Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#23
![]()
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
geoff wrote:
On 1/01/2016 5:06 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote: But.... these days you can buy very good digital gear and very good analogue gear (and let me say that the ATR-100 can be set up to sound so much more accurate than any of the previous generations of tape machines I wonder how the difference between the ATR-100 and (say) the latest Zoom is ? Without even thinking about the $ difference (per channel). Much of the difference is that you can set the ATR-100 up so that it isn't transparent at all, if that's what you want. The issue with the Zoom recorders are the mike preamps and gain controls more than converters. The recording part is the easy part. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
DAT = .WAV @ changing sampling rates | Pro Audio | |||
Sampling rates and scaling | Pro Audio | |||
Demand for even higher sampling rates | Pro Audio | |||
Lavry article on sampling rates, online | High End Audio | |||
Why 24/96 sampling isn't necessarily better-sounding than 24/44 sampling | Pro Audio |