Topic: Mixpre and ? or sound devices 722 - advice requested

[AB52]

I need a nature recording and band recording portable field recorder.  I currently have a mixpre for sale on ebay as I was going to get a Sound Devices 722.  Would I be better off for the money (and still have pro audio sound), by keeping the mixpre and matching it with a Sony D50 or Fostex FRle or something else?

What is the real advantage of the SD 722, other than it is all in one unit and it can record to hard drive and flash at the same time.

Another thing - I must be able to have continuous recording beyond any 2gb limit.

THANKS.

[taperj]

 First off, there's definitely no reason why you couldn't use your mixpre with another recorder for live and nature recording. My thoughts on that for nature recording are that a rig would be harder to use with a separate recorder and preamp. One big advantage of the all-in-one unit would be less fussing with levels to make the recorder and preamp get in the sweet spot you want it to be in, especially with "in the wild" conditions where you have wind gusts etc to react to(I just went out 2 days ago in the Chicago blizzard and tried taping some thunder with heavy winds and spent way too much time trying to get the recorder and pre where it needed to be, not to mention in the bad weather messing with the LS-10 was a real pain). A 722(or 702 for that matter) is simple and effective in this regard, with one place to adjust your levels, not to mention that the recorder is bombproof for all terrain recording and built to be accessed from the front so it's very easily put into a harness that's manageable and weatherproof while climbing, hiking, whatever. One other thing I would say is that the A>D is probably better in the 702/722 than the Sony or the Fostex(I've never used a FR2LE so please forgive me if my assumption is incorrect on this). The preamp in the 722/702 is also a step up from the mixpre according to sound devices. I run a mixpre and like the character of it, I personally wouldn't say that the 7xx's necessarily sound better, I would say they sound different.
 If you are comfortable running flash media and don't need a harddrive, you could easily get away with a 702 here and save some $$. The 722 is definitely a nice choice as well for the extra $$ and would take you far.
 Hopefully this helps some.
 J

[page]

What is the real advantage of the SD 722, other than it is all in one unit and it can record to hard drive and flash at the same time.

for concert recording, it's a matter of preference, but where low level noise is concerned such as for nature recording, Sound Devices recommends their 7 series over any of their mixers as the 7 series have lower noise floors to the order of almost 10db. There was a KB article over on their site about it that I came across while looking for something else.

Within the 7 series, the 7X2/744 have a noise floor that is higher than the 788 which has a different input signal chain (again, referencing their advice articles), so if low level noise is *really* an issue, pick the 788 over the others, otherwise, the 7 series in general will serve you better. Whether the unit is worth the cost is a personal decision, but that's how SD sees it. Best of luck.

[aaronji]

Another thing - I must be able to have continuous recording beyond any 2gb limit.

I think only a few recorders allow .wav files larger than 2 GB (PMD620 and PMD661, for example), and those max out at 4 GB (the .wav format maximum).  Most recorders automatically start a new file at 2GB, but that is (almost) always seemless when two files are pasted together...

[taperj]

Within the 7 series, the 7X2/744 have a noise floor that is higher than the 788 which has a different input signal chain (again, referencing their advice articles), so if low level noise is *really* an issue, pick the 788 over the others, otherwise, the 7 series in general will serve you better. Whether the unit is worth the cost is a personal decision, but that's how SD sees it. Best of luck.

Good point on the noise floor page, that's something that I would check before committing to using the mixpre as well. I am guessing it's not as low as any of the 7xx series.

[page]

Within the 7 series, the 7X2/744 have a noise floor that is higher than the 788 which has a different input signal chain (again, referencing their advice articles), so if low level noise is *really* an issue, pick the 788 over the others, otherwise, the 7 series in general will serve you better. Whether the unit is worth the cost is a personal decision, but that's how SD sees it. Best of luck.

Good point on the noise floor page, that's something that I would check before committing to using the mixpre as well. I am guessing it's not as low as any of the 7xx series.

na, the 552 isn't even as low as the 722.

found the article.

comping specs, the mixpre has a equivilent input noise threshold that is about 4db less than the 7 series (126db vs 130db), and the A/D of the 7 series is about 11db better than the 552's (114db vs 103db). The mixpre and 7 series units also share a 4db split in favor of the 722 in regards to dynamic range (110 vs 114). The 788 gains another 9db of dynamic range at the A/D stage vs the 722.

[AB52]

Lots of good points.  My summary:
SD 7 series beats the mixpre/cheaper recorder combo for:
1.  Lower noise floor.
2.  Most likely better AD/DA converters
3.  A lot easier to calibrate outdoors having one unit instead of two.

So that takes care of it.  My mixpre is on ebay!

THANKS,
AB

[su6oxone]

Plus the 7xx lasts many hours with the Sony L-series batteries.  The 4400mAh one doesn't stick out too much and lasts for a good six hours powering Schoeps MK4/CMC6 or CCMs.  Better than AAx2 or using an external power supply with the MixPre.

[rastasean]

The mixpre has been used in nature recordings many many times by all kinds of people with all kinds of recording gear. Don't worry, I'm not knocking the 722 since its a very nice recorder but you already have the mixpre. Doesn't the noise of the microphones also make a difference? What kind of microphones are you going to be paring it with?

[AB52]

Thanks for the important point.

I am either going to be using a pair of Beyerdynamc MC950s, DPA 4011s or Sennheiser 8020 (quiet omnis) depending on the circumstance.

You make a good point about the mic noise.  but all noise adds up.  Is it cost effective?  Perhaps not.  Pehaps the issue of coordinating two different units is the more serious concern and even that can be resolved with a little patience.  Thanks for sticking up for the mixpre.  I had tested it with a PCM-D1 for a couple of minutes (the only use I have put it to, to make sure it worked) - and I thought it sounded fantastic and quiet - that was with the MC950s.
As you may tell from my other thread I started, I am also considering whether to invest in two chanels or as much as 8.  (not for nature recording - but for other live recording needs.) 
THANKS,
AB

The mixpre has been used in nature recordings many many times by all kinds of people with all kinds of recording gear. Don't worry, I'm not knocking the 722 since its a very nice recorder but you already have the mixpre. Doesn't the noise of the microphones also make a difference? What kind of microphones are you going to be paring it with?

[F.O.Bean]

IMO the 7xx sounds better than the mixpre's pre's, but theyre just diff. The mixpre has a warmer punchier sound while the 7xx have a more clean and transparent and in-your-face sound, at least IMO

Either way you'll be happy. I vote for the 7xx, because its such a SIMPLE DECK to run. I set my levels in the 1st 5 mins of the show and then zip my bag up....

[su6oxone]

I set my levels in the 1st 5 mins of the show and then zip my bag up....

When I had my 702 I never needed to set levels.  Or rather, I pre-set levels for every show.  I used low-sensitivity setting, line-in w/P48, and gain at max (+18dB or so) and hit record before the show started.  Every show I recorded like that (at least 30 or so) turned out great because the noise floor on the 702 is so low, that with 24 bit recording there was never anything close to hiss after normalizing to 0dB (well, actually -0.2dB).  Sometimes, like for Dave Matthews, I set up my stand and gear at the SBD cage, hit record before the opening act, went to my seat for the show, then came back after the end to pick up the gear... and got a great recording with a very low noise floor.  I miss the simplicity of it all back then. 

[page]

Thanks for the important point.

I am either going to be using a pair of Beyerdynamc MC950s, DPA 4011s or Sennheiser 8020 (quiet omnis) depending on the circumstance.

You make a good point about the mic noise.  but all noise adds up.  Is it cost effective?  Perhaps not.  Pehaps the issue of coordinating two different units is the more serious concern and even that can be resolved with a little patience.  Thanks for sticking up for the mixpre.  I had tested it with a PCM-D1 for a couple of minutes (the only use I have put it to, to make sure it worked) - and I thought it sounded fantastic and quiet - that was with the MC950s.
As you may tell from my other thread I started, I am also considering whether to invest in two chanels or as much as 8.  (not for nature recording - but for other live recording needs.) 
THANKS,
AB

Couple of things, the DPAs (IMHO) will render a better nature recording. They are priced accordingly as well, but all costs being equal I think they'll do better. Second, the 950s have an output that is roughly 8-10db hotter than the DPAs, but also has a slightly higher self-noise compared to other mics that we use here (inc the DPAs). They seemed to be designed for loud sources is what I'm getting at, which for concert recording or some eng stuff is great.

Can you turn out a great nature recording with the 950s, the mixpre, and a PCM-D50/M10? Sure, undoubtably, and that's why I tried to preface my remarks above as such, it's a "how much do you want to spend and how critical is this" type game. If I were doing nature recording, and I was all hard core about doing the best possible job, I'd buy a set of DPAs to pair with my 722, but neither are necessary for the job. best of luck.

[AB52]

It is an interesting issue as to when the purchase of equipment for something professional has diminishing returns - assumie one does care about what they spend.  I already have DPA 4011s.   I already have the mixpre (which I have for sale here and on ebay - but I am tempted to keep)
Thanks.

[Todd R]

Another option is to get the new Sound Devices USBPre 2 which can act as a standalone (no computer needed) preamp+AD.  Feed it a digital signal to a Sony D50, and at that point, the D50 is just capturing the bits from the USBPre 2.  The D50 is a nice unit, and I find it to be very reliable and robust.

