why would anyone use a micro with an adapter instead of a full size SD card?
micros offer identical performance and are universal in more types of equipment. My A10 or R07 cant take full size SDs, and if im testing cards i want to find the fastest micros as well
Full size SDs are mostly an empty case, they use the same types and grade of memory inside.
https://youtu.be/1W4UScF4GaA?t=61There are literally *dozens* of UHS-I microSD cards that can sequentially write in excess of 10X the paltry 4MB/sec we need or 8 channels of 24/192.
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-microsd-cards/look at the top speeds of the full size SD cards - Exactly the same! for UHS-I as well as UHS-II.
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/sorry, blaming microSD is a poor excuse by sound devices, imo. Esp considering even among full-size cards tested in that thread only 1 out of 4 actually worked at full bitrate (about statistically the same as the tested micros in these limited sample size). I cant comprehend how they have a 10T spec'd for 12 tracks at 24/192 when the mixpre-6 cant reliably write 8 of those channels with properly spec'd cards. I guess nobody uses high bitrates in the real world?
would have been a huge upgrade if the mixpre-IIs were UHS-II compatible. in any case it needs to be solved. I dont know what kind of buffering the mixpre uses if any, but something like 512MB of fast buffer memory is a tiny onboard chip and would be nominal in cost
Theres prob a reason the scorpio uses an SSD - even thought its maximum bitrate is 17MB/sec and well within the sequential write rates of most modern cards
If camera manufacturers can integrate UHS-II/v90 support, it seems like this would be obvious for high-bitrate audio applications. id love to buy one of the cards that can write at 200+MB/sec but none of our gear supports it