Sound recorder audio quality

[chadandreo]

Hi, 
I was wondering, asides from the features and multiple inputs, all things being equal, will I notice a difference in sound quality when using my DR-10L, DE-60D or DR-10L in 24/48?

[IronFilm]

Well the DR10L vs DR60D are for very different purposes, so choose which one to use on that basis. 

 

[chadandreo]

Thanks.

I know. I’m just wondering if the sound quality is the same when using the same settings. 

[newfoundmass]

You might get similar results but not identical. Like IronFilm said, they all have specific uses where you'll be able get the most out of them. 

I believe that Curtis Judd has done reviews on all of those you've listed, so I'd check out his YouTube channel. 

[IronFilm]

6 hours ago, chadandreo said:

I know. I’m just wondering if the sound quality is the same when using the same settings. 

Does it really matter? They're so very very different!

I assume the sound quality from either would be broadly similar, as they're both recent but very low end audio products from the same company Tascam. And within the relative context of what each are, I haven't heard anything very bad about them. 

Base your decision on which one best suits you needs for that day, rather than which one might theoretically give you slightly better quality. 

As one is a bodypack recorder, the other is a field recorder. VERY DIFFERENT. 
One has a single 3.5mm input, the other has 2x XLR phantom powered inputs (plus a 3.5mm stereo input). Again, VERY DIFFERENT.

[Thomas Hill]

I've used the DR10L a bit and, like @IronFilm says, it is not interchangeable with a field recorder. But it is great for when you need a tiny mic that you can hide virtually anywhere. We had it inside cages with the talent (horror movie) and just let it run then used Pluraleyes to synch it with the other audio. It's also decent as a traditional on-talent lav but you can't monitor it so be sure to run some tests and get the level set for each actor and location.

[IronFilm]

As a plant mic inside a cage, or in a car, or other confined space (so that the actor is then predictably staying in one space) that is a handy use for them, as result will be a little more predictable once you remove the clothing factor from the equation. 

[chadandreo]

Thanks for the replies so far. 

As I have mentioned, I know that they have different uses and features.  Those things asides from sound quality is irrelevant to this question. 

For example, I am recording a single talent using a G3 which only requires a single input, would there be any benefit sound quality wise using a larger recorder with the G3 receiver and included XLR cable as opposed to the DR-10L with the G3 receiver and the included  1/8" cable.  

Or if I tap into a soundboard and I am only using that single source for audio for the job, will I notice a difference in sound quality from the various recorders I mentioned?

[IronFilm]

16 hours ago, chadandreo said:

For example, I am recording a single talent using a G3 which only requires a single input, would there be any benefit sound quality wise using a larger recorder with the G3 receiver and included XLR cable as opposed to the DR-10L with the G3 receiver and the included  1/8" cable.  

Yes!

For the very big reason of: Monitoring!

[chadandreo]

Thats a great and necessary feature, but it has nothing to do with the devices sound quality capabilities. Plus I can monitor audio on all 3 devices.  

[IronFilm]

You can't with the DR10L. Unless you mean you don't have the DR10L, but the DR10CS?!

And being able to monitor your audio does impact your quality, as if you can't then your audio will suffer. 

[webrunner5]

Pretty damn good price on this Rode Transmitter.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/253816749257

[IronFilm]

That is for ONLY the transmitter.
Utterly useless by itself. (thus not a good price for it at all)
And I've said it many times, and I'll say it again: I don't like the RodeLink Filmmakers Kit.

[webrunner5]

6 hours ago, IronFilm said:

That is for ONLY the transmitter.
Utterly useless by itself. (thus not a good price for it at all)
And I've said it many times, and I'll say it again: I don't like the RodeLink Filmmakers Kit.

uh, you are allowed to buy the other half! I don't like Zoom stuff, so we are even.

[IronFilm]

Once you've purchased the RX then it is no longer "a pretty damn good price" like you said, which was my point.

 

9 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

I don't like Zoom stuff, so we are even.

If you've never used a Zoom F series recorder on a production then you really shouldn't judge.

 

[webrunner5]

36 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

Once you've purchased the RX then it is no longer "a pretty damn good price" like you said, which was my point.

 

If you've never used a Zoom F series recorder on a production then you really shouldn't judge.

 

What you think Zoom Just started making Audio stuff. Young people!

Founded1983 (35 years ago) Your silly. They are probably older than you are! I used their stuff when you probably weren't even born. I know what good stuff was and is. Nagra was THE thing to have back in the day and they still are. But for Mere people Tascam and Zoom was THE thing to buy. But when I did my ENG thing the sound man had a old Nagra that looked like it was from WWII. And it still worked like it did when it was new. Probably be the noisiest thing you ever heard in today's world.

Sure for the money they are good. And so is Rode one of their their competitors for the money. Not everyone Needs a https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1029959-REG/nagra_7032001_vi_eight_channel_digital_audio.html

But is is 8 times the price of the top F series Zoom for a reason. And that reason is not what 97% of us on here need. Just like the Rode works for a lot of people. It is inexpensive, but gets the job done for what most people need.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

What you think Zoom Just started making Audio stuff. Young people!

I know that Zoom has been around for a long long time. 
But companies, like people, do change over time. 
And it would be wrong to assume the Zoom of today (with their F8n, and F8/F4) is the same as the Zoom of years ago.

 

[webrunner5]

2 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

I know that Zoom has been around for a long long time. 
But companies, like people, do change over time. 
And it would be wrong to assume the Zoom of today (with their F8n, and F8/F4) is the same as the Zoom of years ago.

 

You are very right to state that.

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

But is is 8 times the price of the top F series Zoom for a reason. And that reason is not what 97% of us on here need. Just like the Rode works for a lot of people. It is inexpensive, but gets the job done for what most people need.

Yes, but I'm not recommending that people start out with their first wireless be something which is over 8 times more expensive than a RodeLink. Not at all, I recommend instead better products (Sony UWP-D11) which are still in the same general price bracket.

[Dan Sherman]

5 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Yes, but I'm not recommending that people start out with their first wireless be something which is over 8 times more expensive than a RodeLink. Not at all, I recommend instead better products (Sony UWP-D11) which are still in the same general price bracket.

Sony is a brand I've hated since the first generation Discman. Everything they make seems to come with a ridiculously high "Sony" tax. I refuse to knowingly buy anything they produce at this point, unless absolutely necessary.

For the price of the Sony kit, I'd just buy a sennheiser g3 instead.