Topic: Sound Devices 722 vs Korg MR 1000

[soundoc]

Am new to this site and to location recording but not completely inexperienced as a recordist.  Have had a home studio for a couple of years and record local bands/projects to computer via multichannel Firewire interface and process with Sonar.  Have Earthworks TC 20 mics and a homemade Jecklin disk which sound amazing  for 2 channel recording even in suboptimally designed room.  Would like to get into location recording partly as a hobby and partly because family members are in several local bands and other musical groups which play out.  Musical spectrum is wide--rock, jazz, vocal and even some classical.

Interested in a "one box" solution for music recording on site--no stealth required (trust me, most of the groups being recorded would be flattered!!).   Simplicity for me would be key as well as ability to have the device used by folks even not as sophisticated as me (read = older teenagers who would like to record band practices). 

Have $ to buy SD 722 or Korg MR 1000 which seem to both get very favorable reviews here and elsewhere on internet.   Am value minded as well but kind of a nut re. great sound.  Am familiar with DSD "sound" as have about 100 SACDs some of which (natively recorded into DSD)  I find amazing through a decent stereo system 

So, am interested in head to head comparisons of SD 722 and KORG MR 1000 from folks who may have seen/heard/used both and would have informed opinion.  Issues of comparative interest:

1) Simplicity of use
2) Build and expected durability
3) Sound as a one box solution--particularly in the realms of comparable recording such as 24/96 which I could actually do something with in terms of my current editing/sharing capacities. 
4) For MR1000, is the DSD sound really that different than 24/96 and above PCM?
5) For non professional but serious hobbyist is SD722 overkill? Is MR1000 too new and too gimmicky to have staying power as a product? 
6) What would you buy with your hard earned $ given price/performance ratio?

Thanks in advance for advice

[mmedley.]

1) Simplicity of use
2) Build and expected durability
3) Sound as a one box solution--particularly in the realms of comparable recording such as 24/96 which I could actually do something with in terms of my current editing/sharing capacities. 
4) For MR1000, is the DSD sound really that different than 24/96 and above PCM?
5) For non professional but serious hobbyist is SD722 overkill? Is MR1000 too new and too gimmicky to have staying power as a product? 
6) What would you buy with your hard earned $ given price/performance ratio?

Thanks in advance for advice

Welcome aboard. I am slightly biased on my opinion, however everything I have read (and seen) leads me to the following...

1. Either will win this one. They are both easy to use. The 722 might have a slight advantage when it comes to size.
2. 722. No doubt that this unit performs in extreme weather/harsh conditions and is built rock solid.
3. 722. Very nice pres and a really nice A>D. I think the Korg pre's are very sensitive and not the greatest out of the box, but good nonetheless.
4. DSD is a nice upgrade to PCM audio. However, there are not too many options with playback and mastering of DSD. You have to rely on Korg's software to do the DSD > PCM conversion. Not a deal breaker, but just something else to think about.
5. No way, IMO! The 722 is expensive, but you get piece of mind. It is a pro unit used on mission critical projects.
6. Only thing I would have done differently than buying a 722, would have been buying a 744t!

I would love a MR1000 myself, but I am going to wait until there are more flavors and playback/mastering options. I am perfectly happy with recording 24/96 for the time being.

[stirinthesauce]

I've played with both.  The mr-1000's pres are very nice, however, for louder sources you must either run pads on your mics or attenuate the signal before the recorder.  That is the only drawback, IMO.  The build is a little more solid on the 722, though both are built very well, and are a breeze to use.  If you've got an extra grand to spend, go for the 722.  If you would rather save it and put it towards something else, the korg is a solid recorder that, in my experience, sounds great out of the box.

[H₂O]

FWIW - You may want to look at a Sound Devices 702 as well if recording to a HDD is not too critical as it offers all the same features of the 722 w/o the HDD at $600 less (you cannot add an internal HDD to the 702).  Compact Flash Memory is getting pretty cheap and you can easily get 8GB high quailty cards for less than $100. 

Also with 7xx series V2 hardware and firmware you can record to an external Firewire HDD if necessary. 

I am probably going to go this route in the near future so I can afford to keep my V3.

[carlbeck]

I own the MR-1000, I have only recorded one show with it so far but the results were very impressive. I feel the pre-amps are excellent for a one box solution. It is not built as well as the SD but I feel it sounds on par if not a little better. Honestly it is a tough call b/c the SD is such a nice piece but they don't come cheap. I spent less on the Korg & have no regrets, I would do it again in a heartbeat.

[flintstone]

Here's a link to results of testing the self-noise of the preamps in many of today's recorders.  The 722 and the MR-1000 are included.  These tests are helpful because they measure how the recorders perform under identical test conditions.

http://www.avisoft.com/recordertests.htm

My reading of these results is that, under these test conditions, the 722 preamp has noticeably less self-noise and a wider dynamic range than the MR-1000.  In other words, you pay more for the 722, but you get more as well. 

The price/performance leader in these tests is the new Fostex FR-2LE.  Its performance in the tests is among the best.  Street price is less than $600.

