Topic: jb3 or minidisc for sbd patch

[Chanher]

probably gonna run rca out of a sbd tonight for a post matrix.  I have a jb3 and a minidisc (not the HiMD) at my disposal. Since I typically compress the board feed in post production, I was wondering if maybe it might make sense to run the MD on the board. I'm thinking of running the c4's > ua-5 > laptop onstage, at831's > battbox > jb3 as either stack tape or "sweet spot" (this venue sounds like absolute ASS), and then MD on the sbd.

[Brian]

jb3

[Krispy D]

what he said

[Wirralgirl]

I usually run the MD off the desk, cos the audience rec needs all the help it can get 

IMO the lack of quality of MD is less obvious on s/d recs, cos the source is relatively pure.
If you use the JB3 for the desk, the MD audience rec will suck bigtime in comparison 

Of course I really want another JB3 (or an Edirol) so the problem wouldn't arise.

Hope it worked out, whichever way it went 

[F.O.Bean]

if the room sounds like ass, why run 2 DAUD rigs

run your best DAUD rig and the SBD>jb3 setup

[Brian Skalinder]

I'm thinking of running the c4's > ua-5 > laptop onstage, at831's > battbox > jb3 as either stack tape or "sweet spot" (this venue sounds like absolute ASS), and then MD on the sbd.

I think that's the right way to go.  The SBD is already compressed dynamically, and unless your AUD recording really sucks ass, you'll likely mix the SBD much lower in the SBD/AUD post-production mix.  So it makes sense to me to have the full WAV quality for the primary source (the AUD), and compromise with MD ATRAC for the secondary source (SBD).

But if the room sounds like such complete ass that you'll have the SBD higher in the mix, then use the JB3 for the SBD and MD for AUD.  Besides, I bet very few people could ever tell tell the difference between a AUD>JB3 / SBD>MD mix and AUD>MD / SBD>JB3 mix.