Korg MR-1000 / 1bit-5.8MHz DSD portable recorder

[studio1117]

Originally Posted by raal

i wish i could agree but as i understand it DSD is most useful when mastering from analog, last in the chain (one generation). i hope i'm wrong on this, but unless you do the mastering yourself, i can't see how DSD could be a 'better' 2 track option in practical terms.

if you mix to DSD what would you master to?

Well... I do analog or sony sonoma ( I also have pcm recorders) so having a DSD capable 2 track is very important to me. Mastering is done from your DSD 2 track.

The software issue is a non issue I still use a Microsoft Works program from the early 90's on my XP machine. All I need it to do is fold down the DSD to PCM for the easy CD burn.

You said you couldn't see how DSD could be better in practical terms, I guess I would ask you if you are an artist or an accountant. To me practical doesn't enter a lot into the picture if it did I wouldn't be in the recording bizz.

Another thought is this and maybe this is just mind tricks, but I feel recordings (pop, rock) made on analog and then transfered to CD sound better than newer PCM recorded material but christ there are so many variables in all of that it's probably myself lying.But really it's about having a notch up on PCM that excites me, maybe it's not for everybody and truth be told, most of the public can't hear the diff anyway. But I'm still going for the best tools I can afford and at @$799 I can afford.
Aaron Householter
www.studio1117.us

[Sinewave]

as i understand it, more than one generation DSD and noise starts becoming a problem. from my very limited understanding, a simple low pass filter isn't going to do the trick.

I don't know of any generation loss when making an SACD using a DSD master, i know that an addtional noise shaper is used when Authoring to SACD, thier is no generation loss when using the orginal DSD master to create whatever playback format, thier might be loss if you create a PCM file of the original master, then sweeten it up then convert it back to DSD again.

[raal]

Originally Posted by studio1117

You said you couldn't see how DSD could be better in practical terms, I guess I would ask you if you are an artist or an accountant. To me practical doesn't enter a lot into the picture if it did I wouldn't be in the recording bizz.

practical, IMO, from a recordists viewpoint is what can supply the best sonic results and archival medium repeatably. i wish mixing to DSD were the answer. i'd do it in a second. i may do it anyway, just in case. as you say, it's certainly cheap enough to warrant a try.

here's something from T.RayBullard on another thread that explains the problem (as i understand it) very clearly. again if there's something i'm missing, i'd thank anyone who could shed some light:

Originally Posted by T.RayBullard

DSD Vs PCM from the Chief Engineer at Phillips

Studio people who have compared the live misc feed to DSD and PCM say that DSD is much better and they cannot tell the two apart. If, as you say, it is flawed, why are the studio engineers all for it. As someone on the forum said, it is analog without all the problems.

BP:
1) Sound of DSD:

The HF noise and the low-level nonlinearities of DSD do not get in the way of the sound as we hear it. However, it is impossible to build a production chain using the format.

DSD is in its place in one (1) application: Mastering from analogue. When the recording chain is completely analogue, you can feed the audio from the analogue mastering into a DSD A/D converter and cut that signal straight onto a disc without any further processing. It is in this application that DSD can be viewed as pretty transparent. When you convert the signal twice, however (such as when using a DSD recorder as the tracking medium), the second conversion is no longer transparent, due to the HF noise present in the source signal hitting a second analogue deltasigma modulator.

In this I have a serious gripe with AudioQuest. Before DSD, they tracked onto a 15ips 1/2" two track. These tapes were first used to master to ordinary CD, later again to SACD for a reissue, which indeed was a sonic forward step. However, they then switched to using a DSD recorder for tracking as well. Grundman then mastered it as usual (ie through an analogue mastering studio) onto the DSD master recorder.
The recording guys may well have found the DSD recorder better than their analogue two-track in a dry shoot-out, so you can't blame them for having made that choice. The resulting SACD releases however, are below anything. What's worse, there's no way of salvaging the recordings for a better-sounding reissue (unless they had the analogue two-track running as a backup). As an example, get hold of the classic "BluesQuest" sacd, which was made from analogue tapes. Then compare Doug McLeod's "Whose truth whose lies", where a DSD machine was used. If you're a bit of a sensitive person you'll run away screaming.

I think we could say that DSD is analog with a few extra problems. Serious ones.

[PMoshay]

All the new Korg MR Series recorders COME INCLUDED WITH "Audiogate" SOFTWARE.
The software works with PC or MAC and will convert DFF,DSF,WSD or Wave files (or not convert) to and from your computer to the MR Unit.
The software lets you convert either way to any of the 4 formats and any sample/bit rate.

Example:
1. You recorded your live concert mix at 5.6MHz/1bit
2. You want to keep your 1bit files for mastering/archival at 5.6MHz/1bit
3. Audiogate software will convert your files to a 16bit/44.1k PCM wave file so you can give the client and yourself a CD. This will leave the original 1bit files untouched.

The Audiogate software will use YOUR AUDIO HARDWARE for playback and will do the output conversion that is appropriate for your hardware, you do not need any special hardware to playback your ORIGINAL 1bit file on your computer (but it will playback at your audio cards rate).

I have been using this on all 4 of my computers flawlessly, PC & Mac's with OSX 10.4 as well as my new Intel Macbook Pro 2.

The software is not only well thought out, it is a very valuble included addition.
And we're talking about a Hardware & Software solution for less than i paid for my first DAT machine (ouch!).

For all the Nay Sayer's here, please reserve judgement on this one until you check it out. Korg has gone to extreme measures to deliver a truly ground breaking product here, this is serious piece of engineering. Many people have been involved in this project for years, it did not happen overnight and the main people that they got to design it were the inventors of 1bit / SACD technology.

I hope you all get to enjoy it soon, i'm loving it! (word has it units may be here very soon)

[raal]

Originally Posted by PMoshay

Example:
1. You recorded your live concert mix at 5.6MHz/1bit
2. You want to keep your 1bit files for mastering/archival at 5.6MHz/1bit
3. Audiogate software will convert your files to a 16bit/44.1k PCM wave file so you can give the client and yourself a CD. This will leave the original 1bit files untouched.

i understand this scenario, and i think it would be very similar if one came from analog tape.

what i don't know is if one had the same live concert mix, then wanted to master it, and then release it as a SACD and/or another format - what would be the procedure? does audiogate software provide a solution for the above example?

i for one have been wanting to do DSD for awhile now, so i'm just wondering what the scenario would be for someone who mixes to DSD and needs to master elsewhere after that. this is a sincere question sir, don't want to start any kind of 'which is the better format' ripples.

in other words, who works with DSD this way (more than one generation of DSD), is happy with the results, and how do they do it?

[studio1117]

Originally Posted by raal

practical, IMO, from a recordists viewpoint is what can supply the best sonic results and archival medium repeatably. i wish mixing to DSD were the answer. i'd do it in a second. i may do it anyway, just in case. as you say, it's certainly cheap enough to warrant a try.

here's something from T.RayBullard on another thread that explains the problem (as i understand it) very clearly. again if there's something i'm missing, i'd thank anyone who could shed some light:

While I'm no scientist, I have to disagree with T.RayBullard in theory. I can understand if you stay in the digital medium and mix a DSD to a DSDif perhaps artifacts were introduced, but once the source is back out through analog mastering tools I can't really see that it acts any different than a regular analog source be it 1/2" or whatever. I could be wrong, but it makes sense to me. Any people know if this is or isn't the case?
Aaron Householter
www.studio1117.us

[Sinewave]

i for one have been wanting to do DSD for awhile now, so i'm just wondering what the scenario would be for someone who mixes to DSD and needs to master elsewhere after that. this is a sincere question sir, don't want to start any kind of 'which is the better format' ripples.

Are you talking about recording in another format like PCM then for Mix down and Archiving you use DSD, then if you wanted to make a CD later on you have to convert back to PCM ? Is that the Generation loss you are worried about ?, If so then good Question because i have no idea what would happen with sucessive conversions. Since i will be using the device to do 2 track recording, my master recordings will be DSD, so then converting to any format after will not be a problem.
Maybe Pete Moshay wil have an answer.

[PMoshay]

Originally Posted by raal

i understand this scenario, and i think it would be very similar if one came from an analog tape master.

what i don't know is if one had the same live concert mix, then wanted to master it, and then release it as a SACD and/or another format - what would be the procedure? does audiogate software provide a solution to the example i quoted above?

With the Audiogate software, you can take your 1bit files and convert them to say "24bit/192k/wave" for mastering elsewhere if they do not handle 1bit files......

or

Just bring your MR1000 with you to the mastering room and playback from it.

