The only reason you would go for the DS-71 over the DM520 is if you want to always use it as a personal voice recorder, or you like the wired remote control mic.
It is fare as a sound effects recorder, great for in-door and out-door voice capture. A Pocket with quality external mics, or another higher grade recorder that isn't accessible will be better for full spectrum sound, but the DM-520 is actually pretty good and definitely the best all-rounder for its size. Tim -----Original Message----- From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] On Behalf Of tim Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 2:56 PM To: PC Audio Discussion List Subject: Re: Comparison of the Olympus DS-71 and the DM-520: RE: Digitalrecordersagain - Plextalk Pocket and Olympus DS-71 cool now what about in my situation recording automobiles, people, indoors, outdoors etc will the dm520 be great for that? or is the ds71 a better option. think I have made my decition, but want to be sure before I move forward. thanks! much ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Noonan" <t...@timnoonan.com.au> To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 21:28 Subject: Comparison of the Olympus DS-71 and the DM-520: RE: Digital recordersagain - Plextalk Pocket and Olympus DS-71 > Ok, re the DS-71 and the DM-520, , it is actually a tricky decision on one > hand, and a completely clear decision on the other. > > This is a very detailed post. > > I have both units - which I am happy about, because as a conference > speaker, > the DS-71 (like the DS-50) mic remote control and detachable mic option is > perfect for capturing my presentations. I can wire myself up, and just > flick > the switch on the remote to start and stop recording - almost total > reliability that record has activated. > > If, you have a DS-50, you can use its remote control and Mic with the > DS-71. > You can not, however, use the DS-50 or DS-71 remote control on the DM-520! > > The price I paid for the DS-71 was nearly double that of the DM-520, and > in > many ways the DS-71 is an inferior product, using an older generation of > technology. I actually think someone stuffed up somewhere in releasing the > DS-71 when they did, it feels like a legacy product that was very delayed > to > market. > > Still speaking about the DS-71, the recording quality is pretty good, and > you do notice the Wave recording improvement over the DS50 and the WMA on > the DS-71. However, it is not as good as the audio recording quality of > the > DM-520, and has more noise floor and Mic preamp noise (I think). > > In addition, the external stereo Microphone for the DS-71, though an > improvement on the DS-50 mic is definitely inferior to the in-built stereo > Mics of the DM-520, especially if you want to use any of the zoom > recording > modes that The DS-71 offers. I don't actually believe that they fully > tuned > the DS-71 mics for the Zoom technology. I would never use any of the zoom > options on the DS-71, but I do use them for some situations (especially > Narrow, and sometimes wide) on the DM-520. > > The narrow setting is good for keeping sounds localised, and the wide > option > is good for spreading the left right mike pickup to catch several speakers > from a single location. > > If you want to hear how the DM-520 Narrow zoom mic setting works in open > air > situations, you can go to my CoffeeCast Conversations podcast at > http://coffeecast.posterous.com > > Other advantages of the DS-71 are that it buffers key presses far better. > For flipping back and forth between recordings in a folder, results are > better. Also it doesn't exhibit the annoying audio click through the > speaker when you move to different recordings. Both these problems with > the > DM-520 are bugs, and I do hope a firmware release will address them, as > they > do frustrate me, when using the DM-520 as a voice recorder. > > Also, it is necessary, occasionally, to reboot the DM-520 to fix an > occasional bug where recording is flawed and choppy. This means that > absolute trust of capturing a recording is somewhat compromised. > Monitoring > important recordings with earphones is therefore useful. I power the > machine off, and back on prior to doing interviews, where I can't afford > to > lose quality of a recording. > > Finally, in complaint about the DM-520 is that I have stopped using the > supplied rechargeable batteries, as they were dying unexpectedly, even > when > supposedly fully charged. I haven't had the time to fully track this > problem > down, or do charge discharge cycling to see if the problem goes away. Not > a > big problem for me, as I am happy to swap in regular AAA batteries before > important recordings. > > The other relatively minor advantage of the DS-71 is that its size is > smaller than the DM-520 if you remove the stereo mic. They are equivalent > sized, when the external mic is attached. > > I still love the audio quality of memos recorded with the in-built mono > mic > of the DS-71. You have to change your mic technique considerably with the > DM-520, so it isn't optimised for close mouth memoing, but mostly this > doesn't matter. > > I think the DS-71 gives you 200 files for each of the five folders. With > 4gb, this may or may not work for you! I found this limitation a problem > once or twice. > > On the DM-520 you get 999 files per folder, and if you add Micro SD card, > you then have ten folders to categorise stuff in to. > > All that said, though, my DS-71 is sitting here on my desk, hardly used > since the new machine arrived, and my DM-520 is always in my pocket, ready > for any situation I need to make a note, or capture a meeting or > conversation. > > In summary: > > Unless you Really need the remote control, you will probably be best off > with the DM-520, it is a magic machine, accessibility is good and the > price > is good for size, quality and features . A few bugs, but only compared to > the elegant smooth operation of the DS-50 and DS-71 machines. > > And, of course, you can still plug in an external tie clip Mic, you just > can't remote control it as conveniently. > > Olympus do have a remote control for the DM-520, but this is expensive and > is wireless. > > Hope this helps. > > Regards > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] > On Behalf Of tim > Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 8:33 AM > To: PC Audio Discussion List > Subject: Re: Digital recorders again - Plextalk Pocket and Olympus DS-71 > > hi all! am seriously debating between a ds71 and a dm520, only thing > stopping me from the dm520 is the not included stereo mike like that comes > with the ds71, also, is there any other recorders with 4 gig or grater > copasity, built in speech and a mike or 2 included with the product? > thanks > for help! > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lauren" <lotusris...