Portable Recorders Sampled Online

[SeamusORiley]

I know that readers are familiar with this site:

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portab...d-samples.html

My question is regarding discerning sound differences. They all sound so similar to me.

Are you able to discern the difference? Does it take a trained ear? I listened to them carefully with headphones.

What of blind testing? I saw that with mics, it is difficult to discern a very expensive one to a moderately priced one. Is it similar with portable recorders?

thank you. I am learning!

[moon]

I listened quickly to the cello clip on the Sony PCM-D50 and the Zoom H2. The Zoom is darker, the Sony has more treble detail. A slightly dark sound can often work better on strings, but I suspect the Sony is the more accurate sound. I'd have to have heard the original source to be sure though. Unnaturally boosted treble can be deceptive. It may sound like it has more detail when in fact it just has more treble.

Anyway, I think they're both very good but there is a small but noticeable difference between these two samples, at least, if you listen closely.

I was monitoring with Sony MDR-V6 headphones and an RME Multiface. Nothing fancy, but decent items in their price range. What's your own monitoring chain?

[SeamusORiley]

Bose OE 2 headphones.

I wondered about that too.

I know this drifts a bit, but recording has opened my world to sound. Here is something about sound discernment I noticed by accident:

I was loading songs into my Zoom H4n to playback at slower speeds to learn. I always wanted to learn an acoustic lead of the Beach Boys "Fun Fun Fun" accurately. Midway, my wife asked me to swap headphones. It was an eye opener.

"Fun Fun Fun" shortly after the 30 second mark, had a "pugh" sound (sorry!) It was an air like sound of slight distortion that surprised me. I took off the Bose OE 2 and put on the Apple iPhone headphones and heard the same thing. Then my wife gave me her Bose IE 2 headphones and it was gone: the sound was clear and it handled the bass properly.

I know that a discerning ear takes time to develop and I am starting late but am enjoying it.

I re-read the link with the mic tests and will go over the recorder samples with the better sounding (or better capable?) headphones. Thank you for your response.

[Fran Guidry]

Originally Posted by SeamusORiley

I know that readers are familiar with this site:

http://www.wingfieldaudio.com/portab...d-samples.html

My question is regarding discerning sound differences. They all sound so similar to me.

Are you able to discern the difference? Does it take a trained ear? I listened to them carefully with headphones.

What of blind testing? I saw that with mics, it is difficult to discern a very expensive one to a moderately priced one. Is it similar with portable recorders?

thank you. I am learning!

I have done comparative tests on mics and recorders and preamps and interfaces for a number of years.

If the test is not based on the same performance, with careful level matching, the information is worse than useless. The differences are more likely to come from performance differences than from recorder differences, and even .5 dB of volume difference causes us to hear things differently.

So while I value the tables of comparative specs, I'm afraid the Wingfield sound samples are not fundamentally useful. We're way past the days when a particular recorder is so noisy that we can hear the hiss over the music, or so distorted that it has its own signature sound. The audible differences are so small that the choice of recorder becomes one of finding the right feature set and price.

Fran

[SeamusORiley]

Originally Posted by Fran Guidry

I have done comparative tests on mics and recorders and preamps and interfaces for a number of years.

If the test is not based on the same performance, with careful level matching, the information is worse than useless. The differences are more likely to come from performance differences than from recorder differences, and even .5 dB of volume difference causes us to hear things differently.

So while I value the tables of comparative specs, I'm afraid the Wingfield sound samples are not fundamentally useful. We're way past the days when a particular recorder is so noisy that we can hear the hiss over the music, or so distorted that it has its own signature sound. The audible differences are so small that the choice of recorder becomes one of finding the right feature set and price.

Fran

Interesting.

Do headphones advertise range in dB's where the consumer can rely upon data more than just (my) untrained ear? thanks.

[Fran Guidry]

I'm not sure I'm following. Some headphones provide frequency response information but with playback transducers listening is a must.

Fran

[SeamusORiley]

Fran, I apologize for the ignorance but what I mean is this:

Is there a measurement used for sensitivity in mics and in headphones, that show the range capable of being picked up?

In researching microphones (wow!) and even headphones, I don't see a lot of advertising based upon numbers. Does this make sense?

We went to Best Buy yesterday (the Zoom Q2HD was there...it feels very light and small) and were listening to the test samples on various headphones. The most expensive Bose headphone was locked up and not part of the sampling.

Is there a criteria of measurement that is helpful here? I don't think I have a very good ear.

[Fran Guidry]

The usual minimum spec these days is "20 hz to 20,000 hz +- 3 dB" - this says that the overall reproduction (or pickup in the case of a mic) covers the normal audible range with minimal variation.

But it turns out that the minimal variation is enough to give different headphones distinctive voices.

There's also a big distinction between closed and open phones. It's easier to make natural sounding headphones that are not sealed, that allow outside sound in and inside sound out. This is good for listening to music but can be a problem when using the phones for multi-track recording where the sound from the phones can bleed into the mics.

When I shop for headphones I go to one of the big review sites and see what they recommend. Somebody like http://www.goodcans.com/HeadphoneRev...endations.html gets me started. Note that these guys (and many others) love Grado headphones, but these are almost all open back.

Fran

[SeamusORiley]

Originally Posted by Fran Guidry

The usual minimum spec these days is "20 hz to 20,000 hz +- 3 dB" - this says that the overall reproduction (or pickup in the case of a mic) covers the normal audible range with minimal variation.

But it turns out that the minimal variation is enough to give different headphones distinctive voices.

There's also a big distinction between closed and open phones. It's easier to make natural sounding headphones that are not sealed, that allow outside sound in and inside sound out. This is good for listening to music but can be a problem when using the phones for multi-track recording where the sound from the phones can bleed into the mics.

When I shop for headphones I go to one of the big review sites and see what they recommend. Somebody like http://www.goodcans.com/HeadphoneRev...endations.html gets me started. Note that these guys (and many others) love Grado headphones, but these are almost all open back.

Fran

Thanks, Fran, this helps.

Experientially, I found the following:

Bose IE were not great and often fell out. (IE In Ear)
Bose OE were really nice, and comfortable.
Bose IE 2 were even better, don't fall out, and handle the bass better. They sound to me to be clearer than the OE (on ear) and they do let in outside sound (keeps me out of trouble at work).