I think this is what you are asking?

[PMoshay]

Originally Posted by Sinewave

Are you talking about recording in another format like PCM then for Mix down and Archiving you use DSD, then if you wanted to make a CD later on you have to convert back to PCM ? Is that the Generation loss you are worried about ?, If so then good Question because i have no idea what would happen with sucessive conversions. Since i will be using the device to do 2 track recording, my master recordings will be DSD, so then converting to any format after will not be a problem.
.

You can always just record only to 1bit/DSD, the Audiogate software will let you convert your 1bit/DSD file (it makes a copy before it converts the file) to DFF,DSF,WSD or Wave files. You can select the target bit rate & sample rate.

You never need to mess with your original 1bit file to convert to a different format.

[Albert]

Originally Posted by dlmorley

I don't see the problem really. It's included software and all it has to do is convert the files to AIFF or WAV (hence it is not a "complex" program)
Are you saying at some point in the future the conversion utility may not run on your computer OS? If this is the case, which I doubt it will be for quite a while, keep an old computer.. I do this for the rare occasion I want an OS9 piece of software.

You obviously didn't buy the Korg Oasys soundcard, a brilliant but low selling device. Support and development of that software was dropped very rapidly. I personally don't want to keep an old computer system around to run one piece of software, that argument just doesn't hold up in my opinion.

These new Korg 1bit recorders look appealing, and the software is probably brilliant, but that's entirely beside the point. Korg has to live with their turn and burn approach to dropping support of poorly selling items. Some people who have been through that with them in the past are simply not going to be as quick to drop money on their products in the future. So I approach with great suspicion units like these recorders, which depend on proprietary software.

Anyone who buys these recorders better hope Korg sells a ton of them. Again, this has nothing to do with the quality of the items themselves, it's more about Korg's long term commitment to supporting the software--no matter the sales. And in that regard, we can only take past performance as a guide, not current promises.

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by Albert

You obviously didn't buy the Korg Oasys soundcard, a brilliant but low selling device. Support and development of that software was dropped very rapidly. I personally don't want to keep an old computer system around to run one piece of software, that argument just doesn't hold up in my opinion.

These new Korg 1bit recorders look appealing, and the software is probably brilliant, but that's entirely beside the point. Korg has to live with their turn and burn approach to dropping support of poorly selling items. Some people who have been through that with them in the past are simply not going to be as quick to drop money on their products in the future. So I approach with great suspicion units like these recorders, which depend on proprietary software.

Anyone who buys these recorders better hope Korg sells a ton of them. Again, this has nothing to do with the quality of the items themselves, it's more about Korg's long term commitment to supporting the software--no matter the sales. And in that regard, we can only take past performance as a guide, not current promises.

Re Oasys, I actually have a friend who still uses one. How is that possible in your scenario?
Well, he uses my scenario. He keeps an old computer for it.
You don't want to keep a computer around in the future IF this box doesn't do well and becomes unsupported. Fine, but to say this is a reason for people not to buy is wrong. It's a choice you have made.
I wouldn't buy any plug-ins or software from smaller companies if this was the case.
Hey, I've got an Audiomedia III card with Pro Tools in my Mac PPC7300. Still works. Worth about $25. I made my money with it within a few weeks of buying it (for something like $2000. I replaced it 3 years after buying it.
I need something to do my best masters NOW. To say that this box will be useless if (a big if) Korg stop supporting it is absurd.

On another note, I also still have a Korg Soundlink system (the original large system) and you know what. It still works, it still sounds good and I could probably get something for it second hand. Korg support?? Never needed it.

[PMoshay]

as far as future proof guarantee, no company could ever possibly offer such a thing, but the support that is already built into the system is fantastic.
Support back or forth to DFF,DSF,WSD or Wave files at rates from 16bit/44.1k PCM thru 5.6MHz DFF (thats 2x the rate of current SACD's) should hold me out for a while.

You could convert your 16bit/44.1k cd's to a 1bit/5.6MHz file with the Audiogate software........ i'm not just sure yet if it's worth anything to do that, but you can.

Having dealt with decades of analog tapes myself, i'm not sure if they have all the "Glorius Luster" that people sometimes equate them with..... i certainly have heard many "brash and edgy" analog recordings, and lets not even mention storage and playback 10-30yrs later. I have Hall & Oates 2" masters that were only 10-12 years old that need to be baked just to be able to be played back, and will they sound as good as they did back then???? Who knows.

[Albert]

I own many Korg products and have been very happy with them in virtually every respect. My only complaint with Korg was the way the Oasys card died on the vine once sales were disappointing. The company cuts and runs fast from losing products, which you can't blame them for, as they are a business. But that approach does make for issues with products that are a combination of software and hardware.

I am not asking for a future proof guarantee, nor am I saying the product is useless without future support. Both those statements are yours, not mine. Please don't put words in my mouth.

All I am saying is that for me there were three factors that turned me off these 1bit recorders. First, the software issue that I've already brought up: support for current formats should be built into the unit itself. Second, it records in a format that is not standard and *does* require conversion for use with any of today's commonly used formats. And third, I far prefer a hand held unit that uses widely available battery types like AA.

[dlmorley]

Originally Posted by Albert

I own many Korg products and have been very happy with them in virtually every respect. My only complaint with Korg was the way the Oasys card died on the vine once sales were disappointing. The company cuts and runs fast from losing products, which you can't blame them for, as they are a business. But that approach does make for issues with products that are a combination of software and hardware.

I am not asking for a future proof guarantee, nor am I saying the product is useless without future support. Both those statements are yours, not mine. Please don't put words in my mouth.

All I am saying is that for me there were three factors that turned me off these 1bit recorders. First, the software issue that I've already brought up: support for current formats should be built into the unit itself. Second, it records in a format that is not standard and *does* require conversion for use with any of today's commonly used formats. And third, I far prefer a hand held unit that uses widely available battery types like AA.

I DO understand your gripes and wasn't trying to argue, but I think they are small gripes related to this product and it's facilities for it's price.
I don't find the software issue an issue any more than I do with ANY company. Ever buy anything from Digidesign or Waves?!
It can also record at any current standard format like PCM 44.1 and as softwares in many mastering houses can usually use DSD files, I think it sounds like an excellent mixdown recorder, ready to go to the mastering house unconverted and The 3rd issue is that the MR1000 uses AA the smaller unit, lithium.

All this is worth nothing until feedback from various sources tells me and I hear that it sounds EXCELLENT, but so far that seems the case..

[Albert]

Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to explain to the Korg guy why I didn't wait for his product. Where I think they might be missing the boat, from the perspective of a customer and person who uses this stuff.

If the MR series offered onboard 1bit *and* 24bit PCM and mp3 recording, or conversion within the unit itself, plus used a common battery type that could be purchased in a drugstore on location anywhere, then I almost certainly would have waited for it and given Korg my money instead of to their competition. If those factors don't bother you, then it looks like it could be a great little recorder.

[bluecouchstudio]

the new Korg products DO record DSD *and* PCM. from the Korg website:

"Each recorder supports multiple recording formats including DSDIFF, DSF, and WSD 1-bit formats, as well as multi-bit PCM format (BWF) with resolutions up to 24-bit/192 kHz."

i read about the Burr Brown chip they are using and verified that it can create both file types.

[raal]

Originally Posted by Sinewave

Are you talking about recording in another format like PCM then for Mix down and Archiving you use DSD, then if you wanted to make a CD later on you have to convert back to PCM ? Is that the Generation loss you are worried about ? If so then good Question because i have no idea what would happen with sucessive conversions.

exactly what i'm alking about, and also what happens if one wants to master after having mixed to DSD, and then go to DSD or PCM after that. one could certainly take the recorder into the mastering session, but how do you master DSD? maybe to analog tape, but even if this is done, what happens if you then try to make a DSD or PCM master?

if your final product is in DSD, coming from a live performance or analog tape, easy enough. you can then keep it on DSD or convert to PCM. it's the previous scenario i'm talking about.

in other words, i'd like to use DSD as i did 1/2" analog tape. from my very limited perspective i don't think it's feasible. if it is, i'd sure appreciate someone shedding some light. thanks.

[bluecouchstudio]

Originally Posted by raal

that's exactly what i'm alking about, and also what happens if i want to master after having mixed to DSD, and then go to DSD or PCM after that. i could certainly take the recorder into the mastering session, but how do you master DSD? maybe to analog tape, but even if this is done, what happens if i then try to make a DSD or PCM master?

i'm considering one of the recorders for mobile recording, but since i use an analog summing buss to mix (and it has 2 stereo outputs), i'm going to do an A/B test. i'll write one copy to DSD and then one to PCM and take it to my ME to compare. for the DSD file, i'll just take the recorder with me and play the audio directly from the recorder into his analog section before it is eventually converted to PCM.

that brings up the only downside of the MR-1, unbalanced output. in my opinion, that devalues the recorder since it makes it more difficult to play audio from it into other pro audio gear.

[mpr3]

raal, I don't think anyone has properly addressed the issue you brought up about second generation DSD being inherently problematic with HF noise. For example, if you record your mix to DSD and then your mastering engineer plays the DSD natively back into analog for further processing and then back into DSD and PCM as final masters. According to the quote below by the chief engineer at Phillips, this is a seriously flawed scenario. Please read below:

*****

The HF noise and the low-level nonlinearities of DSD do not get in the way of the sound as we hear it. However, it is impossible to build a production chain using the format.

DSD is in its place in one (1) application: Mastering from analogue. When the recording chain is completely analogue, you can feed the audio from the analogue mastering into a DSD A/D converter and cut that signal straight onto a disc without any further processing. It is in this application that DSD can be viewed as pretty transparent.

When you convert the signal twice, however (such as when using a DSD recorder as the tracking medium), the second conversion is no longer transparent, due to the HF noise present in the source signal hitting a second analogue deltasigma modulator.

In this I have a serious gripe with AudioQuest. Before DSD, they tracked onto a 15ips 1/2" two track. These tapes were first used to master to ordinary CD, later again to SACD for a reissue, which indeed was a sonic forward step. However, they then switched to using a DSD recorder for tracking as well. Grundman then mastered it as usual (ie through an analogue mastering studio) onto the DSD master recorder.


The recording guys may well have found the DSD recorder better than their analogue two-track in a dry shoot-out, so you can't blame them for having made that choice. The resulting SACD releases however, are below anything. What's worse, there's no way of salvaging the recordings for a better-sounding reissue (unless they had the analogue two-track running as a backup). As an example, get hold of the classic "BluesQuest" sacd, which was made from analogue tapes. Then compare Doug McLeod's "Whose truth whose lies", where a DSD machine was used. If you're a bit of a sensitive person you'll run away screaming.

I think we could say that DSD is analog with a few extra problems. Serious ones.

[PMoshay]

i will be using it as i would a 1/2" tape machine. When i master, if i am doing it, i will play back from the MR1000 just like a 1/2" machine and apply analog eq / comp / etc. then do digital stuff and the dithering to a 16bit file at the end with my Weiss unit.

But my 1st preference is to call Bob Ludwig and hand it off to him. He can certainly handle the files and usually masters using a similar type of signal path (analog eq. comp, etc) then digital processes near the end - then ending up dithering to 16bit with a external unit.

Many of the mid to high level mastering houses are familiar with and could handle DSD files, and to be honest.... if they were not into it, i would wonder why.

I apologise for insinuating that i was saying "you" wanted a future proof guarantee", that was more directed at the notion of my sympathies for companies trying to keep up with all the rapid changes in the computer world, and people wanting free updates the day the new systems ship. I can honestly say that it is really a full time job if one is trying to keep up with all the new operating system updates, new motherboards, chipsets, plugin compatabilities & version upgrades of the modern recording world. I don't really blame companies like waves & digi a bit for charging what they do... it takes alot of guts and patients to try to satisfy musical people and audiofiles.


Confession: i wish i could less time updating & upgrading software ..... listening to all the great mic's i have collected & recording some of my great friends wonderful music (and spending more time with them)....... but i guess thats a decision that we all have to make on our own.

[PMoshay]

"If you're a bit of a sensitive person you'll run away screaming"

It's hard to imagine how it got past a veteran high end mastering engineer & the artist?..........

[raal]

Originally Posted by mpr3

raal, I don't think anyone has properly addressed the issue you brought up about second generation DSD being inherently problematic with HF noise. For example, if you record your mix to DSD and then your mastering engineer plays the DSD natively back into analog for further processing and then back into DSD and PCM as final masters. According to the quote below by the chief engineer at Phillips, this is a seriously flawed scenario. Please read below:<snip>

yes. i actually quoted that very passage some posts up.

this is the exact scenario i'm talking about. since i haven't actually tried it (DSD X 2, or X 1 for that matter), it would be great to hear from others who have. i don't know if a low pass filter could do the trick.

