Topic: Best 24 bit "bit bucket?"

[johnw]

the only feature set advantage i can see that the p2 has over the 671 is it's ability to sync to another adc.

That's the big reason I'm going with one.

Same here.  Although the other thing that sold me on the P2 is the fact that when going digital in, the P2 can do 24/96 while the 671 can only do 24/48.

Interesting - it's advertised as 24/96 capable but I guess that's only analog in?

[thegreatgumbino]

Analog in only is what I remember.  I can't remember where I found that, but it was the selling point for me.

[gratefulphish]

As far as a pure "bit bucket", the MT 24/96 is the cheapest by far, will get the job done, seems to be pretty stable now, and the only somwhat significant "drawback" is having to manually split the files at 2Gb mark.  The other cheaper decks, like the R-09 won't take the digi in, and just about everything else that has been discussed is really a standalone deck, rather than just a "bit bucket."  I have long wondered why a lot of people, including me sometimes, buy much more expensive machines, just for bucket purposes.  But other times, I just run the mics>deck, and that obviously makes the difference.  If you are only using it as a bucket, I would try the MT first, because even if you decide for some reason that you don't like it, you have not invested a lot, can get most/all of your money back by reselling it, and in the meantime, it is super small, easily stealthable, and very reasonably priced, especially if you pick up a used one in the Yard Sale.

[thegreatgumbino]

Same here.  Although the other thing that sold me on the P2 is the fact that when going digital in, the P2 can do 24/96 while the 671 can only do 24/48.

false.  the 671 can do 24/96 via its analog as well as its digital inputs.

http://www.d-mpro.com/users/folder.asp?FolderID=3689&Tab=Data+Sheet

Interesting.  When I was deciding on my purchase I read specific info that stated this wasn't the case.  Glad to see that it does 24/96.  Thanks for the link, Tim.

[Jimna]

hijack of the thread:

hey gumbino, how do you like the v3> MT 24/96 so far?  obviously you upgrading, but over all yea or nea?

would you recommend it to a budget burdened taper?

[thegreatgumbino]

hijack of the thread:

hey gumbino, how do you like the v3> MT 24/96 so far?  obviously you upgrading, but over all yea or nea?

would you recommend it to a budget burdened taper?

It's not bad, but definitely in a different class than running the 722 (I down sized).  For the money, I don't know that you can beat it.  Especially since CF media is getting so cheap as well as a the used MT market.  Add on top of that it takes up little to no room in the bag.

[Jimna]

hijack of the thread:

hey gumbino, how do you like the v3> MT 24/96 so far?  obviously you upgrading, but over all yea or nea?

would you recommend it to a budget burdened taper?

It's not bad, but definitely in a different class than running the 722 (I down sized).  For the money, I don't know that you can beat it.  Especially since CF media is getting so cheap as well as a the used MT market.  Add on top of that it takes up little to no room in the bag.

so how easily solved is the 2 gig file split problem?  also what type of battery solution are folks using, and whats the pros and cons to that consitering the internal battery?  also, has anyone pushed the battery life when recording on just the internal lion batt? 

any other real down sides to the MT?  im looking for a less costly bit bucket and want no surprises down the line. 

thanks for the insight

[willndmb]

imo there is no reason to buy anything other then a MT for a bitbucket
the others are a hell of a lot nicer but if you are n ot going to use the features
ie an all in one box
then its not worth it imo

if you were going to sell the ua5 then i would say i like the hdp2

[Nick's Picks]

imo there is no reason to buy anything other then a MT for a bitbucket

unless you know you will be recording anything longer than 2 hours...and want to do it at 24bit.  Let alone, 24/96.

