| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buying a mini-discPlease note that the review below was written in 2002, and is now out of date. It is unlikely that you will now find these two recorders in the shops as newer models have taken their place. However, the basic differences between Sharp and Sony models remain - Sharps tend to have better facilities for adjusting the recording volume manually, and Sony have better editing facilities. The links and information at the bottom of the page are still valid. For more information about minidiscs, the future of recording devices, and the issue of archiving compressed formats, http://www.minidisc.org is the place to go. The EMOHA Portable Mini-Disc Comparison: The Sharp MT877 and the Sony MZ-R900Investing money in new equipment is always fraught with anxieties about whether you have bought the best or most appropriate unit. Members of EMOHA currently own or use both Sharp and Sony mini-disc recorders and, having been through the effort of researching, buying, and using these machines, we thought we would share our experiences and conclusions. As oral historians we are more interested in recording speech than music, and having listened to both units I'm going to take it as read that they both have excellent sound quality for playback and recording. Reading other reviews, it may be that the Sharp has slightly better bass response for music, but for recording speech I don't think there is much difference. Both recorders feature MDLP - Mini Disc Long Play - which means that you can get up to 148 minutes of acceptable quality speech (and considerably more at an unacceptable quality) recorded on a standard 74 minutes minidisc. This is very useful for interviewers, and if you are looking for a minidisc recorder it is something to bear in mind. Both units come with small, rather bad headphones, and remote controls which plug into the recorder. The remote display is viewed from the left of the lead on the Sharp, while the Sony is viewed from the right - one is upside down compared to the other. I find all these remotes so fiddly I tend not to use them, and I can't say which display orientation is better. Both units seem so fragile that if you sat on them I'm sure they would break (so don't sit on them). As will be explained below, the Sony has more features than the Sharp, and some of these are useful.
The Sharp's main advantage over the Sony is the ease of manually setting the recording levels, although interviewers might find an automatic recording level (which the Sharp doesn't have) useful. However, the track marking facilities of the Sony are excellent, and I think this is important for interviewers, especially the ability to insert track markers at the touch of a button during playback. So, of the two models above, I would say that for oral historians the Sony MZ-R900 is the better bet, and generally this is true of the Sony range of models. I would add though, that if you are buying a mini disc recorder to record live music I would probably go for a Sharp, as the ability to set recording levels quickly, and retain these levels, is more important than it is in an interviewing situation. You can also get useful information from the following links: http://www.minidisc.org and http://www.minidisc.org/equipment_browser.html - if you go nowhere else, try this site for reviews of anything mini-disc related. The ecoustics.com review page has brief reviews of many models. There is a 'chatroom' to do with recording on the h:oral website. Go to http://www2.h-net.msu.edu/logsearch/ , limit the search to h-oralhist, and search for 'Recording'. If you have any comments on the above, or if you would like to review any recording equipment from an interviewer's perspective, please contact us. Home>>Training>>Equipment>>Mini |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||