@att.net> > To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> > Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 6:48 > Subject: Re: Digital recorders again - Plextalk Pocket and Olympus DS-71 > > >> Hi, >> >> Can someone please talk about the cost f these items? I am looking for a >> digital recorder that you can take anywhere, that has a good sound >> quality, but that is also affordable. I am on a budget. >> >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Lauren >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Tim Noonan" <t...@timnoonan.com.au> >> To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 7:35 PM >> Subject: RE: Digital recorders again - Plextalk Pocket and Olympus DS-71 >> >> >>>I would guess, in the absence of no hard comparative data, that the >>>audio >>> recording quality of the Pocket is quite a bit better than is the >>> Olympus >>> DS-71, which I do have. >>> >>> I find the Olympus, across a range of external mics does have a degree >>> of >>> background hiss (preamp noise or circuit noise). This is the case when >>> set >>> to wave recording and manual mic input levels. >>> >>> Also, The Olympus doesn't actually have a line in, only a mic in port, >>> so > >>> I >>> am curious about line in recording quality, and whether you are using an >>> attenuation cable to reduce the line in signal to mic levels? >>> >>> That all said, I absolutely love my Olympus DS-71 in so many ways, and >>> for >>> so many reasons: its extraordinarily flexible and effective voice >>> recording >>> capabilities, battery life and replaceable batteries, and especially its >>> super compact size makes it a take everywhere audio device. >>> >>> Speaker monitoring of line in recordings, and audible recording level >>> feedback are features unique to the Plextalk recorders. >>> >>> Regards >>> Tim >>> >>> -----Original Message-----t >>> From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org >>> [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] >>> On Behalf Of G-Dog >>> Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 10:20 AM >>> To: PC Audio Discussion List >>> Subject: Re: Digital recorders again. >>> >>> Agreed! >>> >>> accessability is a very important factor but it doesn't equate to >>> performance. >>> I use the olympus DS-71 which does an excellent job for both mike and >>> line >>> in recordings. >>> Yes, you can monitor through headphones. >>> I also like the fact that it uses AAA batteries that makes it easy to >>> swap >>> them out if needed. >>> >>> I hear the Edital R9 is also a nifty unit >>> >>> G-Doggy-dog! >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Bruce Toews" <br...@ogts.net> >>> To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 12:01 PM >>> Subject: Re: Digital recorders again. >>> >>> >>> That statement should probably be qualified: It may well be the most >>> excellent recording device in its class on the market, I couldn't say >>> but have no reason to believe otherwise, but there are better recording >>> devices on the market. Sweeping statements are dangerous. >>> >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2009 12:56:11 -0500, "Sunshine" <sunsh...@abe.midco.net> >>> said: >>>> I totally agree with you Dean, the plextalk pocket is the most exclent >>>> recording device on the market these days. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "dean martineau" <dea...@earthlink.net> >>>> To: "'PC Audio Discussion List'" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 12:36 PM >>>> Subject: RE: Digital recorders again. >>>> >>>> >>>> What I know is that the PlexTalk Pocket is totally accessible, nicely >>>> packaged, has both manual and automatic level control, and does a very >>>> nice >>>> job of recording from the line injack. I doubt any other digital >>>> recorder >>>> provides as much feedback, as this one is made for the blind. Of >>>> course, >>>> it >>>> may (or may not, I don't know) cost more than others of similar >>>> quality, >>>> but >>>> there's no guesswork involved. It's nice to be able to monitor through >>>> the >>>> speaker when making a line-in recording. >>>> >>>> Dean >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org >>>> [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org] >>>> On Behalf Of Tim Crawford >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:27 AM >>>> To: PC Audio Discussion List >>>> Subject: Digital recorders again. >>>> >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> Just wondering, which one of the flash memory based recorders recently >>>> discussed here, would be most suitable for making high quality >>>> recordings >>>> from an external source via line-in? e.g. a satellite receiver. >>>> >>>> I don't intend recording via microphone, so that particular aspect of >>>> performance is of limited interest. >>>> >>>> Any views much appreciated. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Tim. >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >>>> >>>> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus >>>> signature >>>> database 4487 (20091007) __________ >>>> >>>> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. >>>> >>>> http://www.eset.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >>>> >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org > > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