Flintstone

[carlbeck]

I think the tests are valid to a certain extent but in our environments of recording music concerts I don't think the tests matter. All that matters is how the units sound. The testing to me does not indicate how the units will perform in the environment I will use the unit in. Maybe it matters more in a studio setting though so it is a valid concern.

[F.O.Bean]

i am a bit biased, but for proven reliability and ease of use and better self-noise and dynamics, its a clear winner IMO

once DSD unfolds over the next 5 years, it will hopefully be as easy to listen to/edit as PCM is now. but for now I think the 722 is your best bet.

[WiFiJeff]

I think the tests are valid to a certain extent but in our environments of recording music concerts I don't think the tests matter. All that matters is how the units sound. The testing to me does not indicate how the units will perform in the environment I will use the unit in. Maybe it matters more in a studio setting though so it is a valid concern.

I think this is absolutely the case.  The Korg mic-in will overload very easily, while I've never had that problem (with the same mics) with the 722, and there's no way to see this from the chart.  I did run both together Friday, but the results are not comparable since I was running two mic setups and the mic differences dominate any recorder differences.  The 722 is way sturdier than the MR1000, it is a brick.  My MR1000 had a hard drive glitch its first outing, which made me very nervous about using it without a backup recording going, and there have been warnings about moving it while recording.  I hope to do an A/B test 722/MR1000 using the same mics in about two weeks, if I can get a hold of a decent mixer to feed them.

Jeff

[ghellquist]

I hope to do an A/B test 722/MR1000 using the same mics in about two weeks, if I can get a hold of a decent mixer to feed them.

All you will need are two Y-cables. There is no problem in connecting the two preamps in parallell. Turn on phantom power on only one of them - there is a very small chance that two phantom feeds will interfer with each other.  I plan to do a similar test myself (own a 722, a friend has a MR1000).

Gunnar

[soundoc]

Identical mike feed recordings are exactly the type of observations that I am interested in.  Clearly one of the great debates that involves all pro and consumer audio is the importance of objective gear measurement vs. subjective opinion.  For instance, in the playback realm, much tube gear measures more poorly than solid state gear, but is often preferred for its intangible qualities.   In the end, it is subjective opinion about the quality of the recordings that matters more I think. 

Of great interest as well to me would be what the two recorders sound like head to head in different recording modes:

a)   Native recordings of 16/44 and 24/96
b)   Highest capable resolution recordings head to head
c)   Highest capable resolution recordings converted down to current "usable" formats such as 16/44 and 24/96

Does anyone have this type of experience with the recorders?

Thanks to all for advice so far.  I shall endeavor to be careful with my pronouns to keep all of the readership happy!!

Soundoc

[it-goes-to-eleven]

All you will need are two Y-cables. There is no problem in connecting the two preamps in parallell.

I have had good experiences running splitters... and once it ruined a recording (both sources). The problem was in the bass.  So I no longer run a splitter for anything important.

Like with any new recorder, I was curious about the MR1000... but once it came out I felt they'd blown the requirements analysis. It doesn't even have a hold switch. I figured they'd simply add the function via firmware update... but they haven't bothered.  The inputs can't even handle most mics at rock SPLs. Who spec'd that thing?

[TNJazz]

1) Simplicity of use

Both are very simple to use.  The Korg is probably simpler though.  The SD has a shit-ton of menu options.

2) Build and expected durability

Both are built well - the SD are more robust for sure though.  The Korg seems very solid until you hold a SD.

3) Sound as a one box solution--particularly in the realms of comparable recording such as 24/96 which I could actually do something with in terms of my current editing/sharing capacities. 

Both sound excellent.  I like the Korg's sound.  It's very detailed and clean using the internal preamps.

4) For MR1000, is the DSD sound really that different than 24/96 and above PCM?

Good God yes.  There's absolutely no comparison.  Even the DSD dithered to PCM files smoke straight PCM files.

5) For non professional but serious hobbyist is SD722 overkill? Is MR1000 too new and too gimmicky to have staying power as a product? 

Not overkill, but you should ask yourself how much you really need all the additional features of the SD.  I doubt the Korg is going to end up considered gimmicky.  There are a number of professional engineers who are very impressed with Korg's offering thus far.

6) What would you buy with your hard earned $ given price/performance ratio?

I'd buy the Korg, personally.  I don't need a lot of bells and whistles when I record to 2 channel.  I want a rig that's mics -> recorder (or mics -> pre -> recorder) and I want to be able to capture in native DSD format.  I was never a believer in high sample rates making that much of a difference until I heard it from this recorder.

When I go out and record 2 channel, the Korg is the deck that gets used.  If it's 4 channel we'll use the 744, but I will always capture to DSD first if possible.

[carlbeck]

I realize for the community there needs to be a comp but for those of us who own the technology or have heard it there is absolutely no comparison. DSD just flat out sounds better even when it is downsampled. 

[TNJazz]

We need a comp!!

There will be one in the next few weeks, I'm sure.  I want to be able to use the same pair of mics, pre and cables for it though.

If I'd thought about it I would have done a comp on Friday night.