Topic: 8-channels, HQ pres, WiFi Control - What's out there?

[acidjack]

Since the SX-R4+ is delayed, possibly indefinitely in the U.S., I'm considering other options. The main attraction of that unit for me was the WiFi control, battery life, and of course Sonosax pres.

I'm aware of the Zoom F8, which seems to be a contender subject to further consideration on the pres. SD doesn't appear to make anything that meets my criteria unless you add a CL-WIFI to the 788, and that adds size and expense, and the 788 is apparently a battery hog.

What else is there? Stuff that costs less than the SX-R4+ would definitely not be a bad thing...

[Ozpeter]

http://qsc.com/products/Mixers/Touchmix_Series/TouchMix-8/

$899 from Sweetwater.  Makes the Zoom F8 look expensive!  OK, you  have to add your own hard drive to record, but that might not cost radically more than an equivalent memory card for the F8.

And there are others like it I believe.

[H₂O]

http://zaxcom.com/products/nomad-touch/#product_specifications

Not ideal as requires a corded windows 8.1 tablet connected

I'm sure a R4+ could be had via the grey market but may be quite expensive

[Bruce Watson]

Since the SX-R4+ is delayed, possibly indefinitely in the U.S., I'm considering other options. The main attraction of that unit for me was the WiFi control, battery life, and of course Sonosax pres.

I'm aware of the Zoom F8, which seems to be a contender subject to further consideration on the pres. SD doesn't appear to make anything that meets my criteria unless you add a CL-WIFI to the 788, and that adds size and expense, and the 788 is apparently a battery hog.

What else is there? Stuff that costs less than the SX-R4+ would definitely not be a bad thing...

When you say eight channels, what do you mean by that? I'm asking because the Sonosax SX-R4 only carries four micpres, yes? It'll only take in six analog channels (four internally and two from outboard micpres). So if you want to record eight microphones, you basically need two of these things. Seriously expensive, that is.

If you want eight micpres, the grand daddy is of course the SD 788t. Newer SD devices exist in the 6 series. Then Tascam has a 788t fighter, as does Roland. A number of Tapers that participate on this board use the Tascam and really like it. The new kid on the block appears to be the Zoom f8. There are some others (European) that are serious money. And undoubtedly some cheap Chinese clones that I just don't follow. So for better or worse, those are what I see as the contenders in a pretty limited field.

[acidjack]

Since the SX-R4+ is delayed, possibly indefinitely in the U.S., I'm considering other options. The main attraction of that unit for me was the WiFi control, battery life, and of course Sonosax pres.

I'm aware of the Zoom F8, which seems to be a contender subject to further consideration on the pres. SD doesn't appear to make anything that meets my criteria unless you add a CL-WIFI to the 788, and that adds size and expense, and the 788 is apparently a battery hog.

What else is there? Stuff that costs less than the SX-R4+ would definitely not be a bad thing...

When you say eight channels, what do you mean by that? I'm asking because the Sonosax SX-R4 only carries four micpres, yes? It'll only take in six analog channels (four internally and two from outboard micpres). So if you want to record eight microphones, you basically need two of these things. Seriously expensive, that is.

If you want eight micpres, the grand daddy is of course the SD 788t. Newer SD devices exist in the 6 series. Then Tascam has a 788t fighter, as does Roland. A number of Tapers that participate on this board use the Tascam and really like it. The new kid on the block appears to be the Zoom f8. There are some others (European) that are serious money. And undoubtedly some cheap Chinese clones that I just don't follow. So for better or worse, those are what I see as the contenders in a pretty limited field.

At least eight channel inputs. Four mic pres is fine. I've looked at the new SD units and it seems that they aren't in much use here, though it's not clear why; however they also do not have wifi control. My impression was that the Roland and the Tascam HS-P82 also do not have that feature. Those two units are also huge, which is a negative.

[Bruce Watson]

At least eight channel inputs. Four mic pres is fine. I've looked at the new SD units and it seems that they aren't in much use here, though it's not clear why; ...

Probably a combination of the units being new-ish, and being expensive. And... they really are aimed at dialog recording, not so much music recording. As a result, they have plenty of buttons and switches that people can use without looking at them. Which sort of defeats the idea of wi-fi control. The dialog people don't have a demand for wi-fi, so SD doesn't supply much wi-fi.

... however they also do not have wifi control. My impression was that the Roland and the Tascam HS-P82 also do not have that feature. Those two units are also huge, which is a negative.

Wi-fi doesn't seem to be taking this part of the market by storm. Even units like the Aaton Cantar 3, which have everything but the kitchen sink, don't have wi-fi. The Nagra VI doesn't. I can't even tell from Sonosax's website if the SX-R4+ will, but I take your word for it.

I suspect that the problem is the market would rather have physical buttons and switches. Time will tell.

Sorry I can't be more help.

