Affordable digital recorder advice

Tue Jan 31 18:42:05 UTC 2006

Mia,
I couldn't agree more, because we have found all of the same
conditions/recommendations. But the use of high quality equipment, in the
field, still yields much better and much longer lasting recordings and
should be considered. We had some problems just this weekend with a high end
recorder, just because it was not initially easy to use. That led us to
rethink what equipment is best and/or how much more training is needed.
Guess all I'm saying is that there are lots of options now (I have also used
your same recorder) and that making more of an investment in high quality is
worth it in the long run. We are also in the business of creating tons of
stuff for the community and are putting that responsibility into the hands
of community members -- so I really understand what you are saying.
Nevertheless, that makes the quality of the recordings even more valuable
and we should all be striving not just for lots of stuff but for the best
possible stuff, given the recording conditions.
Best,
Susan

On 1/31/06, Mia Kalish <MiaKalish at learningforpeople.us> wrote:
>
>  Hi, Susan,
>
>
>
> I didn't read the whole main thread, but I thought I was perceiving a
> recommendation for "recording studio quality" for archival recording.
> Bringing people into a sound controlled studio is very different from
> working in communities where we create tons and tons of material for use by
> the community.
>
>
>
> When we were doing this initially 4-5 years ago now, Depree and I created
> a whole checklist of things we wanted to be able to do, with a focus of
> working in the community. For us, the considerations ranked approximately as
> follows:
>
> 1.       Elder comfort
>
> 2.       Affordable by community members
>
> 3.       High quality recording
>
> 4.       Convenience
>
> 5.       High portability
>
> 6.       Battery-powered
>
> 7.       Ease of use, for us & for community members
>
>
>
> Our goal was to work with communities to show them how they could take a
> major hand in designing and developing their own resources. As such, many of
> our considerations incorporated the needs of the Community in our assessment
> of recorders. Sophisticated, expensive recorders wouldn't be appropriate;
> special recording rooms and devices would take us out of the community and
> would also be difficult to use in places where people live. We didn't want
> to use our hosts' electricity; for some people, this is a financial
> hardship, even for small requirements. We were also prepared for places
> where there is no electricity; or where the travel to and from the locale is
> challenging, as for example, the path down the Grand Canyon to the Havapai.
> So we included all these considerations in our analysis.
>
>
>
> Mia
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Indigenous Languages and Technology [mailto:
> ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU] *On Behalf Of *Susan Penfield
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 31, 2006 7:59 AM
> *To:* ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice
>
>
>
> Mia, Jan and all,
> Just a thought here -- It seems to me that we might not want to
> distinguish between the uses for revitalization and documentation. Good
> quality is needed on both fronts since they really play into each other. I
> think that ease of use is important (for some of us less techie folks), and
> certainly cost is an issue for many, but getting good archival quality
> doesn't necessarily mean giving up all the other things Mia referred
> and,increasingly, those of us who do revitalization work need to be mindful
> that many of those recordings may end up as the only documentation of the
> language.
> Best,
> Susan
>
> On 1/31/06, *Jan Tucker* < jtucker at starband.net> wrote:
>
> Thank you all for the information you provided about affordable digital
> recorders. I'm looking at this one right now.
>
>
>
> Yes, I'm using it for language revitalization, and would like the best
> possible quality and least degredation. I have about 100 to spend on the
> devise and the accessories such as a microphone.
>
>
>  *Olympus* VN-960PC Digital Voice Recorder, with LCD Display - Built-in
> 128MB Flash Memory and PC Link * * Any further comments would be welcome.
> Here is a link with specifications.
>
>
>
> http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&sku=389757&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation#Recording
>
>
>
>  *In recording format they say ADPCM (Adaptive Differential Pulse code
> Modulation)(WAV on PC). Can I assume then this is a .wav format recorder?
> *
>
> Thank you,
>
>
>
> Jan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Nicholas Thieberger" < thien at UNIMELB.EDU.AU >
>
> To: < ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU >
>
> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2006 2:30 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [ILAT] Affordable digital recorder advice
>
>
>
> > David,
> >
> > If it does not record in WAV format then it is not archival. |If it
> > records in a compressed form like WMA, mp3, or others, and then
> > converts to WAV it means the actual recording has already lost lots
> > of the signal. The m-audio microtrack records to WAV and is around
> > US$300 and is not too bad, it has some problem with preamps.
> >
> > Nick
> >
> > At 11:17 AM -0800 30/1/06, David Lewis wrote:
> >>Hi Nicholas,
> >>I checked out the first website mentioned and they wrote this as to
> >>an archival quality format "For audio, use WAV
> >>< http://emeld.org/school/glossary.html#wav > format."
> >>Coincidentally, I was at Best Buy last night and looked over their
> >>selection and chose the lower end of the higher end devices, the
> >>WS-100. It is supposed to transfer directly into Microsoft WMA
> >>format to the computer. I'm pretty sure I can then convert it to WAV
> >>format either with Windows Media player or ITunes. Any advice here?
> >>the device cost $100. the next higher device was $149.00.
> >>David Lewis
> >>
> >>Nicholas Thieberger wrote:
> >>
> >>>-->
> >>>Just to add to this thread from an archival perspective. If you are
> >>>recording unique things that you want to be available to
> >>>generations to come then you need to think about the format of what
> >>>you are recording and whether it will endure. Olympus and other
> >>>small (and cheap, unfortunately) recorders do not record in
> >>>archival formats.
> >>>
> >>>For a summary of the issues around longterm storage of recorded
> >>>material and endangered languages you could look at
> >>>http://emeld.org/school/index.html.
> >>>
> >>>There was a discussion of recorders on the RNLD list and if you go
> >>>to the archive of the RNLD list, here:
> >>>http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?S1=resource-network-linguistic-diversity
>
> >>>and search for 'flash' and 'recorder' you will get some useful info
> >>>
> >>>A summary item is here: http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-2710.html
> >>>
> >>>All the best,
> >>>
> >>>Nick Thieberger
> >>>
> >>>At 7:36 AM -0700 30/1/06, Mia Kalish wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Jan & all,
> >>>>
> >>>>I have been using Olympus digital recorders for years now. They have 3
>
> >>>>quality settings (low, medium, & high) and 2 recording modes (one for
> >>>>meetings, one for one-to-one). The ones I buy are about $99. I
> recently got
> >>>>a Sony refurb unit for $32 at e-cost.com.
> >>>>
> >>>>I didn't read the thread about recorders, because I'm really happy
> with
> >>>>mine, and I had shared about it before.
> >>>
> >>>>Mia
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>
> >>>Project Manager
> >>>PARADISEC
> >>>Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
> >>>University of Melbourne, Vic 3010
> >>>Australia
> >>>
> >>> nicholas.thieberger at paradisec.org.au
> >>>Ph 61 (0)3 8344 5185
> >>>
> >>>PARADISEC
> >>>Pacific And Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures
>
> >>>http://paradisec.org.au
> >
> >
> > --
> > Project Manager
> > PARADISEC
> > Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
> > University of Melbourne, Vic 3010
> > Australia
> >
> > nicholas.thieberger at paradisec.org.au
> > Ph 61 (0)3 8344 5185
> >
> > PARADISEC
> > Pacific And Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures
> > http://paradisec.org.au
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.
>
> Department of English
> Affiliate faculty: Department of Linguistics
> and the Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Program
> American Indian Language Development Institute
> Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836
>

--
Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.

Department of English
Affiliate faculty: Department of Linguistics
and the Second Language Acquisition and Teaching Program
American Indian Language Development Institute
Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20060131/545a68de/attachment.htm>