ifp-899 pre purchase doubts

[haryo]

Can anyone make me feel better about buying an ifp-899 since I'm concerned about the various issues appearing on these forums; white noise and other unwanted noises being the most concerning to me. I assume any piece of electronics will have a percentage of failures/problems but I wonder if the various things people are posting about are within normal limits? Or whether the 800 series is, in all honesty, a bit buggy. I intend to use the voice recording and external mic recording functions often for recording lectures I will be giving, and I'd like quiet recordings. Although no one has mentioned it, I wondered if the 800 series, which is so functionally similar to the 700 series was developed to address some of the 700 series complaints (but of course never billed as such). Thanks

[wulfrun]

Originally Posted by haryo

Can anyone make me feel better about buying an ifp-899 since I'm concerned about the various issues appearing on these forums; white noise and other unwanted noises being the most concerning to me. I assume any piece of electronics will have a percentage of failures/problems but I wonder if the various things people are posting about are within normal limits? Or whether the 800 series is, in all honesty, a bit buggy. I intend to use the voice recording and external mic recording functions often for recording lectures I will be giving, and I'd like quiet recordings. Although no one has mentioned it, I wondered if the 800 series, which is so functionally similar to the 700 series was developed to address some of the 700 series complaints (but of course never billed as such). Thanks

The 7xx and 8xx series differ only in layout & design, they are identical electrically AFAIK. I have an 899 and am completely happy with it.

Remember, people posting problems in here are a small minority of owners and, as you say, there will be a percentage of failures in any product. The IFP players aren't perfect but I think they come out well compared to the competition. In terms of features and sound quality they're hard to beat!

Regarding the white noise issues, it seems to affect the 7xx series of a certain age, presumably a batch with quality problems. I find there's a *tiny* bit of white noise on my 899 but it's only audible when the player is on "stop". When it's playing or you're on the move it's totally inaudible, you need high quality headphones and a quiet room to hear it in the first place.

I have only made a few recordings via the mic since it's not really a feature I need but what I have done seems fine within the expectations of a small portable unit in less than ideal circumstances. To record lectures, where hi-fi isn't needed, I can't see it disappointing you.

Hope that eases your fears!

[haryo]

Thanks, it certainly helps.

[x2mars]

Originally Posted by haryo

Thanks, it certainly helps.

The 899 is a great recorder. I use a pair of binaural mics into the line in and it makes excellent recordings. The built in mic also works well. The radio record feature is really well set up. For recording at this size and cost, it can't be beat.

However, when i transfer a recording to my mac, it gets a nasty click sound at the beginning.

[haryo]

Originally Posted by x2mars

The 899 is a great recorder. I use a pair of binaural mics into the line in and it makes excellent recordings. The built in mic also works well. The radio record feature is really well set up. For recording at this size and cost, it can't be beat.

However, when i transfer a recording to my mac, it gets a nasty click sound at the beginning.

Thanks. For mono voice recording on an external mic, what are the minimum mp3 parameters to use to not get audio oddities? Thanks for the feedback.

[wulfrun]

Originally Posted by haryo

Thanks. For mono voice recording on an external mic, what are the minimum mp3 parameters to use to not get audio oddities? Thanks for the feedback.

The settings you need are based on two things - the quality you want and what you're recording. There's no guarantee never to get "oddities" though.

The sample rate determines the highest frequencies it's possible to encode, with the maximum being half the sample rate. For voice that means about 16kHz sample rate will be more than enough. If you need speech to be intelligible rater than perfect, even 8kHz is enough. For music you will want more but I believe iRiver puts a 16kHz filter on recordings anyway, meaning that anything over 32kHz sampling is wasted, the same being true for tuner and line-in recordings. Saying that, there's a good case on high-quality recordings for using 44.1kHz just for compatability issues with PC sound cards and CDs, if you intend to transfer recordings to WAV and CD afterwards.

As for bit-rate, that's for you to decide based on acceptable quality. Roughly speaking I'd suggest at least twice the sample rate but you really need to do some tests to see what you think is good enough.

Rough guides, based on my own experience, would be:

Voice with built-in mic: 8Khz/32kbit for "good enough" or 16kHz/96kbit for "pretty accurate"
Tuner: 32 or 44.1kHz/128kbit
Line-in (from CD or whatever): 32 or 44.1kHz/160-256kbit
If you're paranoid just use much higher settings, but you will mostly just be wasting data!

[haryo]

As far as the sample rate is concerned, does the main -or only-effect have just to do with frequenct response? Can the practical effect of a lowered sample rate be viewed as a brick wall high frequency filter, or are there other side effects? Thanks

[wulfrun]

Originally Posted by haryo

As far as the sample rate is concerned, does the main -or only-effect have just to do with frequenct response? Can the practical effect of a lowered sample rate be viewed as a brick wall high frequency filter, or are there other side effects? Thanks

The sample-rate determines the highest frquency that can possibly be encoded. It's based on theory (Nyquist's to be exact) so in reality there are other factors that may reduce it further, like built-in filters in the encoder. If iRiver includes a 16kHz low-pass filter, for instance, then there's no need to use sample-rates over 32kHz for quality purposes.

As I said, there may be compatibility reasons to use 44.1kHz though. If you wanted to restrict frequency response deliberately, then sample-rate could be used to give a "brick wall" effect provided there's a suitable setting available. Side effects are really down to the encoder and the choice of bit-rate.

It's well worth taking the trouble to understand the settings available and try some test recordings with known-quality material. On a flash player you don't want to waste space with files that are bigger than they need to be, but neither do you want poor quality tracks, so there's a compromise to be made.