[H₂O]

Neither the hs-p82 nor the R-88 have wifi

The Aeta 4minx has Ethernet but I can't find a way to leverage it for remote control - doesn't looks like Aeta has developed yet

F8 is Bluetooth

Only the lowerend tascam 44wl, 22wl, the 788t and R4+ currently support wifi control at this point from what I can tell

[2manyrocks]

I think the professional market is reluctant to trust their paid recordings to the risk of a WiFi disconnect.  Could explain why there are few choices.

[Life In Rewind]

Perhaps ironic - but Behringer seems to have the most developed Wi-Fi mixer products.

Compact enough to be considered portable.

Unfortunately - nothing battery powered...

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/XR18

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/X18

The Behringer website implies you can use an ipad to record with these.

The 16 and 12 channel models record to USB media - but stereo only.

I've mixed sound for one rock show with a ipad mini running the Behringer Composer mixer - and it was easy enough.

I'd prefer a bigger tablet though...

[cybergaloot]

I think the professional market is reluctant to trust their paid recordings to the risk of a WiFi disconnect.  Could explain why there are few choices.

Not sure that is correct as the paid pros usually have access to both space and power and there are a bunch of 8+ channel w/ wireless options when you aren't concerned about size and power.  But you are right in that the easily portable, battery powered devices are somewhat scarce.

 

[H₂O]

http://qsc.com/products/Mixers/Touchmix_Series/TouchMix-8/

$899 from Sweetwater.  Makes the Zoom F8 look expensive!  OK, you  have to add your own hard drive to record, but that might not cost radically more than an equivalent memory card for the F8.

And there are others like it I believe.

Looks to be AC only and the layout is more for mixing and not in the bag recording.

Maybe good as a board for a small club or band rehearsal but I don't see this as an option for in the field taping.

[stevetoney]

I think the professional market is reluctant to trust their paid recordings to the risk of a WiFi disconnect.  Could explain why there are few choices.

Not sure that is correct as the paid pros usually have access to both space and power and there are a bunch of 8+ channel w/ wireless options when you aren't concerned about size and power.  But you are right in that the easily portable, battery powered devices are somewhat scarce.

I see more and more FOH guys using ipads during soundchecks and doing their mixing on stage while talking directly to the bands.  Those that I've spoken to love that capability.  Clearly if something happens, they can go back to the board and mix the traditional way, but the point is that I don't think the pro market is necessarily avoiding wifi, as much as that it's got it's uses. 

I doubt they'd ever trust the mission critical recording functions ever to not go across hard wires though.  I know I wouldn't.

[2manyrocks]

I have had some experience with mixing via wifi and will tell anybody it's not a comfortable feeling to see a "connecting" message on your tablet during a live performance.   The last settings on the mixer will continue to work until the connection is regained, but there's no adjusting anything when the connection drops out until reconnection is made.

Not getting brand specific here, but a lot of the discussion about the various wireless mixers so far has tended to be around using an external router for better connection reliability compared to using the internal routers built into the mixers. 

Some users are connecting through a router via ethernet and then also connecting via a tablet over the external router's wifi.  If the wifi tanks, presumably the ethernet connection is still there....but I say "presumably" with a grain of salt.  Haven't tried it myself.  At some point, it's just not convenient to haul an external router, ethernet cable, PC, and a tablet although these mixers cut out the need for a multichannel snake and have useable compression, gates, reverb, and EQ built into a very compact box.

I was going to use my wireless mixer this week, and then chickened out to just use the venue's own analog board.   





 

[stevetoney]

I have had some experience with mixing via wifi and will tell anybody it's not a comfortable feeling to see a "connecting" message on your tablet during a live performance.   The last settings on the mixer will continue to work until the connection is regained, but there's no adjusting anything when the connection drops out until reconnection is made.

Not getting brand specific here, but a lot of the discussion about the various wireless mixers so far has tended to be around using an external router for better connection reliability compared to using the internal routers built into the mixers. 

Some users are connecting through a router via ethernet and then also connecting via a tablet over the external router's wifi.  If the wifi tanks, presumably the ethernet connection is still there....but I say "presumably" with a grain of salt.  Haven't tried it myself.  At some point, it's just not convenient to haul an external router, ethernet cable, PC, and a tablet although these mixers cut out the need for a multichannel snake and have useable compression, gates, reverb, and EQ built into a very compact box.

I was going to use my wireless mixer this week, and then chickened out to just use the venue's own analog board.   

Your comment about 'connecting' message is even true in my limited experience using the Bluetooth app with the Zoom F8.  For my uses, I enjoy having the app in my pocket for monitoring what's going on, and for that much I'd say that the capability is a very nice feature to have since it frees me from peeking into my bag every so often, but for actually controlling the unit I'm defaulting to reaching into my bag and physically changing settings.  Fortunately, I have two different screens for monitoring and control so it's less easy to accidentally change something when the app is active.  I'm not sure how much of this comment is biased by the fact that controlling would be difficult anyway because of the size of the iphone screen (as compared to a much larger ipad screen), but I get the feeling based on your comment that my comment wouldn't change much if I was using an ipad.

[2manyrocks]

I have wondered if the iphone has a stronger connection since it is primarily designed as a phone, but I really have no idea.