Edirol R-09 WAVE/MP3 Recorder, Black Reviews

• Much better than the competition

  
  By A1GQGYROVZVW49 on 2006-06-14
  I previously wrote an Amazon review of the main competition for the Edirol R-09 digital recorder, namely the m-Audio "Microtrack". In that review, I noted some serious reservations that I had with the Microtrack. Since that time, further experience with m-Audio and the Microtrack soured me on that company and that product, but Amazon does not allow a person to modify their reviews. I don't want to go in to the details here, but I will say that I decided the Microtrack was barely worth bothering with, and I ordered the Edirol R-09.
  
  The R-09 is obviously targeted as a 'Microtrack killer', and in most ways Edirol has come through on all counts. In my limited experience with this very recently released product, I have yet to find any firmware bugs or disappointing functionality or performance (whereas my m-Audio's most recent firmware revision for the Microtrack, as of this writing, is still buggier than a bait shop, and shows no sign of really getting fixed properly).
  
  The R-09 is for all practical purposes the same shirt-pocket size as the Microtrack. Where the MT used a very simple operator's interface, the R-09 instead uses something more like a conventional CD player/MP3 player/tape player interface that requires no user's manual to instantly feel comfortable with. You have the basic 4-way navigation pad that is either up/down/left/right or play-pause/stop/'rewind'/'fast forward', plus a central button that is either 'Enter' or 'Record'.
  
  The R-09 has a tiny little LCD display, smaller than the MT, but it is superior in every way. It has all the information you caould ask for, very good level (VU) meters that actually work and respond well, elapses time, time remaining on memory card, track name, record/playback status, peak memory, special effect mode, etc. It is a monochrome LCD of high resolution and high contrast, with a bright (and adjustable) backlight. Although you need to hold the display close to your face to read it, once there everything is clear and legible.
  
  To make sure that you know when the R-09 is recording, the Record button lights up with a large and bright red LED, and this can be seen from across the room. The LCD's level meters include peak indicatiors, but the R-09 also has a bright green LED above the keypad that lights when you have reached 0 headroom; this is handy when you are recording yourself, maybe in your own band or orchestra, and want to glance over to make sure the recording is OK....red light on, green light off, and all is well.
  
  The R-09 takes two normal AA batteries, which can be alkalines or rechargeables. The R-09 will record or play for hours on a normal pair of batteries, and you can change them out any time. Compare this with the MT, which has a non-replaceable rechargeable battery inside; if it runs out during a session, you are in trouble, since m-Audio recommends against powered the MT from the charger while turned on. The R-09 has a menu selection for type of battery, and uses this information to properly estimate the remaining battery life for its display indicator. If you set this incorrectly, the unit will still work but the battery display will be inaccurate.
  
  The R-09 has a decent set of mics built in, and the preamp has a Low/High selector switch that is accessible directly without going through the menu screen. This would be set to Low for most music recording, and High for capturing meetings and outdoor samples. The R-09 does not have balanced inputs like the MT, but has instead one mic and one line input jack, each using the common 1/8" diameter phone style connector. Via the menu, you can decide whether the mic jack supplies so-called 'plug-in-power' for the external mic. Many small stereo mics intended for camcorders and computers require the 'plug-in-power' to operate.
  
  The R-09 does not have S/PDIF input or output (the MT has only input), but the intended market for this unit would most likely never use such a signal anyway. There is a single output jack, also and 1/8" stereo phone type, and it can be used for three purposes: headphones, line output, or digital output. I am not familiar with the protocol used for the digital output, but the manual suggests that some powered speakers, etc; use this type of plug and signal.
  
  The R-09, like the MT, has a USB plug and a memory card slot. Unlike the MT, the R-09 hides these behind a sliding door on the bottom of the unit. The USB is capable of higher speeds than the USB on the MT, although you will still find it easier to remove the memory card and plug it into your computer's flash card reader for downloading.
  
  The R-09 uses the 'SD' type flash memory card, as compared with the MT's use of the Compact Flash card. Both types are readily available and inexpensive. You can get a 2GB SD card for less than $50, and this will store 3 hours of 44.1kHz/16 bit PCM coded audio in WAV file format (i.e. CD quality).
  
  For playback, the R-09 has a nice little digital reverb option with five choices: large hall, medium hall, room, plate, off. This works well and sounds quite good; a nice way to sweeten the recorded sound.
  
  For recording, the R-09 has an automatic gain control (AGC) which quietly prevents clipping if the recording level is set too high for the music loudness. Normally you would not use this, and would turn it off, but sometime it can be a life saver. A big improvement of the R-09 over the MT is that the recording level can be turned all the way down to 0, meaning that both gain and attenuation are available as required by the input signal levels. One thing missing is that the R-09 cannot set the left and right channels to different levels, something the MT is able to do.
  
  Setting the record level is down with a pair of up/down buttons on the left side of the R-09, rather like a cell phone volume control. The current setting is displayed on the LCD. Similarly, the playback level is adjusted with a pair of buttons on the right side of the unit. A minor annoyance is that the R-09 levels are set with a terranced/stepped internal circuit, which makes a very quiet click each time you ramp from one level to the next. This is useful, as you can hear the amount of change, but it is something you will hear in the recording. Best to set levels before starting the real recording, or use the AGC if you will not be able to set levels ahead of time.
  
  For almost every application, I would recommend the R-09 over the competing Microtrack. I would only consider the MT now if I needed S/PDIF interface or the ability to set different left and right levels.
  
  

• Edirol R-09 Review Comparisons 24/96, Marantz PMD 660

  
  By A1NFNDHSBZN611 on 2006-06-12
  The Edirol R-09, the long awaited closest successor to the Sony M1 type of DAT recorder, arrived. The entry of small portable DAT recorders was a boon to people wanting a small, quiet, high fidelity, audio recorder that was easy to use, and had long run times. To some the M1 was limited by not having balanced mic inputs. There have now been a succession of non-mechanical recorders using flash media and I own and use three of them. The R-09 is a joy, like the M1
  
  The unit is smaller than the M1, a little fatter than a deck of playing cards. It shipped from Full Compass in a typical small product box and when I opened it, and moved through various items, I thought they have forgot to include the recorder. But it was sitting there wrapped inconspicuously at the bottom. The cables, and power supply take up much more space. The owner's manual had a cover sheet warning about how to install the batteries, something that was also talked about in the detailed user guide. Opening the recorder to install batteries is its one Achille's heel and requires caution to not force it open. The mechanics are unusual, you slide the cover half way to get at the USB and SD card, and then have to slide a lock in the right direction to have the door pivot to open up the battery bay. Be careful here. It takes 2 AA's just like the M1 and 2500 NiMH's will power it for a very long time. I've run it for 9 hours recording with those.
  
  The recorder has more familiar buttons and controls than it's closest competitor, the m-audio Microtrack 24/96 which is only slightly longer. The R-09 screen is small, almost junky, but it is bright and easy to read, with strong black and white letters. Without looking at the manual, you can program the date, and details with one hand. There are two built-in microphones which work very well. The Microtrack lacks internal microphones, and a T-microphone is supplied which is quite good but it is more of a hassle to use the recorder that way because it sticks out and if you wanted to just put the recorder in a pocket and record yourself, there will be much more rubbing noise. I've put the R-09 into a shirt pocket and recorded events very well without much body noise using the internal mics which sound very clean.
  
  Unlike the rotating wheel for recording levels on the M1, there are two buttons to set the level and these appear to function like true gain controls, which are different from the 24/96 where level setting goes by three steps (only two for plug in power) with some adjustment within them. The m-audio sets right and left channels independently or they can be ganged, a feature lacking on the R-09. The Marantz PMD-660 has true concentric wheels to set recording levels, sort of like the Sony TC-D5M cassette recorder that I loved using. There is no limiter feature, but tbe automatic gain control on the Edirol works well for mic input, and does not function for line level input. There is a high-low mic sensitivity slide switch. The recording level meters appear to actually depict recording levels, unlike the m-audio. There is a peak indicator for clipping and in my limited experimenting with peak levels, the signal doesn't degrade as much as I expected. So recording is fun.
  
