Topic: Sound Devices MixPre-D

[SClassical]

This is very similar to the USB-Pre2:

http://sounddevices.com/products/mixpre-d.htm

With digital out..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LT_76rX2mEM

[rastasean]

looks like a high quality version of juiced link, especially on the bottom of the dslr.

[johnw]

The AD part isn't clear to me. It looks like you can set the output to be AES on the right XLR out. You might be able to change 44.1/48/96 with the small black knob on the front? Hopefully its not controlled over USB. I'm assuming it's 24 bit, but it doesn't state that anywhere. I wonder if they kept the transformers? Seems like there wouldn't be room for the AD components if they did. I wonder how the pre and AD compare to the USBpre 2 and the 7xx.

[kirk97132]

any idea on price? I couldn't find anything.  And it needs 10V so it will not run on DVD battery like the MP-2/mixpre  Hmmmm, I wonder how different this sounds compared to the USBPre2

Specs say 10v but picture shows 5v

[kirk97132]

Transformer input.    States it is 24 bit AES output, but does not look to be switchable

[jbell]

The pic say 5v-18v!!  I think that is the same as the MP2/mixpre

any idea on price? I couldn't find anything.  And it needs 10V so it will not run on DVD battery like the MP-2/mixpre  Hmmmm, I wonder how different this sounds compared to the USBPre2

Specs say 10v but picture shows 5v

[OOK]

Ah man....must resist....need other stufffffff....tranformer based with digi out......must resist....

[page]

interesting.

usbpre2 has spdif out in coax/optical, no aes.
mixpre-d has aes and no spdif.
both have usb.

the usbpre2 is transformerless
the mixpre-d is tranformerful. 

Noticed the P12 option is still in tact on the mixpre-d.

[kirk97132]

interesting.

usbpre2 has spdif out in coax/optical, no aes.
mixpre-d has aes and no spdif.
both have usb.

the usbpre2 is transformerless
the mixpre-d is tranformerful. 

Noticed the P12 option is still in tact on the mixpre-d.

USBPRe2 will clock to external spdif signal
Usb-d no external clocking

Usbpre2 will do analog mic, line and digi out at same time
Usb-d choice of either mic or line or digi out

Usbpre2 80dB gain
Usbpre-d 66db of gain

Usbpre2 more rugged USB-3 Jack
Usb-d Usb mini jack

[su6oxone]

Noticed the P12 option is still in tact on the mixpre-d.

Yeah this is a cool feature, especially for Schoeps users since P12 can power your mics basically twice as long compared with P48 with the same battery supply.  The MixPre, I noticed, can do P48 or P15, which would not be useful in this way since Schoeps (CMC6, CCM, etc.) can use P12 or P48, but not P15.  I like the look of this new MixPre-D also, nicer meter lights. 

[notlance]

Price: $750

http://www.coffeysound.com/Sound-Devices-MixPre-D.html

[OOK]

Price: $750

http://www.coffeysound.com/Sound-Devices-MixPre-D.html

That is very reasonable....the regular mix pre is usually 665$....100$ for a/d section isn't bad as far as I am concerned..

[kirk97132]

It don't make sense the USBpre2 is $650 only thing it won't do is P12...and the DSLR hook up but really $100 more?  Hmmm

[F.O.Bean]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

[page]

It don't make sense the USBpre2 is $650 only thing it won't do is P12...and the DSLR hook up but really $100 more?  Hmmm

I guess if you need AES or P12 (or like transformers), but I agree, it's sort of outclassed by the pre2.

[Todd R]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

[kirk97132]

Wonder if they are just getting ready to drop the usbpre from the line up.  Then this would make more sense. 

[page]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

that brings up an interesting though.

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

[ashevillain]

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

Could always get one of these but then you have to deal with another box.



I would be a sweet box if they could put a Coax or optical out in place of the unbalanced mic out.

[kirk97132]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

that brings up an interesting though.

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

DR-680 accepts AES

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

Could always get one of these but then you have to deal with another box.



I would be a sweet box if they could put a Coax or optical out in place of the unbalanced mic out.

Can't you just use an adapter cable???  http://www.fullcompass.com/product/354649.html

Terry

[Todd R]

Most recorders that can take a coax spdif input can accept an AES signal, either with a straight adapter cable like Terry linked to, or more properly by using a 100>75 transfomer:

http://www.fullcompass.com/product/258528.html

[Todd R]

BTW Terry, if you could change your text to read one-eyed d!ldo or something more obscure, the content blockers at my work would be much better about letting me read any threads you post to. 

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

BTW Terry, if you could change your text to read one-eyed d!ldo or something more obscure, the content blockers at my work would be much better about letting me read any threads you post to. 

LOL!  Fixed it for you...

Terry

[page]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

that brings up an interesting though.

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

DR-680 accepts AES

interesting. Thanks.

Most recorders that can take a coax spdif input can accept an AES signal, either with a straight adapter cable like Terry linked to, or more properly by using a 100>75 transfomer:

http://www.fullcompass.com/product/258528.html

oo, neato. I knew you could convert via the hosa box, but didnt know about the barrel method (does it resolve voltage level differences, or just impedance?)

[kirk97132]

Most recorders that can take a coax spdif input can accept an AES signal, either with a straight adapter cable like Terry linked to, or more properly by using a 100>75 transfomer:

http://www.fullcompass.com/product/258528.html

The 680 automatically sense type of signal and adjusts for it.   and with the 680 it does not always play well with converter boxes due to the way it reads incoming digital stream

[Todd R]

Most recorders that can take a coax spdif input can accept an AES signal, either with a straight adapter cable like Terry linked to, or more properly by using a 100>75 transfomer:

http://www.fullcompass.com/product/258528.html

oo, neato. I knew you could convert via the hosa box, but didnt know about the barrel method (does it resolve voltage level differences, or just impedance?)

It is designed for correcting the impedence differences, but it also affects voltage based on the turns ratio of the transformer.  I'm going from memory, but I think it dropped a 5v signal down to a 0.5V signal.  So yes, iirc it more-or-less corrects the voltage level differences as well.

I don't think it should be a problem using with the 680 since it is not converting the digital stream, it is just correcting impedence and voltage levels.  I sold my Canare 110>75 transformer a couple years back though, so I can't test it with my 680.

[Todd R]

Terry -- thanks for the fix!  My work is no longer blocking my beloved ts.com content.

[audBall]

Work without TS.com is like.....well....work.     Who wants that?

[flipp]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

that brings up an interesting though.

How many recorders can take an AES inbound? What, outside of the 7 series are options?

DR-680 accepts AES

As does the Fostex FR2 - though I've never used the AES input feature on mine

[F.O.Bean]

Now all we need is a good digi-in bit bucket

For the USBPre with optical spdif you have the Sony D50 which is a great recorder.  Not much for a good, cheap reliable coax spdif recorder though.  PMD661, though that is a little spendy for just a bit bucket.

Yeah, I should of specified. I meant a good coax digi-in There is also the MT I/II but I wouldn't trust those as far as I can throw them

[audBall]

It appears that the MixPre-D can act as a playback (D/A) device like the USBPre-2, correct?  They both appear to be USB interfaces.  Ever since the USBPre-2 came out, I've considering slimming down my playback and having my recording rig "double" as input/output. 

Aside from being slightly cumbersome and against the grain, can anyone convince me why this would be a bad idea?  It's really more for financial and practical reasons, which would give me way more use out of my rig considering I don't tape all that often these days.


edit - It appears the MixPre-D does not have a D/A converter.  At least it's not listed in the specs like it is for the USBPre2.  Oh well, no Lundahls for me. 

[datbrad]

My take on the difference between the Mixpre-D and the USBPre2 is application. The USBPre2 is designed primarily as full featured computer interface, with stand alone capability that the original USBPre lacked. It's probably the best laptop interface I have seen on the market.

The Mixpre-D seems to be primarily a film sound and ENG device, which explains the use of input transformers. There is no electronically balanced device that has the same isolation characteristics that transformers provide. With cable runs 100' or more from the mics to the preamp, input transformers are simply going to be the most reliable method and one users in that market expect.

For field recording, I actually think the Mixpre-D would be the best option since it offers normal powering options, the superior isolation properties of transformers, and can be used as either a preamp, or a preamp>A/D combo. If I had a Tascam 680, I would definately want one of these new Mixpre units.

[kirk97132]

Well I have a different input on that.  If you are running 100' cable runs then phantom power is the thing you would want.  It was designed to do those exact applications.  IE: long runs with no noise.  While a transformer can isolate noise ...and I am no expert on this....I would  think if there is noise present in your signal the transformer is not going to remove it.  I thought the application was to tailor the sound IE: add it's own color to the sound. 

And for the 680 the ability to have your preamp be able to sync to an external source is a HUGE advantage. 

that said there is a difference between the transformer sound and not.  And as for "normal" powering...well it does run on AA if that is what you want to do and will be able to use film type power supply currents but for most of us since we are already powering recorders adding power capability to the pre2 is not a big deal, and to add the "d" amounts to the same cable work. 

I do think it could be that they will drop the mixpre from their line up.  this is almost a direct replacement with he addition of A/D.   The other down side to the "D" is it only AES.   
Both are good units and since I have the MP-2 & pre2  I get transformers and digital workhorses.  If I did not have both I would look very hard at this unit.  But as a 680 owner, the external clocking ability is something that I want.

[page]

It appears that the MixPre-D can act as a playback (D/A) device like the USBPre-2, correct?  They both appear to be USB interfaces.  Ever since the USBPre-2 came out, I've considering slimming down my playback and having my recording rig "double" as input/output. 

Aside from being slightly cumbersome and against the grain, can anyone convince me why this would be a bad idea?  It's really more for financial and practical reasons, which would give me way more use out of my rig considering I don't tape all that often these days.

I did exactly that a couple months ago when I bought the usbpre2. Only bummer is the headphone out on the usbpre2 has some hiss, but otherwise it's working as planned.

[datbrad]

Well I have a different input on that.  If you are running 100' cable runs then phantom power is the thing you would want.  It was designed to do those exact applications.  IE: long runs with no noise.  While a transformer can isolate noise ...and I am no expert on this....I would  think if there is noise present in your signal the transformer is not going to remove it.  I thought the application was to tailor the sound IE: add it's own color to the sound. 

I am not sure what you mean by this, since phantom power can be applied by both transformer and transformerless devices. The benefits of transformers is that they provide complete galvanic isolation and the highest common mode rejection, their "sound" is simply an artifact, not why they are used. While "transparent" in sound, electronically balanced inputs can have more grounding and RF issues than transformer balanced inputs, which is the main reason transformers are still in use. Also, transformers are large, heavy, and expensive, so audio MFGs are looking to eliminate them from product designs whenever they can.

It is true that many people consider transformers to be "warmer", in the same way FETs are "warmer" than bipolar transistors. However, for the ENG and film sound market, transformers are desired for the more fundamental reasons I stated above, IMO.

[kirk97132]

^^^  " I am no expert on this" 

[Chadfish]

I am glad to hear I can send the AES to my DR-680 on this new MixPre. I didn't want to have to get a USB-pre2 to do that. The MixPre-D is much sexier.

[kirk97132]

Since the size looks to be exactly the same as the MP-2 mixpre case I thought I'd repost some pix for size comparisons.  The MP-2 is on top.  Usbpre-2 on bottom.  DVD battery for a reference since a lot of us have them. 

[DSatz]

kirkd, I support what DATBRAD is saying about transformers, particularly for long cable runs. The ability of a balanced preamp input to block out interference depends on the balance of the entire circuit, microphone+cable+input. Microphone cables, unfortunately, are never perfectly balanced, and the longer they are, the greater the risk of significant imbalance. Active balanced inputs generally don't reject interference very well under those conditions.

In recent years a circuit technique has emerged (see http://www.thatcorp.com/datashts/dn133.pdf if you're of a mind to) which could help a lot with that, but not many manufacturers have adopted it yet. Maybe if people like us were to be better informed and more demanding, that situation would change. Also, many MANY consumer and semi-pro recorders and preamps still have "pin 1" problems (go ahead, look at http://pin1problem.com/ -- I dare you!) which create paths for interference to be amplified rather than rejected. It's amazing how long it's taking for certain manufacturers to become savvy on these issues.

The whole thing about transformers sounding "warm," or in fact sounding any particular which way, is something of a myth, or at the very least a "myth-underthanding." Transformers in old microphones such as the original Neumann U 47 are a whole other topic--they were part of a design which was carefully tuned as a whole, and the net result depends in part on certain technical shortcomings of those transformers, in today's terms. More recent microphones that were designed to be transformerless are surely better off without them. But the input transformers in the Sound Design class of preamp aren't a "sonic factor"--they're a practical approach to a necessary solution.

--best regards

P.S.: Someone earlier in the thread was concerned about 15-Volt phantom powering and Schoeps microphones that are designed for 12-Volt phantom powering. That voltage difference isn't a problem as long as the other parameters of the power supply are correct.

[mepaca]

P.S.: Someone earlier in the thread was concerned about 15-Volt phantom powering and Schoeps microphones that are designed for 12-Volt phantom powering. That voltage difference isn't a problem as long as the other parameters of the power supply are correct.
[/quote

Hello DSatz-
  I appreciate your knowledge and your willingness to share it. Just to confirm what you are saying- Will my cmc6 amplifiers operate with 15v
phantom power from my mixpre with no signal degradation vs. 48v phantom?

[DSatz]

mepaca: Yes.

[kirk97132]

Thanks datbrad and dsatz.  Always nice to get a deeper understanding of the technical side

[rastasean]

sound devices mixpre-d at NAB: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux0bHwZaxrI&NR=1

AES is on right channel but still stereo out.

my badd...

[Chadfish]

Crap! We can't get both channel 7& 8 with the "D"?

[page]

Crap! We can't get both channel 7& 8 with the "D"?

what?

[Chadfish]

It sounded like the last guy said the AES out of the MixPre-D is only one channel. I wanted to use the MixPre D to feed my spdif input for channels 7 & 8 on my Tascam DR-680. I guess for 800.00 I could just get another DR-680 and have 6 more tracks.

[kirk97132]

AES is stereo just like spdif.  1 AES jack = two digital tracks

[notlance]

The MixPre-D carries L&R AES digital outputs via one XLR-3 connector.  This is a very common way to provide AES digital outputs (and inputs).

[Chadfish]

Right on. That's a relief. Not that I'll be buying one any time soon, as I have a regular MixPre. But for future reference...

[rastasean]

Since not everyone on TS is a member of the yahoo group nature recordist, I thought I would post this completely unabridged opinion of someone's thoughts on the mixpre-D.

