<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Does what it claims to do
Review: and is very good at it. I really like the VCVA feature. You can control the sensivity as well. Also the switch for dictation vs conference is very useful as well. Awesome/fast tech support. Had few questions about the software, and got them all answered in 5 mins. The most important thing about digital voice recorders is: they should be easy to control and navigate. I must say DS-2000 is very easy to control and use. Wish List:
It would be awesome if the software had the capability to export to mp3 format.
Rating: 
Summary: AT ($$$), YOU WASTE ABOUT $200
Review: Digital is so much better, right? Well, this misstep from Olympus didn't sound any better at all than my Olympus analog (microcassette) recorder. There was a very noticeable hiss during playback, and in order to hear my recording without laying the speaker almost directly against my ear, I had to turn the volume up past the point of distortion. Consider the fact that I am a Pentecostal preacher, and you might get the idea. As loudly as I speak, I shouldn't have to turn the thing up so high. This wouldn't be bad for a $50 recorder, but at ($$$), this is just a couple steps below robbery! I used the highest quality mode, and both high and low mic sensitivity, but the results were just not acceptable. It was on its way back within 72 hours. I liked the size, weight and the features, but the poor playback, combined with the low-wattage speaker, killed this recorder for me, at least at it's retail price. It's one strong feature is that you can connect it directly to a PC (no need for a card reader), but again, that just wasn't enough to save it from the return process.
Olympus makes the best ANALOG recorders, by my ears, but digitally, they have left much to be desired. If you want to spend ($$$) on a digital recorder, I'd highly recommend the Sony ICD-MS1. Same price (the one without the voice recognition software), basically the same features (except direct PC connection), but much better sound, I mean very much better.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent for dictation
Review: I use mine for medical dictation over internet. It has more memory than you will ever use. USB download is much, much faster than previous recorders with serial download (earlier Olympus models). Much better than tape machines: 1) longer battery life 2) don't have to buy microrecorder tapes ever again 3) file management better and faster (ie search, erase, playback).
Rating: 
Summary: I liked this recorder.
Review: I used this recorder to record class lectures. In the small room that I used it in, the microphone worked very well. However, I was going to buy a nice external microphone if my recorder hadn't gotten fried (more below). I got the DS-2000 not only because it was from Olympus, but because one can use smart media to get more memory-- Olympus says it gets 22 hours or so on 64 mb of memory but not really--- you have to use the bad quality recording mode to get that much. I couldn't work with the bad quality recording mode-- it was just too bad for me. All in all it was a good recorder. I did notice beeps in the recording occasionally (and with another Olypus recorder) but it was not at all frequent and not really a problem. The DS-2000 has a nice layout with easy to use tools. Mine worked very well untill I plugged it into a car power adapter that I had in my car cigarette lighter. After a few seconds, for some reason, the electronics in the recorder started to burn and now it doesn't record right. I was hoping it was the memory card that got broken, but I might have to get a new recorder. If I do have to get a new recorder, I was probably going to get an Olympus DM-1. It is mostly the same as the DS-2000, I think, but with a better sound system and a few other features. I really plan to one day get a recorder that records in 44Kbps or more. The DS-2000 uses I think 12 Kbps in its best quality mode. I am going to wait until the prices come down on those, though. Thank you for reading all of this.
Bottom line: The DS-2000 was a good recorder, but I would probably buy the DM-1 if I had to buy another recorder right away. I would buy an external microphone (though I have never used one). It seems to me that that might help in the recording quality. Eventually, I am going to get a recorder that has the highest recording quality I can afford (44Kbps or more)(I think the Olympus DM-90 currently has good quality).
Rating:
Summary: Good technology - durablity could be better
Review: I've bought analog recorders for years and constantly been disappointed in the microphone quality, not to mention the annoyance of dealing with tapes. If you want quality you have to pay for it, and you pretty much get it with this product. In my case I was able to set it on a table and pick up presentation style audio more than 15 feet away (assumes the individuals were projecting, but not shouting). The playback was quite clear. The size, weight and functionality are good. The MP3 playback was nice, but dedicated MP3 players will always have better features. My only complaint is that after more than a year, the price doesn't seem to have come down much. Considering that Olympus sells an improved DM-1 model for a similar amount, I would've expected a lower price for this. I originally gave this product 4 stars, but after using it moderately for 10 months, have lowered it to 3 stars. My reason is that in less than a year, the headphones plug has malfunctioned so that audio only works in one ear, and to my surprise, the speaker stopped working. I understand that expensive electronics such as this can be fragile. But my advice to anyone purchasing this is to handle with care and keep your receipt and packaging ready.
<< 1 >>
| 