  The unit has plug-in power with adequate voltage to power my Sonic Studios DSM-6S, something the m-audio can't do, and requires an external power supply for that mic. There are no balanced mic inputs with phantom power as the Microtrack and Marantz have. The Microtrack only provides about 30 volts but that is adequate to run my mics. The Marantz has XLR connectors, the Microtrack 1/4 inch TRS jacks require adaptor cables. The PMD 660 has no plug-in power, about the only limitation it has for my usage.
  
  So recording is a joy with the R-09. The display shows recording time left, and time as well as whether plug-in power is on. All units have a hold switch, slides on the m-audio and Edirol, and requiring to push two buttons simultaneously on the PMD-660. While recording, there is a red oval light surrounding the record button indicating the status, whereas on the Marantz, indication is similarly clear from a red diode that either flashes for standby or is continuous when recording. The Marantz has true mono recording, that is recording time available is twice that in stereo. the m-audio has a mono-mode but it records two channels simultaneously and you can't have longer recording times as would be useful for meetings that last weeks.
  
  The Edirol records 16 and 24 bit, at 44.1 and 48 kHz sampling, as well as mp3 from 320 kbps down to 64 kbps. The Marantz for mp3 has only 128 kbps or 64 for mono. The Microtrack goes down to 96. The lower transfer rates are useful for recording non-critical voice, hence my reason for going into detail here. I find one can send lengthy (1-2 hour) voice files over the internet when compressed by software to 24 kbps. It is a great way for sharing lectures and discussions.
  
  There is digital output by Toslink through the headphone jack on the R-09, and no digital input, something others might find a problem. The 24/96 has SPDIF digital in and out through a phono jack. The Edirol has USB 2.0 connectability to a computer, as does the 24/96 while the Marantz has only 1.1 and you require the unit to have the AC power connected to transfer or download directly to the computer. I get around this with a CF card reader. There is no other digital in or out for the Marantz.
  
  I really like the Edirol so far. My only concern is the battery door. It is great having replaceable AA batteries to power it. This a feature lacking in the microtrack which has a built-in lithium ion battery and when power levels drop, you can connect an external USB device with 4 AA's to power it, but this is complicated and cumbersome. The display is smaller on the Edirol but is much more readable than the bigger one on the 24/96. It is more fussy to run the buttons on the 24/96 and the slider switches are more easy to move by mistake with unrecoverable consequences, while the Edirol has smaller slide switches whose position is more difficult to change by accident.
  
  Names of audio files can be edited in the Edirol, and not in the other two recorders. Both the R-09 and Marantz provide considerable information about the files on their screens, while this is limited in the 24/96.
  
  If compactness doesn't matter, the Marantz PMD 660 is my favorite because it has features not available in the smaller units. These include the ability to edit files that have been recorded, that is to make smaller ones and merge several. Battery life from 4 AA's is remarkable, and the unit feels rugged. It has built in speakers which the other two lack, and you can monitor recording through them as well as with headphones. During a recording a point can be marked making it easy to return there during review, a useful feature for interviews. There is a remote recording control to start and stop recording as well as place marks, a very valuable feature in many situations.
  
  The Microtrack 24/96 has much higher sampling rates than the other two, a feature that doesn't matter to me and it has balanced mic inputs as well as digital I/O. But I had to get 4 units replaced because of production problems and the one I have now still isn't right. Other reviews haven't mentioned such problems. It took a number of firmware upgrades to get the functions to work as depicted in the manual. I feel least confident with the battery that will require eventual replacement, a costly process.
  
  The Roland R-09 is compact, featured, easy to use and may become the one I use the most. It is becoming accessorized to get with the iPod mania, so there is a carrying case with a tripod on the way as well as a microphone stand adaptor to put the unit in its case on a stand to use it as a complete microphone-recorder combo. We are blessed with good recorders to choose from.
  
  

• So close, sooo very close!

  
  By A3OJ57BA3ZLJSN on 2006-10-27
  Hi! Last month I purchased a R09 unit and I don't regret it. BUT, although the price-level and ability-level is somewhat right, the build-quality is NOT!
  
  The R09 plusses are:
  The best feature is its small handy size: The R09 is all about a satisfying recording quality (low added hiss and a very sensitive pair of microphones!) and a fantastic recording duration with a (extra!) 2GB SD card. Wide range of recording modes(MP3 WAV), but some rates may not be compatible with other equipment, so check out your digital file chain first. I also appreciate that it runs on just two cheap AA batteries!
  
  A strange observation: This unit could fit four (4) batteries WITHOUT changing the size and external looks! There is room for four (4 x AA) batteries because the space next to the two AA batteries is EMPTY! Well, apart from the power-plug socket (on one side) that could easily be relocated. With a good sized SD-card memory, the batteries are the limiting time-factor (only to about four hours of continuos field recording), and that is very unfortunate. Four AA batteries would also add some welcome weight to this flimsy-feely, non-mechanical recording device. Lucky me, I found a 25 year old SONY-walkman back-up battery-box (D-size x 2!)that just needed a smaller plug to fit the R-09. Great, because now I can record for a full days lectures independently of a power socket. This SONY-box takes less room and the unit remains portable, and I got my four batteries! (2xD+2xAA=4)
  
  The R09 negatives are a few:
  The quality control is lacking and build-quality is "cheap & plastic" for this price-point, and the two excellent onboard microphones (my reason for getting the R09) are able to pick up rattle-noise from the loose (no kidding!!!) main control-switch.
  I suspect someone on the assembly line forgot to drop in a soft spongy washer (like in other gadgets) for that nice professional finger-feel. If you ever so gently shake the R09, it rattles, yes the R09 rattles my friends!!!! So much for the benefits of total silence from a non-existent tape transport...
  
  It has a tiny little info-screen, so bring strong glasses if your eyes have more then 33 years usage and you find much to see. Forget the pathetic "sound-sweetener" (reverb) that only work on the headphone socket streaming that is only sweet (useful?) if the R09 is used as an iPod with pre-recorded music!
  
  Weird feature on a dedicated recording tool! "Ouch man, foocryingoutloud, it did not sound flat like this during my sound check, huuw?"
  
  The many R09 connectors are all over the unit, so if you attach external power, headphones and an external source, the R09 looks like its crucified. It would be lovely if all connection was on the top of the unit, and only up there, thank you! Then you could even find/make a usable and nice protective "R09 overcoat". Now the R09 gets twice its original circumference with all those nessesary plugs connected.
  
  Missing R09 features:
  Worst gripe I have is that this baby lacks a "file-splitting" feature. Dividing existing files can be a extremely useful and space saving feature, if you (say) have a long lead-in silence to a piano recording that should be lopped off. After a finished recording (when still fresh in you mind...) you are able to immediately chop up the file in relevant sections and delete what is useless.
  I also find the lack of a "sound activated rec-function" disappointing when considering the R09 ability to cover a very long lecture/talk, unfortunately now with every long and empty sound breaks.
  
  How sweet it would be if it had a 2-3 second continuos recording buffer, and a "sound trigger" (auto & manual) that included the "pre-buffer" in the recording!
  
  The missing camera-style tripod screw-attachment is a another oversight on this "all-in-one" field unit.
  
  Also, my thumb desperately searches for a depression or a "rubbery area" for a sweet grip, but the R09 feels like holding an expensive shiny Chinese snuff-bottle - you can't help wonder how much it will cost you if it slips out of your grasp. So, you look for a sling inside the R09 box, but none is to be found! I got a typical camera wrist-sling in a camera store (at a whopping $7.00) and attached to the spot between the microphone and the line-in plug. Another bizarre EDIROL omission!
  
  Final comments:
  Next EDIROL R09 must not have a SD-memory slot limited (why?!) to only 2GB, or it may just as well be packed with a 2GB internal fixed memory, or (better) both. At least the meny "move" function would then make sense.
  
  Next Edirol (wait for it if you can!) probably will be smaller and cheaper, maybe dressed in a new "friction grip" body and wrist sling packed, file-split ability, camera screw so it cane be rigged to s tripod (even a flash-shoe for a good external mono zoom-microphone!)
  
  Next I would love a file-function like easy file-splitting, thank you very much!
  
  
  

• Edirol R-09 vs Zoom H4

  
  By A3SDJ70H00OQCJ on 2006-11-03
  Just after ordering the Edirol R-09, the Zoom H4 came out, which promised even more features at $100 less. I ordered Zoom H4, too. The Zoom went back and the Edirol stayed, despite the premium cost.
  
  The Zoom has a huge variety of features that the Edirol lacks. The Zoom may even sound the slightest bit better (more open, slightly better high end) when both are used to record with their built in mics. However, this functionality comes with a price--a much more complicated interface.
  
  The Zoom does everything. It records directly to wav and mp3. It's a 4 track recording studio. It serves as computer interface for your guitar. It serves as an effects box. It can emulate four different types of microphones, such as the Shure SM57 and the AKG C414. It's even got a built-in metronome and tuner!
  
  In order to do all this, the Zoom H4's buttons and controls must necessarily be multi-function. On top of that, it adds a jog dial (like the wheel on a mouse: slide in either direction to change menu choices, push to select the current choice). It is necessary to go two levels deep in the menus to set recording levels manually. The Edirol R-09's interface is so simple and intuitive that many could use it without even looking at the manual. Since all I was looking for was a recorder, the Edirol was the easy choice for me.
  
  The Edirol is quite rightly criticized for how awkward it is to insert and remove batteries. In theory, it's a lot easier to do with the Zoom H4. In practice, I found it just as awkward. I found the SD card much harder to swap out of the Zoom H4 than out of the Edirol R-09.
  
  The Edirol R-09 has four very small rubber buttons on the back. They're too small to notice until someone bumps the surface the recorder is sitting on and the unit doesn't move! The Zoom unit has one rubber button on the back but it didn't seem to grip much.
  
  As the side-by-side photo I uploaded shows, the Zoom H4 is a bit larger than the Edirol R-09. I did not find the H4 so much larger as to be a burden. I did find the Edirol's screen easier to read, however!
  
  A Zoom plus: The Zoom has a true automatic gain control, where the Edirol's is a compressor circuit. The Zoom prevents clipping at high volume where the Edirol boosts low volumes without guarding against clipping.
  
  A Zoom minus: Both devices have level meters. The Zoom has no peak indicator that I could find. The Edirol, in addition to its meters, has an impossible-to-miss LED that blinks when the unit peaks. This makes it very easy to adjust levels properly by using Up and Down buttons on the side of the unit, which can be done even while recording.
  
  One final comment that won't mean much except to other die-hard MiniDisc users like me who stuck with the MiniDisc despite its shortcomings because its fidelity is so good. The Edirol R-09 is the unit that got me to finally abandon the MiniDisc!!!
  
  

• A great musician's tool

  
  By A2UMUCRHEZ19PE on 2006-08-07
  I'm not going to post a self-contained, really in-depth review describing all the features, specs, and quirks of this unit, since there are enough of those out there already. I just want to step back and talk a little about how it serves my needs as a musician, and address some of the concerns I've read in other reviews.
  
  First - I'm a professional jazz musician, and I like to record some of my gigs. I had been using a portable Tascam/Teac DA-P20 DAT recorder that had XLR inputs. It worked well enough, but the battery had long ago died, meaning I had to use AC power, and transfer of the music to my computer meant hooking up audio cables and basically re-recording in real time, as I have no digital input on my PC. It was enough of a hassle that I only did this for "special" gigs. I could have looked at finding a replacement battery, getting a digital I/O interface for my PC, and continuing to use the DAT. But still, between having to set up the mics and having to run the transfer in real time even if using digital transfer, I started to get curious about the new generation of portable recorders. And then, my DAT started to go on the blink, which kind of sealed the deal.
  
  BTW, I also have used my DAT using the line inputs for more "studio" type recording, using more microphones and a mixer and sending the results to the DAT. No complaints about the performance of my DAT there; I'd just want another portable recorder to do as well.
  
  So far, I've brought the R-09 with me to four gigs. Instantly, I am *hugely* impressed. Considering how *easy* it is to record with this thing - turn it on, press the record button (twice), set it down, and you're off - it really produces remarkable recordings. I'm not ready to say they are *as* good as the ones I made with my DAT and my two semi-professional mics carefully set up in front of the band, but they aren't *obviously* much worse, either. Actually, in some ways, I'm pretty sure they are better - setting up the recorder right on the bandstand rather than 10 or 20 feet in front as I generally had to with the DAT setup gives more presence to the piano sound, and allows me to affect the "mix" somewhat in my positioning of the recorder. Unless I decide to figure out my DAT issues, I won't be able to do a real A-B test, but I'm not feeling the need. I'm perfectly happy with what I'm hearing even using the built-in mics, and am confident that if I did set up my mixer and other mics, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
  
  Transfer to the computer is, of course, also *enormously* streamlined compared to the DAT - stick the SD card in my card reader and copy the WAV files.
  
  Between the ease of *making* the recording, and ease of *processing* the recordings, I can see I'm going use this thing a lot more than I ever did my DAT, and have no doubts that before long, I'll have enough usable material to release a live recording. I'll have no qualms about using this recorder for that purpose - even using just the built-in mics, which produce recordings that sound far better than many other live albums I own, and don't sound noticeably worse than even the better ones.
  
  Remember, I'm a musician, not a sound engineer, so I have no doubt that there is more noise in these preamps than in a truly professional system. But still, we're not talking cheap cassette recorder levels of noise, or even four-track hi-speed cassette recorder with dbx - we're talking more than a recording professional might be accustomed to. But note that any noise going to be most noticeable in controlled tests, not in live music situations, where the ambient noise often easily masks recorder-created noise. Note there is a mic sensitivity switch on the back of the R-09. I would definitely recommend experimenting with this as well as the record levels to reasonably "hot" record levels for the situation, so that any noise you do get on the recording isn't amplified excessively during later audio processing such as normalization. If recording a solo acoustic instrument in an otherwise silent environment, you would definitely want to consider external mics and a mixer with better preamps if you're planning on a commercial release, but even in that type of recording situation, the built-in mics would be fine for producing demos or even CD-R's to sell at gigs.
  
  I'm also sure that "real" mics have better frequency response and less distortion than the built-in mics here do. And of course, you're welcome to use them, with an external mixer or dedicated preamp. You might also want to check out a plug-in powered external stereo mic, although given that you'd still be using the built-in preamps and hence probably no less noise than the built-in mics, I'm skeptical this would be enough improvement to be worth the expense and trouble. Again, as a professional musician, I'm quite pleasantly surprised by the sound one gets right out of the box.
  
  Now, of course, what I'm saying could potentially be said about any of the comparable units, so don't my comment as saying that the R-09 is clearly *better* than the Microtrack, Hi-MD recorders, or whatever else you might be considering. I will say that everything I'm hearing leads me to believe the actual difference in recording quality is minimal, and the differences will have more to do with usability concerns.
  
  So, let's talk about usabilty. I have used a portable DAT and have already mentioned the convenience factor. I'd also say the controls on the R-09 are somewhat easier to deal with than those on my DAT were, but either could be called simple. I'd contrast this with the Sony Hi-MD. Unless your music is so uniform in dynamics that you don't mind using the default automatic gain control, setting levels on the Hi-MD is a cruel joke, and having to *reset* them every time you stop the recorder and restart it is, well, it's hard to believe anyone would market such a device for anything resembling professional use.
  