The USBPre 2 supposedly has the exact same A/D stage as the 722/702 and the analog stage/preamp is supposed to be very, very similar and use the same architecture as the 722/702.  A pairing of the USBPre 2 and the D50 (digital in) should be very close to the sound of the 722/702, at a lower cost.

BTW, the USBPre 2 is going to be much closer in sound to the 722 than the mixpre.  The USBPre has pretty much the same preamp architecture as the 722, whereas the mixpre is a transformer based preamp, so it isn't going to have the same sound as the 722.

[AB52]

Todd - have you found something on the SD website or somewhere else that incidates that the A/D stage is identical to the 722?  Is the A/D clock identical (very important). And it does not appear that that noise specs etc are close.
And how do you power the USB2 in the field compared to the mixpre?
True - the mixpre will not sound like the 722 because of the Lundahl transformers which can be good or bad - not really an issue to me.

Nevetheless, your recommendation can theoretically be the best solution for the money. 

I do know of at least two D50s that need repair.  One is on line at Musician's Friends.  Another one is privately owned.  Built in China - not sure it is the long term substitute to a 722.

Another option is to get the new Sound Devices USBPre 2 which can act as a standalone (no computer needed) preamp+AD.  Feed it a digital signal to a Sony D50, and at that point, the D50 is just capturing the bits from the USBPre 2.  The D50 is a nice unit, and I find it to be very reliable and robust.

The USBPre 2 supposedly has the exact same A/D stage as the 722/702 and the analog stage/preamp is supposed to be very, very similar and use the same architecture as the 722/702.  A pairing of the USBPre 2 and the D50 (digital in) should be very close to the sound of the 722/702, at a lower cost.

BTW, the USBPre 2 is going to be much closer in sound to the 722 than the mixpre.  The USBPre has pretty much the same preamp architecture as the 722, whereas the mixpre is a transformer based preamp, so it isn't going to have the same sound as the 722.

[Todd R]

I don't own and haven't run the USBPre 2, just forwarding along info I've heard and read on it.  There are a lot of posts on the USBPre here, best to do a search on it to dig up the specific posts.  I've heard about the A/D architecture and preamp sections second hand through a SD reseller, supposedly coming from SD, and also have read the same thing on ts.com -- again, information supposedly coming right from SD.  FWIW, YMMV, etc, etc.

The noise performance on the USBPre isn't as good as the 722, but it is pretty close.  At that point, it might not mean different preamp sections or architecture and may just be getting into the effects of board layout, etc.  The preamp sections could be very different, I'm just saying that the noise specs themselves may not be a reliable means of telling whether they're different.

On the D50, I've owned one for years and find it to be pretty solid, esp for a handheld recorder.  Not to the level of the 702 or 722 (I've owned both of those -- just built like tanks).  Then again, I wouldn't take much stock in the fact that there are broken D50's out there.  The 702/722 units break too (though at the price of buying one, those are probably something someone gets fixed and doesn't just dump them).  The LEDs on the 722 are known to go out, and I've heard of the main board on 722 units getting fried.  Everything can break, a couple anecdotal data points on failure don't mean much -- though again, I agree that the 7x2 units are very, very robust.

I don't think there is much arguing that for field work and nature recording, the 702/722 may be your best bet, and with used prices you can get one for not that much of a premium over the USBPre+D50 combo, esp since the USBPre is just out and you won't likely find those used.  But a USBPre+D50 combo can get a lot of the audio benefits of a 722, and will cost several hundred less.

One final note:  The D50 can be finicky about getting a digital input -- the sending device must follow the SPDIF standard exactly, and many A/D's don't follow the standard exactly, esp regarding consumer bits.  I haven't followed the USBPre threads enough lately since I decided to get a Lunatec V3 instead.  You should dig around to make sure the USBPre plays nice with the D50 if you want to go this route.

[rastasean]

powering the usbpre2 in the field can be done with anything from a plastic 4 AA battery sled to a tekkeon mp3450.

[AB52]

Thanks Todd - for taking the time to address this fully.  You make a good point about build quality and hearing about a couple of units not working.  It could be mere coincidence that I happenned to hear about it.  And the units could have dropped on rocks or whatever.  I do not know.

I will say this - if a D50 breaks and you get one at a good price - you can buy another one!

It would be good to know how the digital input of the D50 works with the USBpre2.

Best,
AB

I don't own and haven't run the USBPre 2, just forwarding along info I've heard and read on it.  There are a lot of posts on the USBPre here, best to do a search on it to dig up the specific posts.  I've heard about the A/D architecture and preamp sections second hand through a SD reseller, supposedly coming from SD, and also have read the same thing on ts.com -- again, information supposedly coming right from SD.  FWIW, YMMV, etc, etc.

