Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4  (Read 7542 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12647
  • Gender: Male
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2017, 07:11:55 PM »
Not trying to talk you out of the F4, which I don't have experience with.  Just clarifying on the 680, with which I do.

Sleep tight.
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

Offline dallman

  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1629
  • Gender: Male
    • Clifford Morse
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #16 on: August 10, 2017, 07:54:13 PM »
I'm on my phone, heading into a  >:D show, so I'm limited in my typing and reading through the thread right now but this has been a good thread for talking deck merits. Sorry if covered and missed by me, but I am 100 % certain the preamps on the dr701d are different than the dr70d as I carefully researched that. I'm certain I heard the dr701d preamps  were the same as the Dr 680 mkII, but have no real proof of that. My gut says they are the same or quite similar from my recording with both.
Support Live Music: Tape A Show Today!
Deck>possibly something here> Mics

Offline dallman

  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1629
  • Gender: Male
    • Clifford Morse
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #17 on: August 11, 2017, 10:41:12 AM »


Another question that I haven't been able to discern: does activating the "hold" switch on the 680mkII lock out everything?  The manual gives the impression that it just keeps the machine from powering off.  Does "hold" lock out the mechanical switches on the top of the deck?

My recollection is that the hold switch on the top affects turning the power on or off and locked, you cannot accidentally power off. I have my deck in a case, so I never have needed that button as it would be difficult to reach the power button when in use.
The lock button on the front controls the other buttons. I usually try to remember to use this although I have never accidentally stopped a recording or anything. Usually I engage the button, forget, and am hitting the stop button wondering for a moment why nothing is happening.   :) It's handy, but the layout of the deck is good, so I have never had an issue.

Edit to add: I was under the impression that the 701D can record the 4 XLR channels and a stereo feed from the 3.5mm jack as well, all at the same time.  Now I'm not so sure, but maybe I'm just confusing myself.  Can anyone confirm?

This is incorrect. I believe you can go 1/8 in, but the deck is only 4 channel. If you are using the 4XLR's there is no way to also go 1/8 input. There also is no mix track, which I never use and also which would be very easy to do in post if someone did want it.
Support Live Music: Tape A Show Today!
Deck>possibly something here> Mics

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1652
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #18 on: August 11, 2017, 10:52:13 AM »
701d has improved preamps over 70d and the ability to be controlled over HDMI for DSLR camera recording.  To me, it would be easier to power by an external battery than the 680 which is a 12v recorder.  701d is also more compact. 

Never even looked at the SD card list for my 680mki and never had any issues. 

The more obvious differences are the size, channel count, form factor and HDMI control aspects, IMO.

And you can gang two 680ds together.  Don't know if you can gang 701ds together for more than 4 channels.







« Last Edit: August 11, 2017, 10:56:15 AM by 2manyrocks »

Offline Grosse_j

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #19 on: March 20, 2018, 10:06:56 AM »
 I am just on the way do decide for DR 701D, as a good compromise, its small, easy to power with USB Powerpacks, comparable with the DR 680, which I use for several years and -  it is the only which has omni mics on board - especially for recording music in churches like Bach cantata and organ with a seond set of cardoid mics.
Is there any comment/experinece  on the integrated omni mics?
Thanks
Grosse_j

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1652
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #20 on: March 21, 2018, 07:21:14 AM »
I have never used the 701, but had the 70d.  the obvious concern to my thinking is the internal mics are not that far apart and being on the recorder, how would you position the recorder for the optimal mic position in recording? 

Offline Grosse_j

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #21 on: March 23, 2018, 04:48:51 AM »
Its true that the two onboard omnis are too close together for full stereo image.
 Thats why I will combine it with a set of cardoid f.e.similar to  ORTF. My hope is to get the good responce of the omnis for low frequency range especially for organ sound and the good stereo picture with the external cardoids. That is the reason I asked for accoustical quality of the onboard omnis-
Grosse_j

Online heathen

  • Trade Count: (16)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1666
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #22 on: March 23, 2018, 11:05:41 AM »
While the Zoom F4 doesn't have built-in mics, it does have that spot on the back where you can connect one of the Zoom mic attachments (and I think if you do that you can still run 4 other channels for a total of 6 channels).
Recordings on LMA: https://archive.org/search.php?query=taper%3A%22Lucas+Lorenz%22
Mics: Core Sound TetraMic | AT4031s | AT AE5100s | AT853s (C/SC) | Line Audio CM3s | DPA 4061s | CA-14 omnis | Studio Projects CS5 Pre: CA9200 Decks: Zoom F8 | Roland R-05 | Tascam DR-2d