  I haven't used the Microtrack, so I can't directly compare ease of use, but I'm really nervous about that proprietary battery, especially given my experience with my DAT. AA's *rule*. I am finding a set of 2 NiMH's will last me at least full 4 hours of recording, and actually, it will go 6 or more hours if I let it. Actually, even though I've set the option to tell the recorder I'm using NiMH's, it starts flashing the "Battery Low" warning after just 2-3 hours, but it's lying - it really will continue recording for several hours more.
  
  The lack of a true built-in mic on the Microtrack is a *slight* disadvantage. I mean, how hard is it to plug in the little mic it comes with, and I'm sure it's roughly comaprable to the R-09 mic in quality. Still, it's one less thing to deal with on the R-09. Lack of phantom power or balanced mic inputs doesn't concern me about the R-09: if I'm going to the trouble of setting up "real" mics, it's not much more trouble - and it's almost certainly going to be far more effective - to set up a mixer too.
  
  The one thing other recorders have that I wish the R-09 had was the ability to divide up a track after recording. It's not as big a deal if you've got enough SD cards to simply record everything and deal with it later, but if space is tight, being able to go through on a set break and delete an individual song you know you won't want to hear - or even just a long bit of nothing you accidentally recorded - would be great. Also, having individual trakcs right there on the recorder makes playback easier if you want to hear a specific tune right after the gig and don't want to have to fast-forward or rewind through the whole show. As it is, you'd have to be stopping and restarting the recorder during the recording to have individual tracks. If the recorder is in easy reach, this is simple enough, but why have to depend on that.
  
  Others have raised the issue of build quality. I wanted to see the thing with my own eyes before buying, and these are still (early August 2006) in very short supply, so it took a while to find one, but when I did, my concerns were mostly alleviated. It doesn't feel any cheaper than other small electronic device I've owned. And while that battery door is indeed an odd design that seems unnecessarily fiddly, it doesn't really seem in danger of imminent breakage. Given that the Microtrack fares no better, and the actual moving parts in the Hi-MD make me far more nervous about long term reliability issues, I didn't find this a cause for concern.
  
  Bottom line:
  
  If you're looking for soemthing to record your own gigs, this unit, with its built-in mics, will do the job extremely well - well enough that it's really hard to justify paying much more for any marginal improvement you'd get. For my purposes, the R-09 does just what it needs to do and does so affordably enough that I could easily justify it. And frankly, the small size will mean I use it in situations where I'd be unlikely to use anything bigger. Meaning I'll be more likely to capture the really special moments. So I can honestly say I believe I'm going to be able to create a better live recording with this recorder than I would with anything else currently out there.
  
  
  
• STOP. Read this before you buy. This unit is NOT for the recording pro.
  By ALNLJZ2FCMSE1 on 2006-07-30
  I have spent the past month working with the M-Audio MicroTrack and exchanged it last week for the R-09. I run an audio mastering suite (i.e. Pro Tools, Waves Plugs etc.) and needed something portable for my son (an up and coming jazz musician) as my current "portable" system is the Roland VS2000CD. I needed something portable to take to the nightclubs my son performs at and record everything from small jazz combos to Big Band. We use these recordings to analyze his improvisation technique and arranging, etc. Anyhow - I am not happy with the R-09. I wanted batteries (hence the switch from M-Audio) but the mic is too noisy for my aural taste. When I bring the files into PEAK and begin using my WAVES plug-ins on my Tannoy Monitors the noise is annoying. This noise is coming from the internal mics. I DO NOT want to use an external mic. It's not cool to sit in a club with that kind of set-up - I need to be somewhat discreet. Anyhow, I have settled on the Edirol R-1. Why? It is quiet...very quiet. Plus, I really like the mastering effect...it is really quite good with two band compression...I've spent big bucks on plugs that don't sound as good! Yes, it is not SEXY and yes it is a little BULKY...but damn the sound is great...best of all with the R-09's out these baby's are selling cheap. I picked mine up for $299 and used the remaining $100 to buy a large CF card. (I trust CF more than SD by the way!)...If you want sex and sleek but aren't too critical of the audio definitely go with the R-09 BUT if it's all about the sound then find a R-1 - this unit was the bomb last year by the way and it has been tried and tested. The R-09 needs some revamping...maybe with the next batch they'll fix the mic noise. Good Luck finding your new toy!
  
  
• Excellent unit for field or stealth recording
  By A3UI6CTFWL721L on 2007-01-16
  I am a part-time musician and am always looking for something small and portable to record practices and concerts. For many years, I used a WMD3 Sony professional walkman but flipping the tape every 45 minutes was a pain.
  
  With the advent of digital technology, I got a Sharp mini-disc and found it to be very useful. The 80 minute discs were great and sound quality was quite good. Later, I got a Sony M1 professional DAT. It was very good, but I found the built-in mic preamps disappointing, despite getting the Oade modification. Recording time increased to 2 hours. The real drag now was transferring the recording in real-time to computer for conversion to .wav so that I could make CDs.
  
  I recently got the R09. It is small and very light, much lighter than my DAT. It uses SD cards. A 2GB SD card, costing $25, can record 3 hours of music at 44.1khz! It will also record straight to mp3 if you have a smaller card or need to conserve space. Best of all, there is no real-time transfer hassles. Just plug in a card reader and drag and drop the file on the computer. Awesome!
  
  Another nice thing about the R09 is that there are a variety of input options. There is a mic input and line input, and there is a lot of headroom on the input, making it difficult to overdrive it. There is a low cut filter to filter out rumble. The mic input uses 1/8" mini jacks and will supply plug-in power to mics just like the Sony WMD3 and PCM M1 do. The R09 also features built-in mics whose sensitivity can be adjusted (high or low). During a recent practice, I used the built-in mics and was pleasently surprised at the superb quality of the recording. The R09 gives me the option to use the built-in mics if I don't want to take my external mics.
  
  Some people have complained that the R09 will take only up to 2GB SD cards. This is not true any more. Roland recently released firmware 1.10 which allows the R09 to use the new SDHC (High Capacity) cards. There are very reasonable priced 4GB ($50) and 8GB ($100) cards available.
  
  The R09 is very easy to use as well. The interface is so intuitive that I made my first recording and played it back without ever having to look at the manual. The display is a bit small, espcially in this day and age, but perhaps Roland did it to conserve power. Because of the line-in, it is very easy now for me now to convert cassettes, minidiscs, or DATs to .wav without having to tie up my computer for hours on end. The ability to convert audio to .wav without a computer is very handy.
  
  In summary, the R09 marks a major paradigm shift in portable recording devices. It is now so easy to tape lectures, concerts, practices, just about anything and almost immediately have it available for burning to CD for playback. The Roland R1 and M-Audio Microtrack paved the way, but this is the unit that packs the needed features and ease of use at the right price point.
  
  Highly reccomended. If you shop around, you can get the R09 from an authorized dealer for less than $350, a bargain price when you consider what it allows you to do.
  
  
• Edirol R-09 vs Zoom H4
  By A3SDJ70H00OQCJ on 2006-11-03
  Just after ordering the Edirol R-09, the Zoom H4 came out, which promised even more features at $100 less. I ordered Zoom H4, too. The Zoom went back and the Edirol stayed, despite the premium cost.
  
  The Zoom has a huge variety of features that the Edirol lacks. The Zoom may even sound the slightest bit better (more open, slightly better high end) when both are used to record with their built in mics. However, this functionality comes with a price--a much more complicated interface.
  
  The Zoom does everything. It records directly to wav and mp3. It's a 4 track recording studio. It serves as computer interface for your guitar. It serves as an effects box. It can emulate four different types of microphones, such as the Shure SM57 and the AKG C414. It's even got a built-in metronome and tuner!
  
  In order to do all this, the Zoom H4's buttons and controls must necessarily be multi-function. On top of that, it adds a jog dial (like the wheel on a mouse: slide in either direction to change menu choices, push to select the current choice). It is necessary to go two levels deep in the menus to set recording levels manually. The Edirol R-09's interface is so simple and intuitive that many could use it without even looking at the manual. Since all I was looking for was a recorder, the Edirol was the easy choice for me.
  
  The Edirol is quite rightly criticized for how awkward it is to insert and remove batteries. In theory, it's a lot easier to do with the Zoom H4. In practice, I found it just as awkward. I found the SD card much harder to swap out of the Zoom H4 than out of the Edirol R-09.
  
  The Edirol R-09 has four very small rubber buttons on the back. They're too small to notice until someone bumps the surface the recorder is sitting on and the unit doesn't move! The Zoom unit has one rubber button on the back but it didn't seem to grip much.
  
  As the side-by-side photo I uploaded shows, the Zoom H4 is a bit larger than the Edirol R-09. I did not find the H4 so much larger as to be a burden. I did find the Edirol's screen easier to read, however!
  
  A Zoom plus: The Zoom has a true automatic gain control, where the Edirol's is a compressor circuit. The Zoom prevents clipping at high volume where the Edirol boosts low volumes without guarding against clipping.
  
  A Zoom minus: Both devices have level meters. The Zoom has no peak indicator that I could find. The Edirol, in addition to its meters, has an impossible-to-miss LED that blinks when the unit peaks. This makes it very easy to adjust levels properly by using Up and Down buttons on the side of the unit, which can be done even while recording.
  
  One final comment that won't mean much except to other die-hard MiniDisc users like me who stuck with the MiniDisc despite its shortcomings because its fidelity is so good. The Edirol R-09 is the unit that got me to finally abandon the MiniDisc!!!
  
  
• Ease-of-Recording Happiness at Last
  By A1609RYNGS531T on 2007-02-22
  As amateur musicians, my better half and I use this to record workshops, rehearsals, jam sessions, etc. Over the years we've fiddled with minidisk recorders and an iRiver T-30 as well as various flash recorders, cassette recorders, etc ... and all I've wanted the whole time is to SIMPLY RECORD MP3 AUDIO AND TRANSFER IT TO MY MAC WITHOUT FUSS.
  
  I still don't know why it has to be so daggoned unusual or expensive to want to record compressed audio ... but anyway. The R-09 is my happy answer. It's heads and shoulders above the rest in terms of audio quality and ease of use. I have a Mac, he has Windows ... the R-09 doesn't care. Just transfer the files over, doubleclick on them, and whoopee! They're opened in iTunes and I'm done except for typing in new file names.
  
  It also records in wav and uncompressed formats, but for my purposes the mp3 mode is fine. My only two complaints are with the battery/USB access door design on the bottom of the thing -- it's so clever it's stupid -- and the rather steep price, but I guess that's what it took. At least it works, and works wonderfully.
  
  It's also easy to use; I figured it out without the manual and even got everything set up in about 5 minutes of button-pushing. Plus, recording is brilliantly simple; reminds me of the old cassete days -- push the big button in the middle and it flashes red (standby); push it again, and you're recording.
  
  So it's perfect for a half-blind and impatient middle-aged person like me. :-D
  
  Oh, one more note: go ahead and spring for the 2GB card or whatever (that's what I'm shopping for right now); the included 64 MB card only buys you about an hour and a half recording time -- even at a low signal rate and fully compressed audio.
  
  But overall, it's great. At long last, simple recording and transfer regardless of operating system. Thank you, Roland!
  
  
• Balancing with some negatives
  By A2BUD0H1I5JDZR on 2007-01-08
  I like it a lot. But amid all the raves (most of which I agree with), I think some of the negatives get lost. So let me focus only on the negatives, for balance (notice I did give the item 4 stars)
  
  1. handling noise with built-in mics (better set it down on a table, or else hold from bottom and DON'T MOVE)
  
  2. wind noise with built-in mics (should have used better wind screens)
  
  3. goes thru batteries like crazy (maybe there's something wrong with my deck, but it gets nowhere the rated battery length)
  
  4. flimsy construction (the body of this thing is obviously cheap, thin plastic - and even the metal part is just about foil-like. A friend who's an audio pro tried to attach a mic pre-amp using velcro tape, and when he pulled off the tape, the whole body came off with it).
  
  5. very flimsy construction of battery cover (opening the cover inolves a really crappy, finicky, plasticky procedure, and while mine hasn't broken yet, it will soon, I'm sure of it, because this thing eats batteries so fast. Worse, you need to remove battery cover to retrieve memory card)
  
  6. display is unreadable in bright light
  
  7. display is small and poorly conceived (small little icons...I want a nice big clear level, not all this tiny, fuzzy, unreadable crap)
  
  
• Great - all but the case
  By AMOD812ZS8CK2 on 2006-07-28
  What's inside the case works great, and the product is easy to use.
  
  The only real criticism I have of this product shouldn't affect anyone's buying decision if you're looking for a compact, easy to use, good little sound recorder with great features. Hence 4 stars, not 5.
  
  This review has two purposes: a warning to the user, and a strong suggestion to the manufacturer to revise the case design.
  The first time I pulled the DC power plug out of the unit, the Edirol flew apart in my hands, sending two small plastic pieces flying in different directions. It took my clever wife a half hour to put the unit back together again.
  
  Caution: pull out the DC plug slowly, gently, and carefully!
  
  Really, Edirol, you have to fix this. There are a lot of examples out there of robust case design for little electronic devices like this one. This product is way too good to be marred by such a bad case design.
  
  
• Not too shabby, but not quite pro-quality, either.
  By A29QJP360TTQJJ on 2007-04-27
  In terms of consumer audio, the R-09 has a lot lot going for it. It is astonishingly handy and easy to use. Learning it "on the go" is a breeze, thanks to its terrifically intuitive menu structure. The backlit display is clean, responsive, and well-designed. It's light as a feather (although not very rugged) and handsome. Battery life is wonderful (it runs forever on two AAs). And, for most purposes, the quality is excellent, with a decent range of recording options (WAV or various levels of MP3).
  
  My primary problem with it is very particular and would likely affect about 0.0001% of its potential user base. I am a digital archivist working with (among other things) shortwave radio broadcasts, and I need a recorder that has more thorough optoisolation. On the shortwave bands, it spits out an unholy amount of hash and grind which makes my work completely impossible.
  
  The built-in stereo mic has a fairly poor signal-to-noise ratio: fair enough for informal, dictaphone-style use, but you'll definitely want to invest in an outboard mic tailored to your particular situation(s). It easily allows for distinction between a mono and stereo mic with a simple switch on the back of the unit, and has similar switches for high/low gain and AGC (automatic gain control). There are separate line and mic inputs on the top of the unit.
  
  If you're planning on using the recording in any covert situations (not that I endorse that sort of thing... *cough*), the bright-red RECORD button will be a dead giveaway, and there's no particularly easy way to circumvent it without hijacking or defacing the unit.
  
  The R-09 comes with a 64MB SD memory card. With the firmware upgrade, it can take up to a 4GB SDHC card (the non-upgraded unit tops out at 2GB); I've heard reports of folks trying 8GB, but I didn't push my luck there. File management is a piece of cake. You can pull files off of the unit by plugging it in directly via USB (much like a digital camera) or by removing the SD card and using an external card reader of your choice. One strange ergonomic decision is the battery compartment; you have to wrangle with a rather delicate locked plastic mechanism (overzealous users may break it right off) to release the batteries.
  
  For your average sound-recordist and amateur aural chronicler, this is a great little unit. For higher-end folks aiming to cut corners from, say, the Marantz PMD670, you really get what you pay for.
  
  
• What you hear is what you get!
  By AJ91LE7BG59CC on 2007-10-04
  I purchased my Roland/Edirol R-09 a little less than a week ago. As usual, Amazon was flawless in the execution of my order and it arrived just in time for me to road test it during a rehearsal session. I selected the R-09 over offerings from M-Audio, Korg, Marantz, and Sony. My decision was based on reviews on Amazon and the "right mix" of features that I wanted: Standard AA batteries, up to 48 kHz/24bit recording quality, portability, SD memory card, ease of use and manufacturer's reputation. For my use, which is recording live music played on a wide variety of acoustic, acoustic-electric, and electronic instruments, the R-09 seemed to be the best fit.
  
