When you hit record the first time the speaker monitors the audio source out loud. This recorder also makes a fine speaker for a laptop. So, I’d like more encoding formats, but the 192kbps stereo option on the DAR-101 is fine for me in the end. I never notice any artifacts in the MP3 encode I make of the resulting file(s). I often expand the MP3 files I make on this into mono WAV files and tidy them up and normalize and edit them. And it also stands up well to RE-compression. I’ve found that it’s very hard for almost anybody to hear any artifacts in a 32kbps mono recording of AM radio. That said, AM broadcasting is rather limited in acoustical dynamics, at least as we know it. Of course, I could get into “joint stereo” and VBR and throw in more variables, but what I’m saying here is pretty much on point. So, a 192 mono file would be superior to a 320 stereo file. A 160kbps mono file is equal to a 320kbps stereo file. But don’t forget that the encoding rate is divided by two in a stereo format. If it’s a mono source it’s a waste of space on the SD card just for starters. But AM and shortwave radio are of course only mono, as are phone conversations, which this device is specially outfitted to record. All MP3 options on everything are just stereo by default, because almost everybody is dealing with post 50s music in the MP3 format, and that’s always stereo. And of course, to be able record in mono or stereo. What I would like is a broader range of MP3 encoding options, up to 320kbps. ![]() Sure, being able to record WAV files would be welcome, but I’m not really in need of that. My biggest complaint is the lack of recording format choices, and I’ve long hoped there would be a firmware update to expand them. It’s an easy to use rock solid workhorse. I’ve had one of these for along time, and it’s been pretty much the only way I’ve recorded radio for years.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |