Sound Devices 7 series recording

[ts]

I'm assuming most everyone uses wav poly. Anyone use wav mono?

Q: The 7-Series recorders have two options for WAV files, WAV mono and WAV poly. What's the difference between these two WAV file types?
A: When choosing WAV mono (monophonic) as your file type the 7-Series will generate separate data files for each individual track recorded. The mono files generated by the 7-Series recorders have file names similar to T01_1.WAV and T01_2.WAV. The _1 and _2 after the take numbers are the mono designators added to the file name. These represent individual tracks.

When choosing WAV poly (polyphonic) as your file type the 7-Series will generate one data file containing multiple tracks. The poly files generated by the 7-Series have file names similar to T01.WAV, no matter how many tracks are contained within the file.

[philR]

I use WAV mono on the off chance one of the channels gets messed up, I can always copy the mono channel to make a stereo file. It's come in handy on some SBD recordings I've done where one channel is screwy.

[F.O.Bean]

I owned a 722 for like 5-6 years and ALWAYS used WAV POLY

[mmedley.]

I think if you are using 2ch then always run POLY for simplicity, but if you are running 4ch or more then your best option is MONO. I haven't found any software that I am comfortable with to use POLY for a 4ch file. I would love to use POLY for my 744 files, but I also despise learning an entirely new workflow at this point. I tried my damnedest to make the switch to Audition CS6, but the workflow just doesn't seem as intuitive to me as Wavelab 6. I wish I could sit a day with an Audition expert and have them try to convince me otherwise.

[StuStu]

I think if you are using 2ch then always run POLY for simplicity, but if you are running 4ch or more then your best option is MONO. I haven't found any software that I am comfortable with to use POLY for a 4ch file. I would love to use POLY for my 744 files, but I also despise learning an entirely new workflow at this point. I tried my damnedest to make the switch to Audition CS6, but the workflow just doesn't seem as intuitive to me as Wavelab 6. I wish I could sit a day with an Audition expert and have them try to convince me otherwise.

[dream]

I think if you are using 2ch then always run POLY for simplicity, but if you are running 4ch or more then your best option is MONO. I haven't found any software that I am comfortable with to use POLY for a 4ch file. I would love to use POLY for my 744 files, but I also despise learning an entirely new workflow at this point. I tried my damnedest to make the switch to Audition CS6, but the workflow just doesn't seem as intuitive to me as Wavelab 6. I wish I could sit a day with an Audition expert and have them try to convince me otherwise.

I totally prefer Audition CS 6 over WaveLab 7 after some time now. Hopefully poly wave files are coming for WaveLab 8. Concerning 4 Ch recording: I record very often 4 Ch poly files with my 744T. If you need to split them afterwards Wave Agent is an easy way and I wonder why it wasn't mentioned yet.
http://www.sounddevices.com/products/waveagent/

[John Willett]

I think if you are using 2ch then always run POLY for simplicity, but if you are running 4ch or more then your best option is MONO. I haven't found any software that I am comfortable with to use POLY for a 4ch file.

This is how I work - poly if recording stereo and mono files if recording multi-track.

Also, with a poly file for multi-track, the 2GB (or 4GB) limit will come very quickly.

(Although I use a Nagra VI and an AETA 4MinX, rather than a 788T - but the principle is the same).

[H₂O]

Two channel = poly
More than two = mono

[acidjack]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but assuming the 7xx work like most other decks, even if you ran "poly" and it saved multichannel files, you could always split the channels later, no?

[page]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but assuming the 7xx work like most other decks, even if you ran "poly" and it saved multichannel files, you could always split the channels later, no?

correct.

it's just something else to do though. One thing to keep in mind though is how tracks are handled in your editor. For example in Reaper you can pull multiple channels into a track so it's a pain to split them out there (very doable, just something else to do though). Second, John's right that while you have a box that is confirmed to do seamless splits, you'll definitely get more of them with poly files and multiple channels.

[scb]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but assuming the 7xx work like most other decks, even if you ran "poly" and it saved multichannel files, you could always split the channels later, no?

yes, but for 744 and 788 users, not everyone has editors that handle wav files > 2 channels

[Gutbucket]

I'm not a SD hardware user but I make use of their small freeware stand-alone program sometimes to split or combine mono/poly files.  It is available for download here: http://www.sounddevices.com/products/waveagent/

Agreed on choice of poly for 2ch-stereo and mono for more than two for the same reasons as the others- easier file handling in software and longer recording time before file-splits, but also for allowing easier re-naming/re-organization of channels in a different sequence than what may have been writen to the poly file originally.

[dream]

I'm not a SD hardware user but I make use of their small freeware stand-alone program sometimes to split or combine mono/poly files.  It is available for download here: http://www.sounddevices.com/products/waveagent/

I tried to make the audience here aware of this little neat program some posts before. It works very well and I have used it several times. Sometimes you simply want poly wave files: surround recording or phase coherence safety.
Mono files can slip in time accidentally during edit. I made myself simple Audition multitrack session templates to convert 4 channel (as 2x2Ch) H2n or 744T (yes, they mark the spectrum of my recorders) files to 5.1 for further work.

[Gutbucket]

Sometimes you simply want poly wave files: surround recording or phase coherence safety.
Mono files can slip in time accidentally during edit.

I record surround material in mono files, save and work with those, and export to multi-channel FLAC files.

A few more practical reasons I do it that way- my channel assignments into the recorder are not usually arranged in standard order, so I rename the raw files with the appropriate channel indicated in their file name, FLAC and archive them.  Then when I get around to working on them I bring those into my editing software and time-lock them together so they can't be slipped out of sync accidentally, work on the project, then export multi-channel WAV or FLAC.  Keeping them as individual files makes it easier to substitute alternate channels if I recorded them, preview the files with most any media player, and copy single channel files or pairs out for other use.  For instance, I can just pull out the Left & Right Channels.