  I also ordered the carrying case/tripod package and both arrived at my office before lunch. I decided to give the R-09 a whirl at lunch. Some of the reviews mentioned a problematic battery/memory card door so I was careful and I read the quick start guide. Once you know the secret of the little slider button and the dual action of the compartment door, it really works quite well. With two fresh AA batteries (not supplied) installed, and the 512K MB memory card in place, I was ready to go in just a few minutes. I had been warned to expect a somewhat less-than-sturdy package, but the R-09 is well-designed and up to current electronic manufacturing standards. The unit is very light, which may account for the impression that some may have that it is cheaply-made in comparison to its price tag.
  
  During my lunch hour, with my office door closed, I recorded a simple rhythm on my Ovation (unplugged). With the R-09 near the suggested neck position, I found that the "high" setting on the mic gain switch provided the best levels. Setting recording levels is very simple and the peak indicator keeps you out of trouble. Even though I used the default 44 kHz/ 16 bit recording setting, I was astounded by the quality of the sound on playback! Tonal balance was lifelike and the detail was truly amazing. Overall, even at this "medium" quality setting, the playback in Sony enclosed-type headphones, or my Altec Lansing monitors, was beyond what I expected.
  
  Emboldened by my initial test, I took the R-09 to rehearsal that night. Instrumentation for the rehearsal road test included several acoustic and acoustic electric guitars, two guitar amplifiers, live vocals, Digitech(tm) Vocalist® vocal harmonies, and digital playback from a Digitech(tm) Jam Man® loop box. I placed the R-09 on the knuckle of my mic's boom stand using a previously-owned flexible claw-type tripod inserted into the receptacle on the R-09's optional case. The manual suggests placing the unit in the center of a rehearsal group. Amps we placed at seated head level and on the floor.
  
  Again, setting the sound level was surprisingly easy. I still used the high mic gain setting and found that the peak led meter kept me out of trouble. The flashing "record-armed" button was easy to see, and easy to distinguish, even by feel. We recorded eight tunes before we knew what hit us and the R-09 performed perfectly. The system menus are intuitive, simple, and not so deep that you get lost. The most common functions are easy to access; though renaming the resultant recording files is a little cumbersome. This is a minor inconvenience, however, since you will probably do most of your file management later on a PC. If you are recording at medium and higher resolutions, I definitely suggest springing for a 2GB SD card.
  
  At one point, an electrical storm interrupted our session and I grabbed the R-09 and headed for the back porch. I hit the record button, set the levels, and then recorded about six minutes of the storm. The playback, not to beat a dead horse, was truly amazing. The few peak LED spikes from nearby lightning strikes produce no audible distortion and the stereo separation between a downspout, close and distant thunder, and rain hitting a walkway was crisp and lifelike.
  
  After the rehearsal session, I copied the resulting files to my I-Pod® and also burned the files to a CD. In both cases, I simply inserted the SD card from the R-09 into my notebook PC rather than use the USB connection. Playback of the tunes, whether using the stereo output jack on the R-09, the CD in my truck, the I-Pod®, or I-Tunes© player over my PC monitors, revealed the closest thing I've ever heard to our live performances. Each playback method colored the sound as one would expect, but overall, I am thrilled with the sound quality, and that was a huge criterion for my purchase. I am a long-term Roland customer and the R-09 only further cements this relationship. Roland should coin the term WYHIWYG, or what you hear is what you get.
  
  Based on the sound quality, ease of use, and portability, I would highly recommend this unit to anyone who has similar requirements. I have a room full of other recording gear, but the R-09 is so simple to take along, set up, and use, that it will get the majority of my attention. You don't need to mic every instrument and struggle with the difference between what you are hearing in the room and what the microphones in your recording set up are hearing. To switch between cello, guitar, mandolin, keyboard, bass, dobro, banjo, harmonica, or any other instrument requires only that you do what you normally do. This is a major point for me; that you can create music the way that you would in a live context without getting sucked in to the vagaries of sound engineering. You don't have to manage two sound schemes; what sounds good in the room, and what sounds good in the ear of the recorder. With the R-09, they are the same.
  
  
  
• Great digital recorder
  By A1ST0GOXCZ16J8 on 2006-07-07
  I just sold my ED-R-1 and purchased the R-09.The R-1 was great but way to clunky.The new version is lightwieght and very small and a easy to handle.The menu was easy to use and nicely laid out.The R-1 had annoying wheel for menu selection.The new R-09 has tiny buttons for input level right on the side.This is a great 5 star digital recorder and a must buy.The only weakness and its minor is the battery compartment.You must use great care when inserting batteries and the SD.
  
  
• Can it get any better than this????
  By A19VYTD7W7S08O on 2006-09-04
  I have had my R09 for about 2 months. I record our Pastor's sermons every Sunday. I use the line-in directly out of the mixing board. I could not ask for a cleaner recording. I have been using 16 bit 44.1Khz and that requires about 1/2 gig of SD memory. I have a SanDisk Ultra II 1 gig SD and a Ridata 2 gig SD card. Both work equally as well. Play back is also very good. I just pop the SD card into my Dell laptop and it takes less that a minute to transfer 1 gig of audio. The AA batteries seem to last at least 4 hours. I have never had them die while recording. The little indicator gives you a lot of warning.
  
  Using the built-in microphones is OK. It does pick up a lot of extra noises in my application. I have not tried the R09 with external mics. I have used it like an iPod as well. You can put a lot of MP3 music on 2 gigs of memory.
  
  The only negative was mentioned in one of the pro audio reviews. The little cover for the batteries and SD card is a bit on the flimsy side. I am very careful with it. I would recommend it to anyone wanting first rate on the spot recordings. It sure beats using a laptop to record.
  
  
• Good sound, uncomplicated interface
  By A1SAQOTH6R5ZD4 on 2006-12-03
  I use the recorder for recording law lectures. The sound is very good, the recorder is good at capturing voice from distance. I had olympus ws-320 before and there is huge difference.
  
  The user interface is uncomplicated.
  
  The design is nice but not luxurious.
  
  This recorder also has important features as time/date stamping, naming folder and files and a very fast rewind function.
  
  Some reviews are critical of the battery door. Personally I think it is unusual but not impractical. In my opinion it is not a weak link. And it is certainly better than olympus ws-320.
  
  The recorder is bigger than most voice recorders. But the size should not scare anyone. The recorder is small enough.
  
  My only critical comment is the recording light. It is so bright. I wish edirol made a software upgrade that would enable me to turn it of. But it is not a big problem. I have solved the problem by covering it up with tape and paper.
  
  I am very satisfied with this recorder. I do not think there is a better recorder for my needs.
  
  
  
  
• Expensive, but awesome prooduct
  By A3SYL242OE72W6 on 2007-04-24
  I do occasional field recording of my children's plays, piano recitals and similar events. I like to record them for my own purposes like listening, burning CDs for friends & family, etc. I had for years been looking for a recording device that would be pocket-sized, run on batteries, be easy to use and sound great.
  
  SoI bought an Edirol R-09. It was about twice what I wanted to spend, but it's almost perfect. It is simple to use, stores files on SD cards, and transfers them to your computer via the SD card, fits in a pocket, has built-in stereo mics and sounds really, really good. On the down side, the battery door is a little flimsy and for almost $400 it should come with some type of protective cover, but those are quibbles. The battery door is still fine and I bought an $8 digital camera pouch at Wal-Mart that works great.
  
  One thing I would like to see changed is the bright red "record" light. While it's OK for some recordings, it's obvious and annoying in a darkened theater. There should be a setting to optionally turn it off or dim it for such purposes (like some camcorders have). As a workaround, a little piece of electrical tape over the light solves the problem.
  
  My first recording was of a college play. I had the unit in my shirt pocket with the mics barely sticking out. When I later sent a CD of the performance to several of the actors, they couldn't believe it was from a hand-held unit. A couple thought it was a professional recording.
  
