Dave Nolan wrote:
> Also (FWIW) at a recent AES meeting in NYC, a couple of elder audio gurus
> were discussing the Marantz PMD660 ($450), and seemed to think that the
> built-in mic pre's were noticably substandard. Not sure if Marantz has
> improved this with the PMD 670 ($700) or 671 ($1000).
> dave nolan
The PMD660 mic pres are pretty bad--not bad to the point of being
useless for my applications, but a real let down over what I hoped
Marantz would do. A linguist named Bartek Plichta who contributes to
the oral history listserve did a thorough test of the unit as it applies
to linguistic research and came to the conclusion that, although for
what he does it really isn't satisfactory, self-powered condensers
produce the cleanest results.
You can reach it here:
He got me thinking about testing our PMD660s with a mic like the
AT813a/ATM31a (as I learned yesterday from AT, same mic with different
names for different markets) and comparing it to our regular mics.
Curiously, it was my impression that the pres on the PMD660 and the
PMD671 were supposed to be improvements on the pres in the PMD670. I
kinda think the PMD660 pres sound worse, although I haven't done a
really good comparative test. No clue if the PMD671 has the same pres
as the PMD660, but I assume it does.
Does anyone on the list have experience with the Fostex FR2? I've only
heard good things about it, but a few days ago I received an email in
response to my audio recording equipment page:
that said the unit has been "plagued by file corruption problems". That
would be a bummer, since I've been drooling over the FR2 since it came out.
Vermont Folklife Center
P.O. Box 442
Middlebury, VT 05753
akolovos @ vermontfolklifecenter.org