![]() Getting a raw sound file from the device on to your computer for editing is as easy as opening a folder and dragging the file over to your desktop. File transfer is very simple, with both recorders supporting USB connections. I haven’t tested this personally, but the Zoom claims to have a max battery life of 11 hours, while the Edirol claims 7.5 hours. If you can’t use the provided AC adapters, both recorders will operate on 2 AA batteries. Both have AC adapters included, which I would recommend for most recording jobs unless you absolutely can’t access a power outlet. To my ears, I can’t distinguish a difference in the recordings made on one versus the other (using the same settings). They both will record to flash memory cards (SD or SDHC) at a maximum of 24-bit/96kHz, with a range of settings including. First, let’s cover the similarities.īoth are very well made, and should stand up to repeated and regular use, provided that they are cared for properly. What follows is a brief comparison of these two models of portable digital recorder. So far I’ve been quite pleased with the Zoom as well. His grant provided funds to purchase a digital recorder for each applied music studio in our Department. This semester, however, I’ve been using a Zoom H4n, which was purchased through a grant that my colleague Dr. You can read this post to get a few more details on it. I bought the Edirol a few years ago for my own personal use, and have been very satisfied with both the results and user-friendliness. Although I haven’t used all of the brands and varieties mentioned in the Facebook discussion, I have had a good bit of experience with the Edirol R-09HR and the Zoom H4n. ![]() Someone recently posted a question to the Horn People group on Facebook asking about various brands of digital recorders. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |