<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel> 

	<title>Comments on: Digital answering machine recommendations</title>
	<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations/</link>
	<description>Comments on Ask MetaFilter post Digital answering machine recommendations</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:27:35 -0800</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:27:35 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>

	<item>
		<title>Question: Digital answering machine recommendations</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations</link>	
		<description>Digital answering machine recommendations? [More inside] &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Every few years for what seems like a decade, I go down to the electronics store and peruse the stand-alone (without phones) digital answering machines. Every few years I say to myself, surely by now SOMEONE has developed a machine that takes advantage of advances in digital recording since 1970.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
But no. AT&amp;amp;T, Sony, Panasonic... they have lots of cools bells and whistles, but the sound quality is terrible. Digital sound technology has improved dramatically in every other market but this one. WHY?!&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
The last time I checked was about a year ago. I&apos;m afraid to go back because I might snap-off and start swinging them around my head. For the love of Pete, is there anyone manufacturing a digital answering machine that actually sounds good?&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I feel better now. Thanks for any advice you can offer.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">post:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.4518</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:38:44 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>squirrel</dc:creator>
		
			<category>Digitalansweringmachine</category>
		
			<category>Digital</category>
		
			<category>electronics</category>
		
	</item> <item>
		<title>By: Hackworth</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations#103532</link>	
		<description>Do you leave your computer on 24/7? Make use of that modem in your computer and get some answering machine software.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.4518-103532</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2004 14:27:35 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Hackworth</dc:creator>
	</item><item>
		<title>By: stbalbach</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations#103548</link>	
		<description>I have to agree with you squirrel they suck big time. I have been working on a project to build a dedicated answering machine that is connected to the LAN and sends off the messages as a .wav to my email. But it is not easy finding decent voice modems and the whole thing is a big pain, I&apos;d much rather just buy it. Nothing available *sigh*. The answering machine needs to be Tivod.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.4518-103548</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:20:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>stbalbach</dc:creator>
	</item><item>
		<title>By: kindall</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations#103730</link>	
		<description>The AT&amp;amp;T digital answering machine I had before I got my current Panasonic cordless system (with integrated answerer) was great. I got it a long time ago, in the mid-90s at least. The integrated one in the Panasonic is also perfectly satisfactory.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
In short, every digital answering machine I&apos;ve ever owned has been great -- all two of them. I had no idea there was an epidemic of suckiness among them, including among a brand I like just fine.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
You&apos;re never going to get great sound quality, of course. It&apos;s going to be limited to the quality of the original source, which is after all a telephone call. Telephone calls suck for fidelity.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.4518-103730</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2004 03:01:36 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>kindall</dc:creator>
	</item><item>
		<title>By: squirrel</title>
		<link>http://ask.metafilter.com/4518/Digital-answering-machine-recommendations#103869</link>	
		<description>I guess I&apos;m a bit of an audiophile, kindall. I have a deep aversion to the sound of audio &quot;pixelation,&quot; which is the aural equivalent of really crappy jpegs. It&apos;s not that I can&apos;t understand the messages at all... I just don&apos;t know why the sound quality isn&apos;t even as good as cassette tape. &lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If I were 15% smarter (or 90% more motivated) I would just get a voice modem and a digital voice recorder and make my own.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:ask.metafilter.com,2004:site.4518-103869</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:33:22 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>squirrel</dc:creator>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