[JasonSobel]

well, as long as this thread has some useful feature comparisons between the Tascam HD-P2 and the Marantz PMD-671, I thought I'd pop in and clear up a few things...

and why is it (i.e. HD-P2) better than the marantz?
its bigger...I know that.

actually, I wouldn't say that the HD-P2 is bigger than the PMD-671
from this thread:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,62271.0.html

Marantz PMD-671 = 10.4" x 7.3" x 2"
Tascam HD-P2 = 9.6" x 7.4" x 2.36"

so, they're very similar in size.  the PMD-671 is nearly an inch wider, while the HD-P2 is only slightly taller and only slightly thicker.  I guess it all depends on which dimension is most important to you.

Same here.  Although the other thing that sold me on the P2 is the fact that when going digital in, the P2 can do 24/96 while the 671 can only do 24/48.

false.  the 671 can do 24/96 via its analog as well as its digital inputs.

http://www.d-mpro.com/users/folder.asp?FolderID=3689&Tab=Data+Sheet

yes, the PMD-671 does 24/96, but it can not do 24/192.  The HD-P2 can go to 24/192.  however, I don't think the ability to record at 24/192 is a major factor for most people.  that sure would eat up a lot of storage space.  but, on the other hand, with 16 GB flash cards getting cheaper (already under $300), 24/192 certainly is a possibility for a typical show.

personally, I used to own a Microtrack to use as a bit bucket.  had it for about 9 months.  and then sold it and bought an HD-P2, also to use solely as a bit bucket.  the seamless splits are really something I need.  and it has been rock solid as a recorder.  certainly more than the MT was at the time, although several firmware updates have become available since I sold the MT, and I hear it's pretty stable now too.

[AlexG]

I know it was mentioned here before but the ability to clock sync on the HD-P2 is awesome.  Right now I have a matrix rig that works like this

C4 Mics > UA-5 > Toslink > iRiver H120
                  |
                  v
              S/PDIF (Clock Source)
                  |
                  v
SBD Line > HD-P2

It just lines up and you are done, obviously this rig will not work for 24 bit but that could be easily addressed by replacing the iRiver with another 24bit "bit bucket"  The more I use my HD-P2 the more I realize how well thought out it is.  I also like the seamless power switch it provides, I can run Firewire Power, AC Power, or Battery power and switch between them on the fly and the thing just keeps running.  My biggest complaint with it is the buttons on the top are hard to use if they are in a bag. 

[Javier Cinakowski]

wow, AlexG that set up is sweet.  T+

[pmonk66]

The most superior bit bucket is the one you are using until you can afford something better!

[Jimna]

I know it was mentioned here before but the ability to clock sync on the HD-P2 is awesome.  Right now I have a matrix rig that works like this

C4 Mics > UA-5 > Toslink > iRiver H120
                  |
                  v
              S/PDIF (Clock Source)
                  |
                  v
SBD Line > HD-P2

It just lines up and you are done, obviously this rig will not work for 24 bit but that could be easily addressed by replacing the iRiver with another 24bit "bit bucket"  The more I use my HD-P2 the more I realize how well thought out it is.  I also like the seamless power switch it provides, I can run Firewire Power, AC Power, or Battery power and switch between them on the fly and the thing just keeps running.  My biggest complaint with it is the buttons on the top are hard to use if they are in a bag. 

yea, that effing rocks dude.  nice setup fo sho!! Big +T!  it so easy it almost takes the sport of of syncing track by track like ive been doing it..... 

who needs sport anyway.

[rowjimmy]

well, as long as this thread has some useful feature comparisons between the Tascam HD-P2 and the Marantz PMD-671, I thought I'd pop in and clear up a few things...

actually, I wouldn't say that the HD-P2 is bigger than the PMD-671
from this thread:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,62271.0.html

Marantz PMD-671 = 10.4" x 7.3" x 2"
Tascam HD-P2 = 9.6" x 7.4" x 2.36"

so, they're very similar in size.  the PMD-671 is nearly an inch wider, while the HD-P2 is only slightly taller and only slightly thicker.  I guess it all depends on which dimension is most important to you

Because I'm like that... I did the math-
Marantz PMD-671 = 151.84   cubic inches
Tascam HD-P2     = 167.6544 cubic inches