Topic: 702 Users

[OOK]

I will likely have a 702 by summer or sooner.  The question I have is what type of CF card works best.
What speed or spefication should I look for in a card.  Is any one brand better than another when it comes to a 702?  I know my HDP2 loves sandisk ultra 2....

I see transcend has a 133x 32 gig card out.  Would this be a good card to start with?

Thanks for any help...
peace
OOK

[johnw]

That Transcend card should work great. I'm using the A-Data 32GB one and that is only 40x I believe. No problems at 24/48 so far. But I only record 24/48 wav (no flac). The SD7xx decks are hard to beat.

EDIT: I should say that I haven't heard of any cards not working with the 7xx series.

[OOK]

That Transcend card should work great. I'm using the A-Data 32GB one and that is only 40x I believe. No problems at 24/48 so far. But I only record 24/48 wav (no flac). The SD7xx decks are hard to beat.

EDIT: I should say that I haven't heard of any cards not working with the 7xx series.

Thanks      T+

OOK

[H₂O]

I use the A-Data 16GB (the 40x version) and have recorded a number of shows at 24/96 WAV without issue.  You need to run firmware above 2.00 to use the slower cards reliably.

Only goes for about $60 shipped from New Egg at present:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211170

32GB goes for about $140 shipped:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211244
 

You'll love the 702 when you get and it pulls no power since there is no HDD.  I estimate I can run 24+ hours w/o Phantom on a 12 AH external 16V Polymer Li-ON.  I ran 10+ hours at a festival and it never went below 60%  (half of this time was with 48V Phantom on).

[johnw]

I use the A-Data 16GB (the 40x version) and have recorded a number of shows at 24/96 WAV without issue.  You need to run firmware above 2.00 to use the slower cards reliably.

Only goes for about $60 shipped from New Egg at present:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211170

32GB goes for about $140 shipped:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820211244
 

You'll love the 702 when you get and it pulls no power since there is no HDD.  I estimate I can run 24+ hours w/o Phantom on a 12 AH external 16V Polymer Li-ON.  I ran 10+ hours at a festival and it never went below 60%  (half of this time was with 48V Phantom on).

What battery are you using and where did you get the Hirose cable from?

[H₂O]

What battery are you using and where did you get the Hirose cable from?

Built the cable myself (bought the Hirose end from B&H Photo).

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/293010-REG/Sound_Devices_XLH_Hirose_4_pin_Power_Connector.html

The battery is an Electrovaya PowerPad 160 - These go for about $300-400 new.  I bought mine back in 2002 and have used it with all sorts of gear with a VR box I built.   The 702 handles upto 18V so I don't need the VR  with it though - Power Pad outputs 16.5V at full charge. 

http://reviews.cnet.com/notebook-accessories/electrovaya-powerpad-160/4505-6459_7-30159269.html

Electrovaya doesn't make them any more - just stopped within last 4-5 months.  I wouldn't use the newer power pads won't as they have "Smart" connectors that sense voltage between 17 and 19V - meant for newer laptops.  Only use Power pad 120s or 160s.

They come up new on ebay occasionally for between $80 and $180 or so - be careful though and make sure the seller has a DOA policy as alot are sold that have been dropped or exposed to extreme temps - they balloon up when this happens - they should be a 1/4 inch think and uniform.


Also never pull more than 1.5A from it, according to the manufacturer - This maybe how I was able to get mine to last almost 6 years - probably been to 150 shows or so.  I emailed electrovaya a bunch back in 2001-2002 before I bought mine.

[animuselanvital]

Hey everyone.  Hopefully I am not taking this too off topic but hope that someone can shed some light for me.  Just started on this thing and am interested in buying a recorder.  My decision has come down to 2:  Korg mr-1000 and Sound devices 702.  I know the 702 has the reputation of being a solid well built piece of equipment and is supposed to have some decent pre's in them.  The korg however is almost half the price and records in 1 bit audio.  I could get two of these!  I am worried though about how reliable it is and am not sure how the sound quality stacks up between the two when it is just the box alone w/o external pre's.  My plan is to use one of these devices alot in some adverse conditions (hot, cold, dry and moist air, and some rugged terrain).  I need it to be able to hang at my side from a bag and it must have the ability to be mobile with me. I wont be dropping the damn thing if I can help it (and I can do a good job when it comes to protecting my baby:) But its got to be able to handle some bumps here and there.  Last but not least, it has to sound excellent on its own (with the exception of the Korg because of the price I could afford a pre that costs about as much as the korg unit itself if need be . . . not so for the SD 702)  I've heard good and bad things about the pre's on the Korg and have not heard anything on the SD's except that they are very good. . . and I think that was from sound devices themselves.  I'm gonna go crazy here if I don't make a decision soon!

PS -  if anyone has any input on the possibility of using two of these together to create a surround sound field let me know. . . I do remember hearing that they are not linkable like the more pricey sound devices 700 series recorders.

[johnw]

If you want durable, look at nothing but Sound Devices. Out of all the recorders I'd guess no one would argue that anything else that we commonly use is more durable. I personally think it sounds great on its own. Sound Devices also has top notch product support. Again I'd guess that no other product we commonly use has better support.

[stevetoney]

I second Johns statement about the 702.  While I didn't ever use the Korg, I have used all of the following recorders before finally buying and settling on the 702...

Sony D7 DAT
Mini Disc without Hi-MD (ick)
Sony Hi-MD Mini Disc
JB3
Edirol R-09
Microtrack 24/96
Marantz PMD-660
Fostex FR2-LE

Finally...SD-702

So, the 702 costs alot more that much is true.  I know it's enticing to save money and I also had some thoughts before springing for the 702 about 2 for 1.  In fact, at the 702's price point, I could affort two FR2LE's and since these have broadcast WAV, it would not be difficult at all to match the profiles for 4-channel recording.  Very enticing.

But I bought the 702 instead and I'm just so happy I did.  Like everyone says, the quality of the SD products is just simply superior.  The ruggedness is there also.  It's a cliche that you get what you pay for, but in the SD 7xx case, the testament is that most everyone that owns their SD 7xx recorder swears by them as being the best by far.  

There's only one reason I'd EVER get rid of mine and that's that they hold their value and I'd need to sell in order to generate cash.

OK, one final comment about this...you constantly hear people say how happy they are with the 7xx product, but I have never once heard anyone say, I wish I had two (XXX, fill in the blank with any other model recorder) instead of one 7xx.

Steve

[flintstone]

animuselanvital,

I also would recommend the Sound Devices 7xx machines for rugged reliability under difficult field conditions.  A friend of a friend uses a 722 for recording bird sounds in Venezuela.  The 722 has survived 3 years of steady use in the dusty, humid tropical climate, and still produces great sounding recordings.  The 702, using flash memory instead of a hard disc, will be even more durable.

All 7xx recorders can be connected to each other using their C.Link ports.  This lets one machine act as master and the others a slaves during a recording. Here's the Sound Devices page that talks about this function
http://www.sounddevices.com/notes/recorders/linking-recorders/

So if you can afford $3800 plus the cost of several Compactflash cards, two 702s are a proven way to record multichannel. 

Those of us on a tight budget are waiting for Edirol to deliver the four channel R-44 recorder.  The R-44 will cost about $800 plus flash memory.  Delivery is expected to start in April.
http://www.edirol.net/products/en/R-44/

Flintstone

[animuselanvital]

Awesome.  THanks guys. . . The SD 702 really sounds like the best way to go.  Anyone have any words on sound quality?  How do the 702 and MR1000 compare?  Does the 1 bit audio make a substantial difference?  Or are the preamps on the 702 just that much better and the korgs pre's poor enough to depreciate the possibility of 1 bit audio recording?  The SD 7xx's are used on many professional projects not excluding some major motion pictures.  It is no doubt an awesome piece of equipment.  It has the build, strenght, reputation, and professional quality to take care of business.  But is 24/192 to soon be replaced by 1-bit audio?  I just don't want to come in on the tail end of something even though the 7xx's are great products.   Alas. . . the things I don't know   Alot more than what I do know.

