why are some recorders [ d.a.w. or otherwise ] have better sound quality than others

jonlarkster

New member
Hello , just want to know what the technical nomenclature is - i`m assuming it has to do with the conversion of analogue to digital and vice versa . is there more ? it would seem to me that would be the most important quality in a recording set up . Thanks
 
If there is a difference, the biggest source would be how they are used, rather than the technology itself.

Most contemporary analog to digital converters are pretty good and yield comparable results, and the DAW simply uses these, not itself having a significant impact on quality (if any).

To get a noticeable difference you would need to look at the very cheaply made ADC inbuilt into many computers.
 
that`s interesting because i was using a roland vs. 1880 digital recorder with neuman TLM -193 with avalon pre- amp as well as other decent quality pre amps and mics at other times - my accordion as well as my acoustic guitar always sounded a little rough , however using garage band with apollo twin interface and a Mojave ma-200 and just throwing a the mike up with default settings and quickly recording made those insruments sound so much more professional and smoother so my conclusion is that it`s the recording device [ garage band ]
that made the diff.
 
I would think the biggest variation would be:

a) microphones (transducers vary a lot)
b) difference in the analog portion (pre-amps etc. can be/are voiced as desired)
c) AD-DA converters (most recent ones have become really good)
d) Recording device/program (should be little or no difference. Storing 1s and 0s is pretty well black and white)
 
i was using a roland vs. 1880 digital recorder

Some of the Roland VS series used compressed recordings which would affect the sound quality slightly. If you hear a sound quality difference it is always worth checking all your settings because the difference should be minimal these days if you are using uncompressed and unprocessed audio.
 
Back
Top