Offline 2manyrocks

  • Trade Count: (12)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1652
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #23 on: March 23, 2018, 12:31:20 PM »
Its true that the two onboard omnis are too close together for full stereo image.
 Thats why I will combine it with a set of cardoid f.e.similar to  ORTF. My hope is to get the good responce of the omnis for low frequency range especially for organ sound and the good stereo picture with the external cardoids. That is the reason I asked for accoustical quality of the onboard omnis-
Grosse_j

The only recording I really remember making with the 70d internal mics was walking around outside.   It seemed pretty decent.  How that translates to recording an organ with the 701d I really don't know.  If they don't suit your personal preference, then you still have another pair of XLR channels to use external omni mics of your choice. 

But....with the release of the Sound Devices MixPre recorders, I would really look carefully at putting that $ towards one of them.  I'm guessing even the smaller Mixpre 3 will do mid side which would let you pair a figure 8 pattern with an omni center???  Or try a pair of cardoids with one omni?  I think I even saw a SD702 sell here for about $500 recently--which for sure would do a great m/s recording.

Offline Gutbucket

  • record > listen > revise technique
  • Trade Count: (13)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 12647
  • Gender: Male
Re: DR-680mkII vs. DR-701D vs. F4
« Reply #24 on: March 23, 2018, 03:39:12 PM »
^ Any decent stereo recorder can record Mid and Side (and produce a great Mid/Side recording).  There is need for a machine with Mid/Side decoding built in to do so.  Far better to determine the most optimal matrix ratio between the two afterwards rather than on the fly.  Just be sure to route your Mid mic to the Left channel and the Side mic to the Right channel for proper decoding afterwards.

Its true that the two onboard omnis are too close together for full stereo image.
 Thats why I will combine it with a set of cardoid f.e.similar to  ORTF. My hope is to get the good responce of the omnis for low frequency range especially for organ sound and the good stereo picture with the external cardoids. That is the reason I asked for accoustical quality of the onboard omnis-
Grosse_j

If you must use the internal omnis, figure some way of rigging up a baffle between them to improve separation.  Otherwise, and probably in addition to that, compensate with your external microphone pair setup in such a way as to over-emphasize stereo-width  / stereo-difference information (tending toward "hole in the middle"-ness when monitoring that pair in isolation).  ORTF represents an "optimized for 2-channel recording microphone technique", and when mixed with closely spaced internal omnis will produce a rather monophonic result.   Assuming the ORTF 110 degree angle between microphones is appropriate to the room and your recording position in it with respect to the source, space the cardioids significantly further apart than ORTF's specified 17cm.  I'd space them at least twice as far or more if mixing the internal omnis in full-range. 

Alternately, if you plan to low-pass the omnis and chop off their contribution above 100Hz or so prior to mixing with the ORTF cardioid pair, standard ORTF spacing may be appropriate (again, assuming ORTF is the best choice given the room and your recording position in it with respect to the source).


However, I see all of the above as compensation for incorporating overly narrow-spaced omnis without introducing more problems than the benefit you get from using them at all.

The far superior answer will be to pick up a pair of external omnis which you can setup optimally.  Even if they are inexpensive and nothing pedigree they will be on par with the quality of the built-in mics yet provide the needed flexibility to do a proper microphone setup with the omnis spaced significantly further apart (at least twice as much as the directional pair you plan to mix with them, preferably more).  Mid/Side works very well in combination with spaced omnis.  In my experience, ORTF as an "optimized for 2-channel recording microphone technique" does not work as well mixed with a pair of omnis, and an alternate setup using the cardioids with a narrower angle or less spacing between them is likely to be more appropriate.  Note that this represents the inverse of the situation described above when considering mixing ORTF with the internal omnis that have insufficient spacing between them. 

Via trial and error you may be able to tweak the omni spacing "just right" to mix nicely with ORTF, but I tend to think of ORTF being best when used on its own, and find alternate stereo configions superior for combination with omnis.

« Last Edit: March 23, 2018, 03:49:47 PM by Gutbucket »
musical volition > vibrations > voltages > numeric values > voltages > vibrations> virtual teleportation time-machine experience
Better recording made easy - >>Improved PAS table<< | Made excellent- >>click here to download the Oddball Microphone Technique illustrated PDF booklet<<

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.17 seconds with 32 queries.
© 2002-2018 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF