Personal View site logo
JuicedLink Little DARling recorder
  • 57 Replies sorted by
  • MikeLinnMikeLinn

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Juicedlink offers significant discount if you're buying 2 or more, and the discount increases with quantity. Details on their site

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    I think the 16 db will cover even very loud yelling.

  • DouglasHornDouglasHorn

    I can see where this could be a real advantage over wireless in some situations. And it is a nicer form factor. But since it's not possible to ride levels, the extra headroom of 24/48 would be better. Normally, you set the levels a bit low on a bodypack in case the talent yells. Maybe the 16dB pad covers that.

  • 4CardsMan4CardsMan

    I've been waiting all this time. No XLR input?

  • IronFilmIronFilm

    HillTop, get the Aspen lav.

    http://aspenmics.com/products/hq-se

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    I'm partial to the Tram TR50.

  • Brian_SianoBrian_Siano

    This comes out just a month after I could have really used it. Drat. But, it looks like exactly what I want from a wearable recorder. I'll buy on, at least.

  • HillTop1HillTop1

    What will be the best mics to use with this especially as it has the lock in 3.5mm jack on the mic input hole.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Cool - looks good with upgraded version for slating. Thanks for posting. Price is right.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Recorder is finally available at

    http://www.juicedlink.com/collections/audio-recorders

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @Ralph_B

    Cool, thing is it have very little to do with your point, as sane people do not do it.

    Set proper levels, after this get the numbers I mentioned and also, if you wish, make tests.

  • Ralph_BRalph_B

    LOL, you don't need math. Just take the time to do a simple test. This assumes you have a decent quality audio recoder. Record your voice at a level of -60 to -70 db. Make two recordings, one at 16bit 48k and one at 24bit 48k. Take the recordings into your favorite editor and add 40 to 45 db of gain to both. Listen to the result.

    I've done this test and the 16bit recording is significantly noisier than the 24bit.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Granted you don't have 24 bits of real information, but you probably have 20 (and certainly 18), and that can make a difference.

    As it is "not true". Please provide all noise levels values, speech dynamic range and show with math in how many useless bits it will result.

    As I said, Robert had video explaining this.

  • Ralph_BRalph_B

    This is not true. 24/48 has a distinct advantage over 16/48 for recording dialog, namely the ability to lift low level signals in post without loss in quality. It's the audio equivalent of lifting the shadows in video. The more bits, the more you can lift low level signals without 'banding' appearing. Granted you don't have 24 bits of real information, but you probably have 20 (and certainly 18), and that can make a difference.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @matt_gh2

    Your test will be pointless. Even if you set levels to fully utility all available bits noise in all stages (background, mike and ADC) will eat all least significant bits of 24bit. So, it is not about that is better.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    I somehow came to believe 24/48 is noticeably better than 16/48 for dialogue, but now that you and Robert Rozak say that's false, I need to create some recordings with both settings and take the Pepsi challenge (blind test). I've created very nice dialogue with 16/48 years ago, so maybe I'm wrong on 16 v 24.

    All in all, sounds like this could be a killer product.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Only thing I dont like is 16/48. I could live with 24/48, but would prefer 24/96.

    24/96 is fully pointless. 24/48 is also mostly pointless for the task as it is made for voice recording.
    It is just pure background noise, mikes self noise and ADC properties. You can check back Robert Rozak videos concerning more complete reasons.

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Very cool. JuicedLink representative says $200-240 and coming out this summer. A lot of good features on this. I'll be getting this and testing for next project as soon as it hits. Only thing I dont like is 16/48. I could live with 24/48, but would prefer 24/96.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

  • matt_gh2matt_gh2

    Good review-thanks. B&H has it listed as August availability. No price yet.

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    Check good preview from NAB by B&H

  • MirrorManMirrorMan

    This could be a really handy device. When he says "sprinkle a few of these around" and compares it to the Zoom, he makes it sound affordable. You can of course charge a bit more for a "Pro" device, but with loads of good budget options around he needs to be competitive for the small producer market.

    Several things I'm curious about... Will it record only in mono or in 2 channels for stereo? Any remote recorder should be able to record stereo. Battery life is critical. The small Sony PCM-M10 can go for 5+ hours, has a good preamp, built-in mics etc and can be had for $220

  • Vitaliy_KiselevVitaliy_Kiselev

    @zcream

    I think it was referenced at PV, do not remember where (I mean single padding cable), and also can be found at google.

Add a Comment