The noise performance on the USBPre isn't as good as the 722, but it is pretty close.  At that point, it might not mean different preamp sections or architecture and may just be getting into the effects of board layout, etc.  The preamp sections could be very different, I'm just saying that the noise specs themselves may not be a reliable means of telling whether they're different.

On the D50, I've owned one for years and find it to be pretty solid, esp for a handheld recorder.  Not to the level of the 702 or 722 (I've owned both of those -- just built like tanks).  Then again, I wouldn't take much stock in the fact that there are broken D50's out there.  The 702/722 units break too (though at the price of buying one, those are probably something someone gets fixed and doesn't just dump them).  The LEDs on the 722 are known to go out, and I've heard of the main board on 722 units getting fried.  Everything can break, a couple anecdotal data points on failure don't mean much -- though again, I agree that the 7x2 units are very, very robust.

I don't think there is much arguing that for field work and nature recording, the 702/722 may be your best bet, and with used prices you can get one for not that much of a premium over the USBPre+D50 combo, esp since the USBPre is just out and you won't likely find those used.  But a USBPre+D50 combo can get a lot of the audio benefits of a 722, and will cost several hundred less.

One final note:  The D50 can be finicky about getting a digital input -- the sending device must follow the SPDIF standard exactly, and many A/D's don't follow the standard exactly, esp regarding consumer bits.  I haven't followed the USBPre threads enough lately since I decided to get a Lunatec V3 instead.  You should dig around to make sure the USBPre plays nice with the D50 if you want to go this route.

[page]

My appologies for brevety, phone typing sux:

One of SD's folks posted in the usbpre2 thread that they use the same A/D chip. Second, the usbpre2 works w/ the d50 after the update, again per Nic.

[moooose]

For about a year I used a SD50 + MixPre combo, mostly for nature recordings, then I switched to a SD 702. Mics? Usually AT3032 (very quiet omnis), plus Rode NT4, Rode NTG-1, AT 853 in both cases.
IMHO there is a difference in favor of the 702 in terms of self noise and detail. It's subjective (and the SD 50 + MixPre duo is great, too), but to me there is one nonetheless.
Just my 0.02. Anyway I still trust ears and taste more than tech specs.

[rastasean]

What is the SD50?

Just so the OP knows, the 3032 mics are not longer made and replaced by the 4022s which are electric condenser omni microphones.

[willndmb]

What is the SD50?

Just so the OP knows, the 3032 mics are not longer made and replaced by the 4022s which are electric condenser omni microphones.

prob sony d50

[moooose]

Yes, it is a Sony D 50. Sorry for the typo.

[AB52]

If I understand it correctly, the USBpre2 has a a toslink cable output.   So what cable goes from the USBpre2 to the Sony PCM-d50 optical digital in?
Anyone have a link for the cable that works?

And I see that the USB pre2 is battery powered.  Sounds painful - but I assume a battery powered laptop could power it for a whle. (especially those little netbooks are getting fairly small).

Still - that is three pieces - A D50, USBpre2, and power supply.

SD 722 is looking better to me all the time.
Best to all,
AB

[page]

If I understand it correctly, the USBpre2 has a a toslink cable output.   So what cable goes from the USBpre2 to the Sony PCM-d50 optical digital in?
Anyone have a link for the cable that works?

And I see that the USB pre2 is battery powered.  Sounds painful - but I assume a battery powered laptop could power it for a whle. (especially those little netbooks are getting fairly small).

Still - that is three pieces - A D50, USBpre2, and power supply.

SD 722 is looking better to me all the time.
Best to all,
AB

Yes, technically it is battery powered, but so is the 722 (it just takes an attached battery or one connected just like the usbpre2).

Anyway, the cable is toslink (5side, squarish, half the size of a dime) on one end and 3.5mm optical on the other.

http://www.amazon.com/3-5MM-TOSLINK-FIBER-OPTIC-TOSLINK-mini-Toslink/dp/B00006LVF3

[AB52]

Thanks Page for your help.  Any recommendation on the power supply?
I really appreciate your help.  You make a good point about the battery.

[page]

Thanks Page for your help.  Any recommendation on the power supply?
I really appreciate your help.  You make a good point about the battery.

tekkeon, that way you can have AAs in the D50, a 6v connector to the D50 as a secondary power supply (like the 702) and then the usb out off of the same battery to the usbpre2. 1 battery, fairly long run time since the D50 is only 6v if I remember correctly. Now that would be bulkier than a 722 (and you would only get 1 recording medium compared to the 722's 2 or more), but it's cheaper and the sound would be virtually the same. It now turns into a cost vs space issue instead of cost vs sound which is what it was earlier.