[bct] Re: Question about digital voice recorders

  • From: "Kelly Ford" <kelly@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 00:16:52 -0800

What's the sampling rate on the WS320M?  Is there anything you like better
about the DS2 versus the WS320M?
I just used the DS2 for about a month on a trip and was generally pleased.
The built-in microphones record things missing some of the low end of the
audio spectrum to me but overall I've found the unit easy to operate.  But
now I'm wondering if I should be looking at the WS320M?


From: blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blindcooltech-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mary Emerson
Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 6:56 AM
To: blindcooltech@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bct] Re: Question about digital voice recorders

The WS200 does not play MP3 files, and it has less memory so you can hold
less recorded material in the WS200. I own the WS320M and it has a gigabyte
of memory and will play MP3 files although it will only record WMA files.
The WS200's recording sampling rate (I think that's the term) is only 64k,
where, by contrast, the DS2's sampling rate is 128k which means the DS2 has
a better stereo sound with a bit more high and low to it, which adds a
little more polish to the recording. I also own the DS2 and I don't notice
much difference between the DS2 and WS320M recordings.
Also, note that the WS300, 310 and 320 all have the same design and
generally use the same instruction manual. The main difference among them is
the size of memory. The 320M has 1 gigabyte, the 310M has 512 meg, and the
300 has 256 meg. I am not sure if the 300 has M after the number or not; if
not, then it won't play MP3 files.

Other related posts: