In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
Going to a concert soon and I wnat to make a recording of it

I am told DAT recorders are the way to go.

You could probably just use a cassette given recording from the
audience is going to be useless anyway.

Nothing like a bit of encouragement from a professional is there Dave
:-)))

Heh heh. I'd have thought you'd have been against bootleg recordings too?

--
*If they arrest the Energizer Bunny, would they charge it with battery? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article , Iain M Churches
writes

"mo" wrote in message
...
Hi
Going to a concert soon and I wnat to make a recording of it

I am told DAT recorders are the way to go.

I dont own one myself, any ideas if its possible to rent them and where
from? I am located in Southampton.

Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to make CDs out of the
music captured?
DATs are used extensively for stereo concert recording.
You could probably hire one.


If you have no local rental
company you could telephone the sound supervisor
at your local radio station.

What's one of those in a local waydio station ;?....

--
Tony Sayer

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
Going to a concert soon and I wnat to make a recording of it

I am told DAT recorders are the way to go.

You could probably just use a cassette given recording from the
audience is going to be useless anyway.

Nothing like a bit of encouragement from a professional is there Dave
:-)))

Heh heh. I'd have thought you'd have been against bootleg recordings too?

Indeed I am.- See my other post in this same thread,
and my mention of the BPI.

If the OP gets permission to make this recording, and copyright clearance,
then it does not constitute a bootleg.

Iain

mo wrote:

Going to a concert soon and I wnat to make a recording of
it

I am told DAT recorders are the way to go.

It once was. DAT is now an obsolete format.

DAT has been replaced by any number of flash memory and hard
drive based recorders.

I dont own one myself, any ideas if its possible to rent
them and
where from? I am located in Southampton.

Search google for "audio equipment rentals".

Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to
make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or dying.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to
make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or dying.

Every DAT recorder has an S/PDIF output. Most good DAT
recorders have an AES/EBU output connector.
Ditto sound cards.
Interconnection is simple.

Iain

Iain M Churches wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to
make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or dying.

Every DAT recorder has an S/PDIF output.

I'll take your word for that. I suspect there have been some
portables that lacked digital outputs.

Most good DAT
recorders have an AES/EBU output connector.

Certainly not many of the portables. Many of them have only
optical outputs.

Ditto sound cards.

Only the better sound cards have digital inputs that don't
resample. Many of the cheap ones are just plain ornery to
work with. For example, some sound cards have been very
picky about digital formats and refused to recognize the
digital outputs of some recorders.

Interconnection is simple.

Not nearly as simple, reliable or fast as downloading from a
digital recorder. For openers, all the DAT machines I've
looked at or used transfer files in real time. Digital
recorders transfer files in fractions of real time,
fractions like 1/3, 1/5, 1/10...

Even CD recorders transfer files faster than DAT machines,
because at least you can rip CDs in maybe 1/7 of real time.

In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or dying.

Every DAT recorder has an S/PDIF output. Most good DAT
recorders have an AES/EBU output connector.
Ditto sound cards.
Interconnection is simple.

Yehbut a DAT can only download in real time. Modern HD based systems can
do it very much faster.

--
*Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
Iain M Churches wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to
make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or dying.

Every DAT recorder has an S/PDIF output.

I'll take your word for that. I suspect there have been some
portables that lacked digital outputs.

Most good DAT
recorders have an AES/EBU output connector.

Certainly not many of the portables. Many of them have only
optical outputs.

Prof machines have. Maybe that, and the 300% markup
is what puts them in that category:-)



Ditto sound cards.

Only the better sound cards have digital inputs that don't
resample. Many of the cheap ones are just plain ornery to
work with. For example, some sound cards have been very
picky about digital formats and refused to recognize the
digital outputs of some recorders.

Every DAW I have ever seen will accept any format, digi,
or analogue balanced or unbalanced. Even computer sound
cards (EMU etc) have balanced analogue connectors these
days.


Interconnection is simple.

Not nearly as simple, reliable or fast as downloading from a
digital recorder. For openers, all the DAT machines I've
looked at or used transfer files in real time. Digital
recorders transfer files in fractions of real time,
fractions like 1/3, 1/5, 1/10...

Even CD recorders transfer files faster than DAT machines,
because at least you can rip CDs in maybe 1/7 of real time.

That's true. I usually listen to the initial transfer, and make
or check my editing notes. During the transfer one can also
mark "on the fly" the edit points so they are ready and
waiting when you start your edit. On a HS transfer
this would not be possible. So the time is not wasted
by any means.

Iain

Iain M Churches wrote:
"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Even CD recorders transfer files faster than DAT
machines,
because at least you can rip CDs in maybe 1/7 of real
time.

That's true. I usually listen to the initial transfer, and
make
or check my editing notes.

Since it usually happens in 1/7 of real time or less with a
CD recorder, hard drive recorder or Flash-based recorder,
there's barely time for a trip to the john or a cup of
liquid refreshment.

During the transfer one can also
mark "on the fly" the edit points so they are ready and
waiting when you start your edit.

I often do my opening round of edits based on visual cues,
minimal listening required.

On a HS transfer this would not be possible.

Nor, would it be necessary.

So the time is not wasted by any means.

Sure it was. I do what few real-time transfers are left
while I'm doing something else.

There's no comparision between the reliability of hard drive
and flash-based recorders to DAT. There's a lot to be said
for no moving parts, or at least factory-sealed moving
parts.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
Also how difficult are they to connect to computers to
make CDs out
of the music captured?

Reasonably hard to do right. Unecesarily time-consuming.
Just one of many reasons the DAT format is dead or
dying.

Every DAT recorder has an S/PDIF output. Most good DAT
recorders have an AES/EBU output connector.
Ditto sound cards.
Interconnection is simple.

Yehbut a DAT can only download in real time. Modern HD
based systems
can do it very much faster.

Methinks that Ian either has time to burn, or has never been
there and done that.