There are many occasions when it is inconvenient to pull out a notebook or a word processor to take note of some significant, but fleeting ideas. A digital voice recorder can at such times save the day — and the ideas. This device is also nearly indispensible during in-person interviews.
In my search for a recorder, I discovered that Olympus nearly rules the market, with an array of models with different features at different price points. Almost anyone can find a suitable recorder for his or her favorite writer, a gift certain to be appreciated. They are easy to find: I bought mine at Radio Shack.
I have relied on my Olympus — model VN3100PC, by the way — on many occasions: an interview a couple of weeks ago, quick observations as I moved from place to place during a rapid travel tour, longer and more thoughtful cmmentary late at night when I was too tired to write.
I recommend purchase also of a small cell phone case, perhaps with room for spare batteries and an eyelet of some sort that will accept a clasp [I'll explain why in my next Gifts post].
Sorry, comments are closed.
Comment by
Michael Downend
7 Dec 2007
Olympus does rule the market and with good reason. I carry my D2300 everywhere–you never know when the muse lady will strike. Now here’s that good reason: I use this ever reliable tool to facilitate the use of my voice-recognition software which I use on both my MacBook and Dell laptops–Dragon Naturally Speaking on the Windows machine and iListen on the Mac. I can record anytime, anywhere then simply transfer the input to either machine via the Olympus recorder. Since the VR software has been “trained” to my voice, it has no problem recognizing the output from the recorder and pops it directly into Word or my scripwriting sw. This frees me from having to be at the laptop to dictate the Great American whatever.
MD
Comment by
Tom Colvin
8 Dec 2007
Michael, that’s a great idea to pass along. I’ve come close to buying Dragon Naturally Speaking a number of times and then back away, remembering reviews I’ve read that are generally somewhat critical. These reviewers complain about the inaccuracies that pop up in the transcription process, requiring careful proofreading. But your entry reminds me of the utility of Dragon Naturally Speaking when coupled with the Olympus.
As an example, I have a long interview sitting in my Olympus right now. I keep putting off working on it, not looking forward to the task of transcribing it myself. Dragon Naturally Speaking, of course, would do it in a breeze — and I could easily spot the necessary corrections as I write my blog entry from the review. I’M SOLD!
Comment by
Michael Downend
9 Dec 2007
Tom,
I’ve always believed careful, stringent proofreading is a must for a professional writer–especially those of us with logorheic tendencies–no matter how the text is delivered. The work invariably gets better. And it’s especially important for those writers-myself included-who follow William Stafford’s dictum, “There is no such thing as writer’s block for writers whose standards are low enough.”
MD
Comment by
Tom Colvin
9 Dec 2007
Amen.
Comment by
Jeremy Osborne
10 Dec 2007
I bought the VN-3100PC about a year ago. It doesn’t get much use, but it’s invaluable when I need it. Used it to capture anything from a dialog to a board meeting, equally effective those tasks and anything in between.
Comment by
Jesse
11 Dec 2007
Speaking of using recorders for in-person interviews…would you say they’re absolutely necessary or is simple pen and pad still legitimate?
I’ve been writing for publication for over a year now, having conducted a lot of interviews, and never once used a recorder, mainly because I didn’t want to spend the money yet. I also wonder if some interview subjects would be that comfortable being taped.
I’ve done fine with writing down all my notes for my interviews thus far; how do you know when it’s time to start recording interviews on a regular basis?
JH
Comment by
Tom Colvin
11 Dec 2007
Jesse, for years I relied on pen and paper for interviews, so certainly that’s still a valid option. However, with a digital recorder, one can be certain about the exact wording of answers from your interview subject. I’ve found that I write more colorful articles with more direct quotes when I have the digital interview file at hand as a resource. In extreme circumstances, that may even have legal value in case of lawsuits. And the recorder allows the interviewer to concentrate exclusively on the conversation and line of questioning. Of course, then you have to get the digital interview into shape from which you can turn to writing — so the digital recorder does not necessarily save time.
Like most things, there’s are pros and cons. I usually make up my mind about whether to use the recorder at the last minute, after getting a sense of the interview subject. As you intimate, some freeze at the sight of a recorder, while others feel a sense of relief. One even has the option of emailing the digital interview file to the interview subject, if that seems appropriate.
Tom
Comment by
Tom Colvin
11 Dec 2007
Jesse, I visited your website “Vigorous Writing.” Nicely done, and a good resource for aspiring writers. Even us old-timers can use a writing lesson from time to time.
For those reading this comment, just click on Jesse’s name — or any commenter’s name that is underlined, for that matter — and you will be taken to the commenter’s website.
Tom
Comment by
Jesse
11 Dec 2007
Tom, thank you for the kind words. Good points about the validity of tape recorders. I often read some huge feature article in GQ Magazine, and the writer will state explicitly that he turned his tape recorder on and got the interview going.
Another writer said that he could not possibly do such an in-depth interview without the recorder. I’ve read other guys who say they just use pad and pen and do it old-school style and they’re at the top of the field.
So, I guess it really is a personal preference to a large extent.
JH