Topic: 722 users....a/d stage opinions?

[nic]

the only mics i prefer over mg's are shempz mk21 but thats because mg doesnt make a subcard.
the mg m20 is still the best card cap

[Cooker]

I really like the sound of my 4022>722 but when I added the v2 back in the mix I found it to be a little more transparent. Personally I like the A/D in this box and I think the v2 helps it out a little. When I need to stealth Ill leave the V2 at home and still have a fabulous 24bit recording. So far an all in one box I guess it’s just what you want to haul around in the field. I don’t mind the extra weight of the V2 and 6v SLA.

see, knowing Natelsky, i'm betting he would like 4022 > 722 better because he always found 4022>v2>ad2k too transparent.  i could see you running that 148 in front of it to warm it up too. i don't think i've seen any 4022 > 148 > 722 yet.

then again, Marc, the AD2K+ is a totally different animal at 24 bit. Get in touch with Tractor, he and Adams ran a bunch of different 4022 ~~~ 744 comps this past spring.

[marc0789]

I really like the sound of my 4022>722 but when I added the v2 back in the mix I found it to be a little more transparent. Personally I like the A/D in this box and I think the v2 helps it out a little. When I need to stealth Ill leave the V2 at home and still have a fabulous 24bit recording. So far an all in one box I guess it’s just what you want to haul around in the field. I don’t mind the extra weight of the V2 and 6v SLA.

see, knowing Natelsky, i'm betting he would like 4022 > 722 better because he always found 4022>v2>ad2k too transparent.  i could see you running that 148 in front of it to warm it up too. i don't think i've seen any 4022 > 148 > 722 yet.

then again, Marc, the AD2K+ is a totally different animal at 24 bit. Get in touch with Tractor, he and Adams ran a bunch of different 4022 ~~~ 744 comps this past spring.

I think Swanny ran a few 4022>m148>722 at 10klf.

[CQBert]

I have had my 722 for quite a while and have totally enjoyed it.  Ease of operation, quick start up, flexibility, features, all there.   I have run CCM 4's into it a couple of times but mainly my ADK51TL's. 

For that part the mic's are 90% split omni, 9% Card, 1% M/S.  I am quite happy with the sound. 

24-bit is a huge step in sound quality and as for the A/D - maybe the V3 is a little better, after all that is all it does - shouldn't be a little better. 

There is a whole lot of gear packed into one small place that works really well - nobody else has done that much for that PRICE to date.

I have a buddy with and R1 and R4...  The R4 seems pretty nice, plastic, but nice.  The sound from it is good also(new in the last week - no real critical opinion yet).  If it carries its weight it has a whole new level to itself.

Like anything the 722/4 cannot be perfect - for some too big, others its an A/D but at the end of the day it has nothing to be ashamed of.  The quality is fantastic and I for one do not have regrets... 

Maybe the next generation will improove on what we have now.. at least it is not car battery powered cassette recorders and
2ft long shotgun mics -

CQBert

[Tim]

does anyone really like the 722 as an all in one solution? the more i read on here the more i'm relieved i never bought one. yeah, i know i sound like bean
 

i personally like my schoeps>722 recordings a lot. the schoeps seem to be a good match with teh SD as an all-in-1. The V2 helps tighten the low end makes the highs nice and pristine. To put in terms of grades......schoeps>722 = A ; schoeps>v2>722 = A+ (to me)

have you run your schoeps near-coincident into the 722?

I liked the XY tape of yours that I heard much more than the few other schoeps/722 tapes I had heard before

[thegreatgumbino]

Shrinkynuts McAngrypants.....to damn funny! +T 

[Tim]

Shrinkynuts McAngrypants.....to damn funny! +T

it was a name that they used on The Daily Show right after the hearings

backatcha

[Nick's Picks]

of all the "one box" solutions out there, i've not heard anything that touches Carls Wmod FR2 ..but it has extra oade tweaks as well.

honerable mention...the mod'd UA5 sounds fucking great in 24bit mode.  real good in fact.
on my system anyway..