Originally Posted by PMoshay

i will be using it as i would a 1/2" tape machine. When i master, if i am doing it, i will play back from the MR1000 just like a 1/2" machine and apply analog eq / comp / etc. then do digital stuff and the dithering to a 16bit file at the end with my Weiss unit.

But my 1st preference is to call Bob Ludwig and hand it off to him. He can certainly handle the files and usually masters using a similar type of signal path (analog eq. comp, etc) then digital processes near the end.

i'm sure he can! sure would be great if mr. ludwig commented on this thread wouldn't it? hmmm...

last time i spoke to chris bellman at grundman's and asked how he was getting the majority of his stuff lately he told me 1/2" or 1/4" are still king, which isn't surprising. i'm sure if more than one generation of DSD is possible though, alot of people would at least start experimenting with it.

I apologise for insinuating that i was saying "you" wanted a future proof guarantee", that was more directed at the notion of my sympathies for companies trying to keep up with all the rapid changes in the computer world, and people wanting free updates the day the new systems ship.

no problem sir. i stopped trying to future proof anything computer related a long time ago. necessary evil as they say, but sure is convenient (when it's working).

the bottom line is if i were in LA or somewhere where good techs abound, i'd probably be mixing to analog and be done with it, or/and running parallel PCM/DSD copies . in this neck of the woods, i balk at the idea of a 102 or 820 - and it's more convenient to send audio files to MEs than tapes, so for down here it sure would be sweet if something like the Korg, DVRA1000 or whatever could conveniently be used as a 2 track. i'd still mix to both PCM and DSD though. prolly will anyway, but i sure would like to know definitively if taking a DSD file, mastering it and then making another DSD file is possible with good results, and how someone like mr. ludwig would be doing that.

one question on the Korg recorder: couldn't you just keep the DSD files on a hard disk for later use? sounds pretty future proof to me.

[PMoshay]

i start mixing a record in 2-3 weeks to the MR1000 at 1bit/5.6Mhz that Bob will be mastering when i finish. Bob & Adam are on the list of people that will be getting units to use at Gateway. He already has a fantastic Sonoma setup that leaves him not in need of a MR1000, except for his home PT rig. It will also be a convienent way for he & others that master DSD to be able to take files home and listen without the expense of another expensive setup. You can just copy any files back and forth over USB2.0 from/to its 40gig internal hard drive, it mounts right up on your PC or Mac.

The issue i keep seeing with analog is:
1. storage of tapes
2. whos gonna monitor and backup the decaying tapes
3. whos going to pay for that backup and time
4. future availability of analog supplies
5. future availability of people that know about analog
6. cataloging tapes & easily accessing them
7. is it really the only thing that sounds good? has technology really declined since the 70's?
8. who wants to spend the money buying/finding a good 1987 tape machine

I have dealt with these issues myself having been working with artists like Hall & Oates who have a catalog that goes back over 35 years. The past 10 years worth of songs are very easy to access ....... and sound quite good (and better with every version of technology).
I still have a great 2" machine, nobody wants to use it (except me).

You want to start talking about declining quality, let's talk about studio musicianship these days.......... i really miss the 70's, 80's & even 90's, but that's another forum.

[Sinewave]

I posted this before but this is what the head of the Super audo center (Sonoma) had to say about the HF noise.

There is some degree of HF noise on the multitrack, but in every session we've done the noise is very manageable and mixing back via analog to DSD has delivered sonically excellent results. Of course every generation of DSD through analog and back to DSD adds a bit of loss in quality, the loss is far less than doing the same thing with PCM and the results from mixing DSD in the analog domain have been quite amazing. Hope this answers your question.
Best wishes,
gus...

in other words, i'd like to use DSD as i did 1/2" analog tape. from my very limited perspective i don't think it's feasible. if it is, i'd sure appreciate someone shedding some light. thanks.

If i were you i would record at the highest PCM sample rate possible to maintain quality, then give it to the ME for sweetening and leave conversion to DSD as the last thing instead of giving him a DSD file for processing in the analog domain then back to DSD or PCM for the delivery format. This way conversion to DSD for a potential SACD release is one time only and he could always take the orginal PCM or 1/2" analog tape and make a separate master for CD realease instead of using the DSD master. But then again it would depend on the skill of the ME to deliver satisfying results.

[Sinewave]

PMoshay- i will be using it as i would a 1/2" tape machine. When i master, if i am doing it, i will play back from the MR1000 just like a 1/2" machine and apply analog eq / comp / etc. then do digital stuff and the dithering to a 16bit file at the end with my Weiss unit.

Really ! you would still use an external dithering unit ?, then how good is Audiogate when it comes to converting from one file format to another say like DSD to 16 bit 44.1khz ?.

[PMoshay]

Originally Posted by Sinewave

Really ! you would still use an external dithering unit ?, then how good is Audiogate when it comes to converting from one file format to another say like DSD to 16 bit 44.1khz ?.

What i've done so far sounds really fantastic , but if i am playing back from the MR-1000, i can't record back to it at the same time.

I will not be able to master a SACD at my studio as i do not have a Sonoma system, i can only do PCM. I am hoping that soon we will have a more affordable system for SACD mastering. I would love for Koji and the Waseda Team to make one for us.

[Albert]

Originally Posted by PMoshay

1. The MR1000 will run on AC or 8AA alkaline batteries.
2. There dones not seem to be a logical reason to be able to do those conversions inside the MR1000. Once you record something, you still need to transfer it to a computer, at that point you can use the included Audiogate software to convert it to anything you want (except MP3..use iTunes or something)
3. if you are worried about file sizes / record time when recording, record at 16bit/44.1k wave on the MR1000, it will ship with a 40gig hard drive.

Thanks for that response, I appreciate having those issues cleared up. You guys might want to emphasize in your advertising the PCM recording capability and the ability to use AA batteries. The promo material hits the 1bit futuristic stuff so hard you've really got to read carefully to get the rest of the story. I'm sure there are other people with similar concerns as mine.

I'm assuming there must be an external AA battery case that plugs into the power jack? Unless it's a lot bigger than it looks, I don't see how all those batteries could fit inside.

Does the MR-1 have similar PCM recording capabilities as the MR-1000?

[PMoshay]

Originally Posted by Albert

Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to explain to the Korg guy why I didn't wait for his product. Where I think they might be missing the boat, from the perspective of a customer and person who uses this stuff.

If the MR series offered onboard 1bit *and* 24bit PCM and mp3 recording, or conversion within the unit itself, plus used a common battery type that could be purchased in a drugstore on location anywhere, then I almost certainly would have waited for it and given Korg my money instead of to their competition. If those factors don't bother you, then it looks like it could be a great little recorder.

I'm not trying to be a salesperson for Korg here, i do not work for Korg, i am just passing along the info on my testing and evaluation of this product. I wanted to be part of this project because i think it is a very needed product in the pro audio world, and i myself want a product like this for the work i do.
That being said:
1. The MR1000 will run on AC or 8AA alkaline or rechargeable batteries.
2. There dones not seem to be a logical reason to be able to do those conversions inside the MR1000. Once you record something, you still need to transfer it to a computer, at that point you can use the included Audiogate software to convert it to anything you want (except MP3..use iTunes or something)
3. you can record at 16bit/44.1k wave on the MR1000, it will ship with a 40gig hard drive.

[bluecouchstudio]

yes, the MR-1 is similar to the MR-1000. but the MR-1 only records at 1-bit/2.8 Mhz, whereas the MR-1000 records up to 1-bit/5.6 Mhz. also, while both have balanced inputs, only the MR-1000 has balanced outputs. the MR-1 only has a stereo unbalanced out, a major flaw in my opinion. i wish you could have the smaller recorder AND the balanced outs, but i guess that's incentive to spend more $$ and get the nicer MR-1000. here's a link to Korg's website for more info.

http://www.korg.com/gear/info.asp?a_...&category_id=3

[Sinewave]

Originally Posted by PMoshay

What i've done so far sounds really fantastic , but if i am playing back from the MR-1000, i can't record back to it at the same time.

I will not be able to master a SACD at my studio as i do not have a Sonoma system, i can only do PCM. I am hoping that soon we will have a more affordable system for SACD mastering. I would love for Koji and the Waseda Team to make one for us.

Yes but what do you think about the quality of the Audiogate conversions ?