150 (some gear mailorder joints offer deals with 3 easy payments).

[Andrew McIntosh]

I'm expecting one of these in the mail soon (I hope) -

They have a four-track option but I decided on this because it was cheaper - can always edit at home.

[Zeno Marx]

I've heard some surprisingly great recordings made with the Zoom products.  The majority of them have been with the H4n.  From the conversations I've read, when Tascam goes head-to-head with Zoom, they don't fare well.

interesting stuff about microphone placement:
http://www.dpamicrophones.com/en/Mic-University/StereoTechniques.aspx

[bitewerksMTB]

The reviews I've read on the more afforable Zooms (except for H4n), is the cases are not very sturdy & the mic picks up little movements. I haven't come across that issue with the Tascam. I'm going to keep looking around, track down some reviews but the Tascam DR-05 is what I'm looking at. The price is right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tY28gQnBW0

[murderous_vision]

I have an old Sony MD and a GE cassette handheld. Both fucking rule. I paid $4 for the tape and $50 for the MD used. Deals are out there, you may not have to pay that much. Will send you those machine samples this weekend. I am actually going to make you a recording fresh tomorrow and mail you the cassette...

[tiny_tove]

I have been using for many years the zoom h2. despite the limited display it is excellent for any kind of recording.
I use it for studio recording, audio card and microphone for both vocals and  field recordings.
and it was quite cheap.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I have used H2 zoom. It's not utterly perfect for ALL things, but for price range, very good.
I have friend who has bigger more hi-fi brand, with all sorts of XLR input (for 2 microphones) etc. It is without doubt better for ultra hi-fi recordings, yet if you want to carry recorder in your pocket, and make recordings easily by simply pushing couple of buttons, then Zoom is most definitely better.
For loud sounds and big spaces, it may produce quite flat sound - which may or may not be possible to made sound better by mastering. But close range, tolerable level sounds - it can be very good. Field recordings, rehearsal recordings, saving sounds for later use (like synth, metal junk, etc).

Alchemy of the 21st Century CD all field recordings were made with H2, with no effects or mastering of any kind.

[ghoulson]

I used the Zoom recorders for a while but they were unreliable and didn't really provide what I was after.
Managed to purchase a Roland R-05 a few years ago for €50 - now using it for most field recordings (even if I still do many with taperecorder).
http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.php?ProductId=1077

[WCrap]

it really depends on what and where you want to record, if you need it for recordings outside in the field / the streets / smaller acoustic noises and instruments, or if you want to record high volumes / loud noise in the studio or live.

if it's the first, i have this one and could not be more happy.
http://www.thomann.de/gb/marantz_pmd_620.htm
i record everything from close-up recordings of crickets, water, cello playing or gongs to street riots and fireworks.

if it's the latter you need to look into some recorder which allows you to hook up proper external microphones, as most build-in mic's won't be strong enough or too sensitive, especially not in the price range you were suggesting in your first post.

general rule: more expensive = better product. the internal mic's of the $100-150 price range will get you a good dictaphone, but nothing more.

[Andrew McIntosh]

Got mine today. Took it to work for a try-out, seems reasonable. Very easy to use, at least, and small enough to put in the pocket. It doesn't feel sturdy, it's true, but we'll see how long it'll last.

[crumer]

I love the Zoom. Just take out a lot of 1k for loud stuff and it sounds much more present. See most of side B of Burning In Hell. Quiet birds and trains sounded good as well as giant pieces of sheet metal. Maybe using it in mp3 mode the compression made it sound 'tighter' to my ears. Always impressed with digital field recording in general, growing up four track means to die excited about no tape hiss, maybe too easily impressed. I didn't have any problem making the Zoom sound harsh or loud / clear using only simple EQ fixes, in Audacity even.

[nidding]

I have a Zoom H4n and a Tascam DR07. While it's more expensive, I'd choose the H4n any day - it's a totally different league.
The Tascam has a lot of handling noise, but can make good albeit kinda flat sounding recordings when fairly stationary - so it's a good choice if you want the more affordable option and have the time for making your recordings ... if you're more the "record-and-run" type, then it's not the best choice.

[bitewerksMTB]

This is as annoying. Almost all of the brands are the same +/- one or 2 features. The Roland looks good for the sturdy body. As far as recording quality, I'll just be playing back through my mixer to record to 4-track. I'm sure most of these would be just fine for my simple needs. I'm not recording band rehearsels or jet engines.

Thinking of getting one of those dual tape recording decks so I can spit out weekly Mania tapes limited to 20 copies each. I think I saw one place you can pay out over 4 or 6 months with no interest.

[Jordan]

I'm pretty happy with my H4N.

[ConcreteMascara]

My friend's got a Roland R-09HR and it works quite well. Used it to record a lot of source material for Concrete Mascara. Really crisp sound.

http://www.rolandus.com/products/productdetails.php?ProductId=757



Oh shit apparently it's discontinued. NEVERMIND