Definitely works a charm so long as you use exact recommended cards. Had exact card but in 32GB version, but had irregular skips in audio tracks. Once I sourced the proper 16GB cards, I've had success with these on every shoot since (several dozen) syncing with scratch/reference tracks from various cameras.

OK, well, I am just reporting my experience, and I consider it just as reliable as this Juicedlink with it's horrible UI, Sennheiser G3 radio mics which have died on me in the past, and even a Sound Devices 302 mixer that ruined my sound on one film. I would use RodeRec and iPhone for any number of professional situations. Is it a Zaxcom or Lectrosonics radio? No way, but it's incredibly reliable and good results audio for very little money. I'm happy to have a different perspective to you though.

OK, well it's never been an issue for me in over 50 shoot days. Duck tape would add some security, but it's not required.

Added my post about Zaxcom

http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/15867/zaxcom-and-why-patents-must-go-to-hell-with-capitalism-as-company

I can't see the significant advantage of this little Darlink thing at all.

For DIY little thing it can be ok, but no for any serious situation.

Especially I mean here non locking flimsy 3.5mm connector on phone.

Problem with this recorder is Zaxcom patents that do not allow to make it really top notch. I'll try to make post on it.

This way I can wire four people and start stop the audio while operating the camera. The Tascam does not have this feature.

Any reason for all this start-stopping? It is big point of failure as you need two way connection to get clear response that all recorders started.

Finally some review of this weird thing

Sadly I see this thing:

Some argue that 24-bit recording is necessary, but Robert Rozak from JuicedLink argues that it's overkill. I personally don't mind recording at 16-bit for the pure efficiency it allows, both in terms of battery life and write times. Robert Rozak lays out this reasoning in the manual:

"Acknowledging that marketing of audio recorders has pushed higher sample rates on consumers, we base this specification on the Meyer/Moran paper published by the Audio Engineering Society that demonstrates that humans can not perceive the difference between CD quality (16b/44.1KHz) and higher bit rates (such as what is used with SACD or DVD-A). As an example, even the highest quality lav microphone (which may, at best, provide 70dB SNR for a lav with an unrealistically high 1Pa signal input) can not come close to utilizing the 144dB of dynamic range from even an ideal 24bit A/D, and is serviced with plenty of margin by 16bits."

It is true, but it is words juggling as not applicable to recording. Very strange to see this from Robert. As clearly source of restriction is LSI he uses for recording.

http://nofilmschool.com/2016/02/review-juicedlink-little-darling-distributed-audio-recorder

In other words - go and get small Tascam.

Maybe email Robert at JuicedLink - maybe he'll cut you a deal

What if it had the ability to record three simultaneous tracks and different dB levels? That'd reduce the need for adjusting levels, and wouldn't require a complex interface. Wouldn't need a Wifi circuit eating up the power, either. All I'd need after that is an indicator of how much power is left. (I'd probably just switch the things on, do a hand-clap clapper board for syncing, and let'em run all day with 32 gig cards.)

Good point about UI, but does anyone know of similar product available that does the same thing (very small recorder, with simultaneously recording backup track at lower db level)?

Oh no! That user interface is ridiculous. Actually, hats off to him for making what is probably a perfectly serviceable UI from very inexpensive parts (once you get used to it) but I just can't imagine using these now. It's just too kludgey. It would be hard to have any confidence in it when you have to make fast decisions and actions.