  I've also used it for conferences. On the lowest-quality setting it records forever, and with SD cards now so cheap, storage is no longer an issue. Another thing... it doesn't say you can use lithium batteries in it, but I do, and they last forever. I still have the first set in there and I bought it almost a year ago, although I only do occasional recordings.
  
  Overall I like it a lot and definitely recommend buying it, particularly for recording field events where quality is important.
  
  UPDATE: 11.16.07 While recording a play a few weeks ago I dropped the unit and it broke. The case "cracked" or opened a little along the seam and the side control buttons got messed up. Damn! So I called Edirol to see about repair and they gave me a return authorization number and told me to send it back for an estimate. A week or two went by with no contact. And then day before yesterday I got a box from UPS with the repaired unit inside. No charge!
  
  Now that's good customer service! (But I still think they should include a light case or skin for protection, especially for a $400 product.)
  
  Overall, I reiterate my strong "buy" rating.
  
  
  
• Great recorder, but I suspect it was used...
  By A1VC5S5JC6KBAN on 2007-05-07
  This recorder is great. I purchased it to bootleg concerts because I go to about 30 shows a year. It does everything as advertised. However, you will need an external mic for stealthy concert recording. Built in mic is great too. I use it record myself playing the guitar and it produces amazingly clear recordings. Records phone calls on speakerphone very well too. I have a 4gb SDHD Card from QMemory in there. With that I can record like at least 4 hours in 16 bit wav. Great battery life too so far. A three hour concert barely puts a dent in some fresh rechargeables.
  
  The item I ordered "new" actually came in a used condition. The screen was all scratched up. But it worked fine and still does.
  
  
• Just got this -- some initial problems
  By A2D5FV57KXHFKN on 2006-07-06
  The R-09 recorded great for an hour, then I started having serious problems turning the power on and off. The screen would freeze, or the recorder simply wouldn't turn on. I downloaded the latest firmware update (if I'm using that word correctly), and that seems to have fixed the problem. Hopefully it won't recur.
  
  It's about the same size as a deck of cards, and about the same weight. You could easily stick it in the front pocket of your pants. Not having to plug in a microphone if you don't want to is great. The internal unidirectional mic sounds very good.
  
  The battery door does seem to be rather badly designed. You have to apply some force to open and close it, and it feels like it might break. You have to open the door not only to replace the batteries, but also to plug in the USB cable (though you only have to open it part way).
  
  Dumping audio files to my laptop over USB worked fine.
  
  
• Fantastic recorder
  By A24MMKO5SI037Y on 2006-07-30
  I am a musician and play in a band as well as perform a solo act using background music. This recorder makes excellent recordings with the external mikes or with the built-in mics. I record practices and performances. Recommend you get a 2 Gb SD card to maximize your storage capability. I have left the record on for whole practices and performances and ended up with .wav files as large as 1.8 Gb and still was able to download these large files to my computer. I then use WAVELAB to enhance, and extract each song from the the many in these large files and convert them to MP3's for emailing. Recommend you record using wav at 16/48. You get about 2.5 hours of recording time for a 1.8 Gb file. It's tiny size is very handy for recording on the go and the display is crystal clear. Some serious thought has gone into the controls and their placement. Even in dark venues I have no problem using the recorder. This has solved so many of my recording requirements. I wish I could have got one of these 20 years ago. Now I have several bulky recorders to sell.
  Bravo EDIROL.
  
  
• recommended w/ reservations
  By A2ZWIYED2LXWCB on 2006-11-22
  my use is to record our non-pro choral rehearsals and our own concerts. The sound quality is quite good and obviously better than that of DM-10 that I had been using, but not WAY better. choral recordings sound kind of muffled and the reverberation (not the add-on playback effect) sounds stronger than reality. Could be the effect of the omni mics, which pick up signals from all directions in our stone gothic church.
  
  Maybe I was expecting too much (r-9 costs 3 times as much),Compared with DM-10, the sound quality is definitely not the "night and day" difference I had hoped for. The mics are not as sensitive as I wish. For our 40-people rehearsals I am setting the gain at 20 on high gain at about 25' away. I could imagine if it is a really quiet concert (which is quite frequent for choral music) I might have to push the gain all the way to 30 max and still not be able to pick up the soft angelic soprano hum. Of course, with DM-10 I can't even control the gain and prevent clipping with AGC. This alone makes this a keeper.
  
  Overall, because of the AGC and incremental gain control, I am glad I purchased the unit.
  
  
• Great - BUT automatic gain control not good
  By AYDXJUSPKEJ87 on 2007-02-26
  I'm charmed with this little gem, which I will use mainly for taping meetings. But the advertised automatic gain control does not work as advertised. It does limit high intensity sounds so the recording doesn't overload, but it does not automatically boost low level sounds. Indeed as soon as you switch in automatic gain control, the microphone sensitivity is lowered so you are less likely to pick up softer sounds. It's still great in many other ways, but they would have better advertised the R-09 as having limiting circuits, not as automatic gain control....
  I thought at first that I had a defective unit, but Edirol tech support tells me this is the normal way the unit operates.
  
  
• Hissssssss not for quality music recording
  By AU6BBJ3GGR296 on 2007-07-17
  I read reviews. Listened to sound samples and decided to try this unit. I wanted to record live un-amped acoustic guitar and harmonica. It does a decent job as far as dynamics, especially with an external condenser mic, I use the Audio Technica AT822 - Stereo Microphone which you can buy for about $[...].
  
  I gave this only 2 stars because of the background noise which is hissing. You may not notice it on loud rock music. But whenever you come to a quite part or silent part of the recording the hiss is quite loud, defiantly noticeable, and to me it ruins the recording music wise. I tried the internal mic, and 3 externals all have the same hiss. You can turn the mic gain to low, but this just lowers the volume, and when played back and you turn volume up to a normal level the hiss is still there. I guess for $[...]+ you can't expect top quality pre-amp. But the company advertises this thing as recording "Crystal clear". My Sony Camcorder has better quality sound or at least no hiss. Also the sliding hinged battery door is awkward to open, and does not seem very sturdy.
  Note that I recorded at the highest quality setting in WAV format in a perfectly quite room.
  
  On the plus side, it is very small and easy to use. Great display and interface. OK for voice memos or meetings. Good for getting down quick song ideas. But if you want quality music without hiss you will have to pay more for a better product. I'm looking at the Marantz PMD 660, with upgraded pre-amp.[...].
  
  Good Luck,
  Jack
  
  
• Good sound and easy to use
  By A32IJMUC425GT8 on 2007-04-09
  I bought the Edirol for a quick and easy way to reocrd rehearsals and gigs. I'm a jazz musician and educator at a University so I have plenty of opportunites to record. I found the quality to be better than my old Sony mini disk recorder and the Sony is very good. As others have mentioned, it is super easy to use. I looked at the manual for about 10 minutes and was ready to use most of the features.
  
  I can record one of the jazz combos I coach and easily put up files of our rehearsal on the web for the students to critique. When I get home, it takes me less than a half hour to post several files on a web page-it's incredibly easy.
  
  Some reviewers have mentioned the flimsy battery door and I would agree somewhat. There is a separate sheet that gives instructions on how to open the battery door with a warning not to force it or damage may occur. I can't see the door breaking as long as one opens it according to the instructions.
  
  I haven't had the unit for very long, but I can't find any negatives so far. Sure you can get more flexibility and better sound with a hard disk recording system, mics and a laptop, but for a quick way to record with clean and accurate sound the Edirol R-09 is perfect.
  
  
• Throw away those mini-discs
  By A9BAUWMTY9H8M on 2007-07-16
  I'm a professional journalist, and I bought the R-09 to create podcasts, and to act as a voice recorder for interviewing.
  
  It works exactly as I expected, and the quality even on MP3 is great, although I always record using the uncompressed WAV format, edit, and only then compress to MP3 for uploading to a Web site.
  