[stevetoney]

Awesome.  THanks guys. . . The SD 702 really sounds like the best way to go.  Anyone have any words on sound quality?  How do the 702 and MR1000 compare?  Does the 1 bit audio make a substantial difference?  Or are the preamps on the 702 just that much better and the korgs pre's poor enough to depreciate the possibility of 1 bit audio recording?  The SD 7xx's are used on many professional projects not excluding some major motion pictures.  It is no doubt an awesome piece of equipment.  It has the build, strenght, reputation, and professional quality to take care of business.  But is 24/192 to soon be replaced by 1-bit audio?  I just don't want to come in on the tail end of something even though the 7xx's are great products.   Alas. . . the things I don't know   Alot more than what I do know.

Regarding preamps, best to answer this for yourself by listening to the many shows that have been recorded with the 7xx.  Those are all uploaded to www.archive.org.  If you want to hear the /xx preamps though make sure you're only listening to samples that don't have a different preamp in front of the 7xx. 

Regarding 24 bit audio, it's all about getting a sampling resolution that records enough information so that there is no loss in fidelity during the recording of the audio.  There's no magic carpet ride here.  It's about developing technology that will write fast enough and with enough resolution...it's bits and bytes being written to magnetic media.  Beyond that, quality in sound recording is a function of the stuff you put in front of the data writer...the mics, preamp, A/D etc.

The SD-7xx enables 24 bit recording at sampling rates up to 192kbps.  Not many people actually record at the 192 sampling rate.  That's just too much information and is past the point of diminishing returns (in most peoples' opinions) and results in huge files to manage.  Most people record at 24/48 or 24/96. 

Regarding 24bit, I don't fully understand how it works, but suffice to say that 24bit provides an order of magnitude greater resolution than 16 bit.  It is my understanding that another order of magnitude beyond 24bit is again beyond the point of diminishing returns in terms of what we can hear with our ears on recorded mediums.

As it is, general music playback technology has not yet fully caught up to 24 bit.  We still don't have 24bit playback systems for say burning 24 bit files onto DVD and playing the DVD in your car. 

So, IMHO you really don't have to worry about technology advances beyond what 24 bit can offer...or leapfrogging past 24bit.  You'd probably never be able to hear the difference with the 'naked ear' anyway.

Bottom line is that 24bit 7xx digital recorders are not about to become obsolete.

[stevetoney]

This thread was originated with Otherone asking about media for the 7xx.  I also use 16GB A-data without any problem at all.  I have two of them.

FWIW, some people like the 702 because without the harddrive and with just recording to CF, we are getting fairly significant increased runtimes from decreased power draw.  Others like the 722 because with the internal harddrive you can write simultaneously to two sources in case one or the other fails.  But the harddrive apparently draws a decent amount of power and shortens runtime.

[ghellquist]

Short takes.
I own a 722 since several years. Together with a stereo mic or a pair of omnis it is what comes with me on smaller recordings. On larger recordings, I have a rack on wheels with heavy high end stuff.

As witnessed by others, the 7xx is solid and keeps on working in quite severe surroundings. It is not totally water proof though, for that you need to go to the Cantar http://www.aaton.com/products/sound/cantar/index.php

Comparing the 7xx vs the MR1000 there are some differences in features as well as that ruggedness factor. One worth noting is that the 7xx allows you to listen to an MS recording decoded into normal stereo which to me is an important factor.

I have recently run my 722 flat on against an MR1000. I did two tests, both with MKH20 omnis going Y-cable into both machines. One test with external preamp, DAV BG2, and the other direct into preamps of the boxes. I recorded a largish symphony orchestra, 65 players, playing russian music with lots of dynamics. The MR1000 running at top speed, 5.6 GHz, and the 722 running at 96kHz/24 bit. Once at home the MR1000 file was converted with the included application into 96/24.

The result was interesting to say the least. With external preamp I could hear absolutely no difference. None whatsoever.

Using internal preamps, there was a very slight difference. Not much to talk about, and I could not really say which sounded better.

Now, this is a limited test of the sound, but to me it shows that the difference in sound between units at this level is simply too small to really take into account. One might be better than the other, but other things like moving the mics half a meter makes much larger difference. And selecting the correct mic setup, as example omni mics vs ORTF, makes a difference totally hiding the difference due to different recording equipment.

Well, all this is my opinions based on personal experience.

Gunnar

[animuselanvital]

thanks fellas.  I will try and sink all of this in bfore I make a decision.  Appreciate the help immensely.