The MixPre-D doesn't look like anything to be excited about judging from the specs. It appears to be their old design with a couple of new features, and is more expensive. Transformer inputs are a joke in comparison to modern integrated circuits. The input noise and dynamic range of the digital out is comparable to a $200 Sony PCM-M10, which has an integrated recorder. The 103dB digital output is a very inexpensive add-on and is closer to 16-bit quality than being 24-bit. There is no spec given for input noise with the phantom power turned on nor when at lower gains. It is certainly a battery hog. The connectors for the dedicated output for DSLR use are uncommon, so their idea is to sell an expensive cable to you that you will have trouble finding if you needed one in a pinch. I am still trying to figure out what are the "mixer" features of this microphone preamp? It does give XLR, phantom power and novel AES and USB output, which are very useful features. The AES out can not be used at the same time as the XLR outputs. As a DSLR mic amp, the signals are amplified then attenuated which just injects noise from from the circuitry. All the current DSLR mic amps do this, and my guess would be that at least the MixPre-D might be better than DSLR mic amps from BeachTek or JuiceLink, who don't even really give specifications for their products, but at almost twice the price.

Just my thoughts from looking over the information,
Bruce Rutkoski
www.natureguystudio .com

[tlsmith]

Since not everyone on TS is a member of the yahoo group nature recordist, I thought I would post this completely unabridged opinion of someone's thoughts on the mixpre-D.

The MixPre-D doesn't look like anything to be excited about judging from the specs. It appears to be their old design with a couple of new features, and is more expensive. Transformer inputs are a joke in comparison to modern integrated circuits. The input noise and dynamic range of the digital out is comparable to a $200 Sony PCM-M10, which has an integrated recorder. The 103dB digital output is a very inexpensive add-on and is closer to 16-bit quality than being 24-bit. There is no spec given for input noise with the phantom power turned on nor when at lower gains. It is certainly a battery hog. The connectors for the dedicated output for DSLR use are uncommon, so their idea is to sell an expensive cable to you that you will have trouble finding if you needed one in a pinch. I am still trying to figure out what are the "mixer" features of this microphone preamp? It does give XLR, phantom power and novel AES and USB output, which are very useful features. The AES out can not be used at the same time as the XLR outputs. As a DSLR mic amp, the signals are amplified then attenuated which just injects noise from from the circuitry. All the current DSLR mic amps do this, and my guess would be that at least the MixPre-D might be better than DSLR mic amps from BeachTek or JuiceLink, who don't even really give specifications for their products, but at almost twice the price.

Just my thoughts from looking over the information,
Bruce Rutkoski
www.natureguystudio .com

[kirk97132]

DOH wrong board

[rastasean]

Looks like b&h will start carrying this pretty soon. Here is a little writeup from Sam at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/audio/hands-reviews/new-sound-devices-mixpre-d-camera-sound-and-post?BI=8067&kw=Article_Sound_Devices

Its neat but expensive and requires two additional products if you want to use it with your DSLR.

[mountaintaper]

I've been running mine for a few weeks now, I like the sound of it, especially with my KM150's.

[hi and lo]

Jon Tatooles from Sound Devices states the mixpre is a little better for... you guessed it... mixing! The usbpre2 is better if higher sound quality is needed. ymmv

http://vimeo.com/22302001

[page]

Jon Tatooles from Sound Devices states the mixpre is a little better for... you guessed it... mixing! The usbpre2 is better if higher sound quality is needed. ymmv

http://vimeo.com/22302001

not real surprised. I'm guessing the remark is in relation to the transformer-less design of the usbpre2.

[jonch070]

Hey all might start a new topic on this, I know this is an old post BUT:

Thinking of buying a MixpreD over the 702 because of ios capability, but still want recording when I dont have the ipad around (like in rain etc). Mostly nature recording.

Functionally will having a bit bucket make that much of a difference from recording the line level out from the mixpre to a sperate device? I was planning on just running the XLR outs from the Mixpre into the line in on my Sony PCM-m10 which im told bypasses the Sony pre's and the all the sony does is just pure conversion. There would be XLR to 3.5mm adaption, but still. 

Is the conversion really noticeably superior on the Mixpre as opposed to this solution? Am I losing that much quality from the conversion on the sony? Am I loosing that much quality with the  XLR to 3.5mm adaption (or alternatively tape out)?

Thanks,

Jonathan


Thanks!

Jon