how would you compare this to the ULTRASONIC RECORD CLEANER MODEL V-8
1751916
Thanks for your question. They are both fantastic machines that clean records in a way that is immediately sonically apparent. This is a fantastic machine. World Wide Stereo is 35 years old and a very proud Music Hall dealer.
2023902
I'll be able to do a direct comparison soon, as I've got a PX312 coming in, after purchasing the VN-302PC. The specs and features are very nearly clones of each other, but I've found that the Olympus lacks some rather basic abilities that the Sony covers, such as a means of moving files between the 5 folders for organization. Also, the files recorded on the internal memory can't be moved over to the external memory card through the recorder; though it's easy enough to do when connected to a PC. It shows up as two separate drives on the PC, and the files remain uniquely named whether recorded on internal or external memory, so it's a simple matter to just copy them over. (If they reused file numbers on int vs ext memory then there would be an added complication of renaming before copying). I'd rather that the file names included the timestamp, like some other recorders do, but neither of these do that. Record quality of the Olympus is fine, so if the Sony does just as well, the Sony has more comprehensive features. The file erase process is better on the Sony as well, because it plays back the recording you're about to erase for confirmation before recording. With the Olympus you have to stop the playback on the target file first and be careful that it didn't advance to the next file, and watch the screen for the sequence of prompts to follow through with the delete process. I think the Sony method for deleting is better because it can be initiated while the target file is playing, and the playback of the recording as confirmation has less potential for inadvertently deleting the wrong recording. I believe the Sony also retains the time for at least a minute during battery changes, while the Olympus loses an hour or two and needs to be reset. It's not very significant since the batteries last so long, but so far, all the pros have been on the Sony side. When I get the Sony in hand I'll see if it actually performs as well as the Olympus
636030
I'm sure either one will do a pretty good job for you. Fwiw, I purchased the Epson v500 for the simple reason that it has ICE Technology which does an absolutely amazing job of cleaning all sorts of debris/artifacts/dust et al from both slides and negatives. The hours I've saved not having to hand manipulate each image are numerous to say the least. This was the second time I've had to scan my full slide collection after the first set (over 500) was wiped out by a virus. This time was MUCH easier w/ the V500. Also, the quality of the scan improved a great degree so maybe the virus was a blessing in disguise afterall :-) Btw, I had no problem whatsoever setting it up on my Dell Vista OS. YMMV ... Cheers and good luck !
1846548
The VL-a110u is a Sharp 8mm video recorder. I have a Sony TRV37 8mm video recorder and I use the Sony V8-25CLH Head Cleaning Cassette with satisfaction. As the 8mm is a standard format I do not see why this head cleaner should not work on the Sharp 8mm video recorder.
1065938
It's not exactly like the Tascam 4 track, but still very easy to use and the recording quality is miles better. Go ahead and get one.
1353270
No your built in sound will be fine. The amp and software will clean everything up. Getting pops and clicks out of vinyl is a little tricky as it can make the recording sound muddy. Otherwise the amp worked great for me.
279319
Roomba cleans much better but costs more. I have run them side by side (Roomba 650 next to the MR6550) and for picking up dog hair and dirt the Roomba does a noticeably better job. Same with paper shreddings.
961818
I happen to own both models... They both sound tlhe same at reference levels, however the egged one is better for music.
1073696
Steve, the recording quality was very bad and we ended up returning the unit. My older sister has an immense album collection we want to convert but we are still looking for a good quality converter and have yet to find one. This has been some years now since we started looking. good luckmc
1006097
yes that's what I use. I'll be honest it took me almost a month to figure out. but once I did I love the software. Don't expect it to cut the tracks in the right spot. I always erase their tracks and put them back in the right spot. I do that by finding track listings on wiki, iTunes, amazon, or a site called discogs and write down the track times. It takes a little work. but I haven't found a software yet that cuts the tracks right automatically granted Ive only tried a few. So if you go for it be patient. I don't ever tinker with any of the effects so not sure how good they are. Like echo and crap like that. I just go for a good clean transfer. It does work good for that. In my opion. I did however buy an old turntable for just listening. One with pitch control and the adjustable counterweight and all that kind of fancy stuff. How bout that for an answer. Peace. Hit me up if you got mo questions. I don't mind talkin about records and record players.
537780
The dirt and grit seems to congregate at the bottom of the vat pretty quickly and the water appears clean during most of the process. The deep cleaning is really done in the brushes anyway, the water just keeps them flushed. That being said, depending on how dirty the records are, I usually don't clean more than 20 or so at a time, but if I have a lot to do I will let the water sit for a few hours (sometimes over night) and let the full amount of dirt settle to the bottom, add some more cleaner and water and then spin clean another 20. This process seems to work well for me.
730382
Quite honestly, I bought an Olay one from CVS in between my 2 Clairsonics. The difference was the speed of the cleaner head & the Olay didn't feel as if it was, 'cleaning as deeply'. My skin truly felt cleaner after the Clairsonic and it is made very well.
1637446
I believe the sounds quality features are different as well, though I could be wrong, on Kenwood's website there is comparison thing though if I recall correctly
1251094
Glad to have helped, David. A little background on why I bought this. I'm embarking on the biggest free-lance writing project of my life: The history of University of Nebraska at Omaha hockey. I have an antique recorder that uses the mini-cassettes, but they last a maximum of 30 minutes per side. Some of my interviews already have exceeded an hour, so I use the digital recorder as a backup. The quality of the digital recorder is far superior to the old recorder. My final suggestion for you once you get it: Familiarize yourself with all the features to get the best use from it. Happy Holidays!
1909675
i have to agree with bruce ditto and find out how old the turntable is maybe get a newer one from amazon get the one thats direct drive because belt driven tends to break down the road and the belts can be hard to come by unless you order some ahead good luck and get yourself an eq with that hk youll discover whole new sound
1797016
This machine is able to clean both 7" and 12" records. Obviously, you'll need to use your spindle adaptor for the 45's. It's a great cleaner.
537778
I cleaned 25 of my oldest lp's with no problem. If yours are loaded with grime or mold you might have to change it sooner. Most folks get up to 50 records cleaned in one sitting. Use a good micro-fiber cloth to dry.