Topic: New Sound Devices 7 Series Recorders

[cascademedia]

Hello Folks,
We just received word on 2 new recorders from Sound Devices:

702: Portable Digital Audio Recorder, two channel analog, and digital I/O COMPACT FLASH ONLY

702T: Portable TIME CODE ENABLED Digital Audio Recorder town channel analog , digital I/O COMPACT FLASH ONLY

These will complement the 722/744t nicely.   
Thanks,
Frank

Cascade Media, Inc.
For All Your Digital Recording Needs
Portland, Oregon USA
(888)336-4643
(503)353-6860
(503)353 6864 -fax
www.cascademedia.net

[joekar]

Sounds cool...email sent..Thanks

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

pics? Just curious.

[JasonR]

Should look just like the 722 and 744t basically.  The new 702 is basically a 722 without a hard drive, and with firmware that won't complain about the lack of HD, and perhaps one less LED on the front panel.  The 702T likewise, but it adds timecode like the 744t.  702T will be priced the same as the 722, so you can have either a hard drive or time code for the same price.

- Jason

[SClassical]

Should look just like the 722 and 744t basically.  The new 702 is basically a 722 without a hard drive, and with firmware that won't complain about the lack of HD, and perhaps one less LED on the front panel.  The 702T likewise, but it adds timecode like the 744t.  702T will be priced the same as the 722, so you can have either a hard drive or time code for the same price.

- Jason

702 has no HD..so I guess you can put whatever HD size you like in the future or there is a GB size limit? Hope one day they can make a recorder smaller and more portable using CF only.

[mmedley.]

Should look just like the 722 and 744t basically.  The new 702 is basically a 722 without a hard drive, and with firmware that won't complain about the lack of HD, and perhaps one less LED on the front panel.  The 702T likewise, but it adds timecode like the 744t.  702T will be priced the same as the 722, so you can have either a hard drive or time code for the same price.

- Jason

702 has no HD..so I guess you can put whatever HD size you like in the future or there is a GB size limit? Hope one day they can make a recorder smaller and more portable using CF only.

http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=61808.msg824544#msg824544

[BobW]

B&H has the SD702 in stock today.
Soooo tempting !

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=ShowProduct&is=REG&Q=&O=&sku=429566

[mmedley.]

B&H has the SD702 in stock today.
Soooo tempting !

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?A=ShowProduct&is=REG&Q=&O=&sku=429566

You will hate yourself if you get this over the 722 IMO. In our uses I cannot see this being the least bit tempting...even if only using it for 16/44.1.

[Aaron41]

Why would anyone choose the 702 over the 722? The price difference will be made up with the CF cards you'd have to buy.

[mmedley.]

Well, CF prices are dropping like crazy. When the 32GB flash card comes out and is under $200 then it would be economical and a savings I suppose. But still, even when that happens (a long time mind you) you could record to CF only on the 722. The way I see it, by that time Grace will have a 8 channel handheld HD recorder to internal 1 terabyte flash memory by the time I upgrade again. 

[SClassical]

Why would anyone choose the 702 over the 722? The price difference will be made up with the CF cards you'd have to buy.

Really for people who already have CF and do not want to keep/achieve the recordings in the recorder. I might get the 702 over the 722 because I already have CF cards already and also got a habit of backing up my recordings at the end of the concert at home on an external HD/computer. Also, 702 is lighter I guess without the HD, which is better for field work. You might be able to save battery power too without the HD. Also might not heat up as much without the internal HD. As you know HD is not guarantee for life so if you do not back up your recordings at home you might end up loosing all your work if the HD breaks down. So many reasons...incl it is cheaper, too. One thing I do not understand is why they want to make it the same size as the 722 if there is no HD inside. Obviously they can make it smaller (without the HD) but they didn't.

[Zaphod]

Why would anyone choose the 702 over the 722? The price difference will be made up with the CF cards you'd have to buy.