  It's really useful when travelling, as it saves me lugging a mike and desktop stand around to create a weekly newsletter that I write and podcast. The interface is pretty intuitive - I needed only to skim the manual.
  
  The only criticism I'd have is that the battery/SD card cover is flimsy, and the catch is fiddly to open. I'm sure Roland, which makes the Edirol R-09, will be able to fix this for the next rev of the product. Other than that, I'd recommend it as a top-value product.
  
  
  
• Disappointed in that didn't save Very Important Audition Files & Edirol was indignant in helping!
  By A2A4C2V3YQP2CI on 2008-02-28
  I read so many rave and stellar reviews about the Edirol R-09 that I had to have it. Our recording needs are for my daughter who takes voice lessons and sees a vocal coach once a month or more when going out on auditions.
  
  We got the recorder and immediately skimmed the book to see if we had to do anything special before using it. It looked simple enough. I took out the 64 sd card and replaced it with a 2GB (which it said the machine could easily handle).
  
  We went off to a 90 minute audition prep and pressed the record button, and it said standby. Pressed it again, and it began recording. The numbers were increasing and by the end of the lesson it indicated a 91 minute recording. We got home to play it back, and nearly passed out. It had recorded only 5:55 in a .wav file. Both my daughter and I couldn't figure out what went wrong. So we chalked it up to perhaps OUR error even though my daughter is tech savvy and I worked in the computer field for 18 years.
  
  We tested it before returning for a 2nd audition prep by putting it in front of our stereo. We turned on a radio station, and set it to record. After 32 minutes, we stopped it and played it back. Another downside to the edirol, is that only one person can listen to the playback at a time by earphones. If you want others critiquing your performance, you must first import the file over to the computer, where it will show up, at least in our case, in the itunes library. Can be very frustrating especially on the road! So this is a major turnoff for us. The sound quality is great however.
  
  Okay, so we played back the radio recording and it was fine. It captured the 32 minutes. Off we went to the coach, and pressed record twice and watched it record for 60 minutes. Lo and behold, we went to play it back while we were there, and voila! NOTHING! We saw it record, and playback was a bust. Another hour of voice wasted.
  
  Got home, recorded 14 minutes of singing, oh, and by the way, each lesson we went to had brand new Duracell batteries in it so we wouldn't run out. Both times by the end of the lesson, the batteries were down low so it uses a lot of battery for 1-1.5 hour lessons.
  
  Here's a hint that we didn't know about until calling the Edirol people who have to be the nastiest in the business! When I called, I got a guy whose attitude was "well, why are you calling me with these problems? I don't know what YOU did wrong and I don't know what it could be because our units work fine". Whoa! I explained the situation and he had no solution. He saw I didn't lose my cool, and I asked to speak to someone WHO WOULD KNOW how to help me. He wouldn't put anyone else on and decided to try some things. I spoke about this last 14 minutes we recorded, and that right after that the battery low light came on, and we opened the bottom (which is tricky to do because it feels like it is going to break so be careful), and took the old (which only recorded a 1 hour lesson) batteries out, and put the new ones in. And the 14 minutes were gone! So he told me that you can never take the batteries out while you are recording or you will lose what you recorded. I didn't have time to look that up in the book, but I have to trust what he said. So you MUST power the machine off so you won't lose your recording.
  
  I think a simple "save recording" button would put my mind at ease. It's like typing a word document....save it every paragraph or two so you won't lose the document if the power goes down. Since there is no save button on the edirol, it absolutely makes me nuts that after both 90 and 60 minutes lessons, we had nothing to show (well after the 90 minute session, 5:55 was saved). I still don't know why it won't save the recordings that are long especially that I have a 2GB card in it.
  
  The rep did take me through some settings menu, that I couldn't replicate if I tried, since he went so fast, and he asked me what this and that setting was on (they were on the settings that the factory installed as I hadn't touched anything). He then told me to change something to mp3 and then said try that and see if it works. Now, that is not my idea of customer service. And there is nothing, at least that I could find, that would indicate i would have to go through a lot of menus to tape a long recording session.
  
  We haven't gone back for a voice lesson yet to see if being on mp3 is going to help. I am sending it back to the place I bought it in and they are happy to take it back - more than I can say about Edirol. Horrible company to deal with....just my opinion.
  
  The machine to us was a major disappointment.
  
  
• Edirol R-09 gives good value for your dollar
  By A364JJL7G9GIIX on 2007-04-10
  I bought this to use on video shoots as a backup when recording audio directly to camera and/or my mobile Protools rig. The A/D converters sound comparable to the onboard converters in my 002R. I'm talking dialog here, not music, so I'm not being ultra-critical, but I don't think you would be disappointed with the results. The onboard mics are good for foley work such as footsteps and ambience, and you can't beat the convenience when used in this capacity. (Watch out for wind noise, though). I also plugged in a pair of B&K's through a Sound Devices 302 mixer and was able to (of course) get a much wider stereo field. I also used it to record some lectures, and from inside a nylon mesh pocket of my shoulder bag I got an audible, intelligible results. Will also fit a shirt pocket. The unit now supports 4Gb memory, which gives several hours of recording capacity at 24/48. Battery life is quite good as well, and you can use Lithium, NiMH, or Alkaline. Intuitive user interface, not to deeply embedded with submenus. All in all, a great unit. Wish it had a SPDIF input.
  
  
• Useful firmware upgrade for R-09
  By A3SCGP82YIJ0W6 on 2007-07-30
  I posted this as a comment to the review by MD Weiskopf, but I wanted to make sure it's seen, so I'm reposting here. The latest R-09 firmware upgrade (1.20) allows you to link the red record indicator to a power-saving timer so that a few seconds after beginning a recording, the red light goes out completely, making the R-09 much more conducive to use in the kinds of covert situations this unit is most likely to be used for. I've used the R-09 with the internal mic and both the Sony ECM-MS907 and ECM-MS957 (too big; would love a "stealthier" black shotgun or "pencil" mic) stereo condenser mics and find there to be a definite problem with hiss, unfortunately. But for the money, I can't beat the size and convenience of the R-09 and have gladly retired my minidisc recorders. Hopefully, Roland/Edirol will tame the signal-to-noise issues in the future (though that doesn't help those of us who already have the unit). I'm not pleased about the noise floor, but otherwise I love the R-09.
  
  
• Edirol R-09 WAVE/MP3 Recorder
  By AFMDJGD8TDPVX on 2007-05-12
  Great product. Recieved in perfect cond.
  Great ease of use.
  Highly recommended
  
  
• A good try!
  By A299X7SO4KW6T5 on 2007-07-16
  The Edirol R-09 performs exactly as described. My only complaints are with the interface to the solid-state world. Much as the tried to make it not-so, the membrane switch is still very much in use here. When are we ever going to see toggles and potentiometers anymore? Call me old fashioned, but I like to hear the tactile feedback, and not in an uncomforting beep, but a satisfying clunk who's engagement one an be assured is in the position selected.
  
  Often, I missed a peformance, because the "flashing" red LED was on instead of the red LED. Chalk another up to inexperience. You see how the robots are quickly taking over.
  
  

• Sony MDR-V700DJ DJ Style Monitor Series Headphones
• Sony MDR-V600 Studio Monitor Series Headphones with Circum-Aural Earcup Design
• Sony MDR-V6 Monitor Series Headphones with CCAW Voice Coil
• Sennheiser HD600 Over-Ear Open Dynamic Hi-Fi Professional Stereo Headphones (Black)
• Plantronics DSP-400 Digitally-Enhanced USB Foldable Stereo Headset and Software

• Edirol Cover and Stand for the R-09
• SanDisk 2 GB SD Memory Card ( SDSDB-2048-A11, Retail Package)
• Edirol CS-15 Stereo Microphone
• Sandisk 4GB Secure Digital SD HC Memory Card (SDSDB-4096, BULK, No Reader)
• SanDisk 2GB SD Memory Card (SDSDB-2048, Bulk Package)