[Brian]

does anyone really like the 722 as an all in one solution? the more i read on here the more i'm relieved i never bought one. yeah, i know i sound like bean
 

i personally like my schoeps>722 recordings a lot. the schoeps seem to be a good match with teh SD as an all-in-1. The V2 helps tighten the low end makes the highs nice and pristine. To put in terms of grades......schoeps>722 = A ; schoeps>v2>722 = A+ (to me)

have you run your schoeps near-coincident into the 722?

I liked the XY tape of yours that I heard much more than the few other schoeps/722 tapes I had heard before

yes....that was the only show i ran XY at 10k lakes.

and i'd be lying if i said i didn't "touch up" the recording in post

edit:  whatever moke  

[chris_jones]

not sure if it's the pre or the a/d of this box i don't like, but i don't like it standalone.

chris

[Tim]

does anyone really like the 722 as an all in one solution? the more i read on here the more i'm relieved i never bought one. yeah, i know i sound like bean
 

i personally like my schoeps>722 recordings a lot. the schoeps seem to be a good match with teh SD as an all-in-1. The V2 helps tighten the low end makes the highs nice and pristine. To put in terms of grades......schoeps>722 = A ; schoeps>v2>722 = A+ (to me)

have you run your schoeps near-coincident into the 722?

I liked the XY tape of yours that I heard much more than the few other schoeps/722 tapes I had heard before

yes....that was the only show i ran XY at 10k lakes.

and i'd be lying if i said i didn't "touch up" the recording in post

edit: whatever moke

it sounds really, really good...

[marc0789]

not sure if it's the pre or the a/d of this box i don't like, but i don't like it standalone.

chris

I did some critical listening last night, albeit with only the handful of 148>722 shows I have. I do think the a/d is solid, but a *little* vague sounding, and with the tiniest grain to it. Need to listen some more. To my ears, very comparable with the HHB a/d. Which is to say very good, but not quite up to uv22 standards, definitely a few major notches above the trashcan. To me, one of the inviolate taping rules is the *one box rule*. Can't think of one instance when discrete components will not sound better than an all in one unit. Guess I would need to do a 4022>148>modsbm1 versus 4022>m148>722 16 bit versus 24 to really decide, and that ain't gonna happen.

So now I'm fairly torn. The 722 does not, as with some peeps, appeal to me in order to reduce the hassle factor. Totally opposite. It will be a big pita to shell out for the computer, bigger to drop $2400 on the 722, and I will probably spend more time throwing the things to both dvd and cdr. Not to mention that I'm not real big on archiving to disc, even dvd. So the thing has got to sound better than what I run right now, and I have doubts.

[nickgregory]

Marc is your comparison based on you moving to a total one box solution, or keeping the M148?  Curious as I think the jump to 24 bits will likely be a significant improvement, though I understand the comment on the computer and CD/DVD archiving...

[marc0789]

Marc is your comparison based on you moving to a total one box solution, or keeping the M148?  Curious as I think the jump to 24 bits will likely be a significant improvement, though I understand the comment on the computer and CD/DVD archiving...

no, definitely keeping the 148. No offense, but I have no faith that the 722 could replace a topnotch preamp and a/d.

have the cash and the ok from the wife, which is big.....but I don't want to drop all the cash and time and find myself missing something. Still will probably do it, because frankly I need something to keep me interested in taping right now.

[nickgregory]

no, definitely keeping the 148. No offense, but I have no faith that the 722 could replace a topnotch preamp and a/d.

have the cash and the ok from the wife, which is big.....but I don't want to drop all the cash and time and find myself missing something. Still will probably do it, because frankly I need something to keep me interested in taping right now.

no offense taken...that is what I thought you were doing....so you were comparing 24 bit files to 16 bit files?  Or were you comparing post processed dithered 24 bit to 16 bit?