Really for people who already have CF and do not want to keep/achieve the recordings in the recorder. I might get the 702 over the 722 because I already have CF cards already and also got a habit of backing up my recordings at the end of the concert at home on an external HD/computer. Also, 702 is lighter I guess without the HD, which is better for field work. You might be able to save battery power too without the HD. Also might not heat up as much without the internal HD. As you know HD is not guarantee for life so if you do not back up your recordings at home you might end up loosing all your work if the HD breaks down. So many reasons...incl it is cheaper, too. One thing I do not understand is why they want to make it the same size as the 722 if there is no HD inside. Obviously they can make it smaller (without the HD) but they didn't.

Yeah if it was more stealthy more of us would go for it, I suppose they just focused on making it more rugged for field work.

[kindms]

Why would anyone choose the 702 over the 722? The price difference will be made up with the CF cards you'd have to buy.

Really for people who already have CF and do not want to keep/achieve the recordings in the recorder. I might get the 702 over the 722 because I already have CF cards already and also got a habit of backing up my recordings at the end of the concert at home on an external HD/computer. Also, 702 is lighter I guess without the HD, which is better for field work. You might be able to save battery power too without the HD. Also might not heat up as much without the internal HD. As you know HD is not guarantee for life so if you do not back up your recordings at home you might end up loosing all your work if the HD breaks down. So many reasons...incl it is cheaper, too. One thing I do not understand is why they want to make it the same size as the 722 if there is no HD inside. Obviously they can make it smaller (without the HD) but they didn't.

Actually the reason folks are scratching their heads is this is all possible with the 722 and 744t. You can remove the HDD and run CF only if you want and it does save on weight and power. And they also support mirroring. They can write to the HDD and CF simultanouesly. So that is a great way to ensure that if the HDD fails the CF will be ok or vice versa. limiting to CF only for only like 200 - 400 in savings doesn't really get you anything and you loose the ability to have redundancy in the feild recording.

If it were significantly less money it would make a lot of sense but for a few hundred bucks ill go with the ability to add or remove HDD

[wbrisette]

Actually the reason folks are scratching their heads is this is all possible with the 722 and 744t.

I think of this product as a bit more give and take from the 722. You've gained timecode, which could be important if you use it...most tapers don't use it, but you've lost the hard drive. From the 744T's perspective you've lost 2 channels and the hard drive. Overall, I don't think it's going to be a huge seller for them, but I'm sure there is some market they are trying to hit with this product. I'm just not sure what it is, but then again, I'm not in marketing.

Wayne

[Steve J]

If you use the B&H site as a guide, they've got the 702t (w/ timecode) priced the same as the 722.

[mhibbs]

Why would anyone choose the 702 over the 722? The price difference will be made up with the CF cards you'd have to buy.

Really for people who already have CF and do not want to keep/achieve the recordings in the recorder. I might get the 702 over the 722 because I already have CF cards already and also got a habit of backing up my recordings at the end of the concert at home on an external HD/computer. Also, 702 is lighter I guess without the HD, which is better for field work. You might be able to save battery power too without the HD. Also might not heat up as much without the internal HD. As you know HD is not guarantee for life so if you do not back up your recordings at home you might end up loosing all your work if the HD breaks down. So many reasons...incl it is cheaper, too. One thing I do not understand is why they want to make it the same size as the 722 if there is no HD inside. Obviously they can make it smaller (without the HD) but they didn't.

They'd have to re-engineer the entire box to make it any smaller.  If you open one up, you'd be actually shocked at how much shit they crammed into that tiny of a box (which is wicked hard to put back together btw).  To me, having the option to use the internal hdd or use cf justifies the price diff of the 722.  The weight of that little hdd is irrelevant.  Also, if I remember correctly, the 722 parks the drive head to keep from damaging the disc when in CF only mode.  Which means the hdd isn't spinning, which means there's no heat issue (or it's greatly minimized).  Same thing w/ the battery...if it's not spinning the hdd, there's probably little to no difference.  At 24/192, there's not much archiving possible on the disc anyway.  2gb every 30min gets expensive if you're running cf as well.

Just my take on the deal...

mitch

[fozzy]

#

[ghellquist]

Now, marketing is about getting peoples attention. They sure managed this time, a lot of discussion on this forum on the relative merits of units on the high scale of nice.

Bet that this discussion has sold more units to tapers than the sum of all ads over the last year. Go figure.

Gunnar