The 7xx boxes were not designed for the taper market, or even the professional location recording engineer; they were designed for the film and video sound mixer. A sound mixer's primary concern is that his equipment be dependable. If I blow a recording it's embarrassing and may cost me my next job. If a film sound mixer misses a take it could cost thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars. For example, the sound for the film "The Dark Knight" was recorded with a 788T. In that film they blow up a hospital and there is no second take for that scene. 7xx recorders are often used for ENG and scientific purposes under extreme conditions where failure is not an option. It just so happens that the 7xx boxes sound pretty good too.
The 7xx competition is not a PMD661 but rather recorders from Aaton, Zaxcom, and Nagra. Compared to recorders from those companies, the Sound Devices boxes are often less expensive.
This is it, of all of the gear I've used; I can guarantee that I can turn out a recording at the end of the night, that's not necessarily true with others. Yes, there is a high likelihood of others working, but with dual media and dual power supplies for redundancy, plus the odds of something outright failing like the P48 section of the machine is
really slim...
It's just the difference between a pro-sumer box and a professional box.
Do
we need that for recording? The vast majority, no, but that doesn't mean it's a bad box.
If I took a BMW to work and a bicycle the next, would anyone even know the difference if I didn't tell them? I understand the professional use/reliability aspect of it, but if the pre is so good in an SD 7XX, why do most run a V2, V3, or other pre with it?
Because it's just TS that rags hard on the preamps. Go talk over at GS or some of the nature sites, sure, some don't like them (e.g. the nagrists), but it's a minority that complain. What sort of sound do you want is the grand question? The SD preamps are
really clean and rather dry (which is the typical complaint) but that's the intent for overdubs or other work where you're stacking audio or replacing sections and want the gear used to sound seamless. With what we do, folks often prefer some analog/harmonic distortion or some other textural addition (which could be considered a form of distortion I guess) to their recording, but we're really just hunting for flavor, not necessity at that point.
For a couple of years I ran my stuff straight into the 722 and was happy. I only have a preamp now because of odd circumstances (more "it found me" sort of thing), not because I went looking for it. I can get
great recordings now, and unpleasant recordings (texture/flavor-wise), but I got
consistently (just) good recordings with just the 722.
I had a discussion with a fellow 722 owner last night. At this stage, you can pick up the usbpre2 and a D50 (all new) for about half the list price of a 722 and get the same sound and many of the same functions. The catch; you have one more link to worry about, no redundancy in the power dept, and no redundancy in the medium department. For 95% of our concert taping, that's fine (guestlisting or contract work being that last sliver). If someone likes the SD sound, that’s the route to go now, so if you're not doing mission critical stuff where it would be hideously embarrassing to come back and say "hey, sorry, my gear died" at the end of the event, the 7 series really doesn't hold much for you, but there are few professional jobs which would consider that option viable. The only reason I'm keeping mine is because I'm still doing around 10 or so shows a year where I absolutely
need something at the end, otherwise I'd make the switch.
edit: spellcheck in IE would be nice... (and clarification added).
Topic: Sound Devices 7xx series- why are they so expensive? (Read 16854 times)