Sound Devices MixPre-D

[page]

Crap! We can't get both channel 7& 8 with the "D"?

what?

[Chadfish]

It sounded like the last guy said the AES out of the MixPre-D is only one channel. I wanted to use the MixPre D to feed my spdif input for channels 7 & 8 on my Tascam DR-680. I guess for 800.00 I could just get another DR-680 and have 6 more tracks.

[kirk97132]

AES is stereo just like spdif.  1 AES jack = two digital tracks

[notlance]

The MixPre-D carries L&R AES digital outputs via one XLR-3 connector.  This is a very common way to provide AES digital outputs (and inputs).

[Chadfish]

Right on. That's a relief. Not that I'll be buying one any time soon, as I have a regular MixPre. But for future reference...

[rastasean]

Since not everyone on TS is a member of the yahoo group nature recordist, I thought I would post this completely unabridged opinion of someone's thoughts on the mixpre-D.

The MixPre-D doesn't look like anything to be excited about judging from the specs. It appears to be their old design with a couple of new features, and is more expensive. Transformer inputs are a joke in comparison to modern integrated circuits. The input noise and dynamic range of the digital out is comparable to a $200 Sony PCM-M10, which has an integrated recorder. The 103dB digital output is a very inexpensive add-on and is closer to 16-bit quality than being 24-bit. There is no spec given for input noise with the phantom power turned on nor when at lower gains. It is certainly a battery hog. The connectors for the dedicated output for DSLR use are uncommon, so their idea is to sell an expensive cable to you that you will have trouble finding if you needed one in a pinch. I am still trying to figure out what are the "mixer" features of this microphone preamp? It does give XLR, phantom power and novel AES and USB output, which are very useful features. The AES out can not be used at the same time as the XLR outputs. As a DSLR mic amp, the signals are amplified then attenuated which just injects noise from from the circuitry. All the current DSLR mic amps do this, and my guess would be that at least the MixPre-D might be better than DSLR mic amps from BeachTek or JuiceLink, who don't even really give specifications for their products, but at almost twice the price.

Just my thoughts from looking over the information,
Bruce Rutkoski
www.natureguystudio .com

[tlsmith]

Since not everyone on TS is a member of the yahoo group nature recordist, I thought I would post this completely unabridged opinion of someone's thoughts on the mixpre-D.

The MixPre-D doesn't look like anything to be excited about judging from the specs. It appears to be their old design with a couple of new features, and is more expensive. Transformer inputs are a joke in comparison to modern integrated circuits. The input noise and dynamic range of the digital out is comparable to a $200 Sony PCM-M10, which has an integrated recorder. The 103dB digital output is a very inexpensive add-on and is closer to 16-bit quality than being 24-bit. There is no spec given for input noise with the phantom power turned on nor when at lower gains. It is certainly a battery hog. The connectors for the dedicated output for DSLR use are uncommon, so their idea is to sell an expensive cable to you that you will have trouble finding if you needed one in a pinch. I am still trying to figure out what are the "mixer" features of this microphone preamp? It does give XLR, phantom power and novel AES and USB output, which are very useful features. The AES out can not be used at the same time as the XLR outputs. As a DSLR mic amp, the signals are amplified then attenuated which just injects noise from from the circuitry. All the current DSLR mic amps do this, and my guess would be that at least the MixPre-D might be better than DSLR mic amps from BeachTek or JuiceLink, who don't even really give specifications for their products, but at almost twice the price.

Just my thoughts from looking over the information,
Bruce Rutkoski
www.natureguystudio .com

[kirk97132]

DOH wrong board

[rastasean]

Looks like b&h will start carrying this pretty soon. Here is a little writeup from Sam at B&H:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/indepth/audio/hands-reviews/new-sound-devices-mixpre-d-camera-sound-and-post?BI=8067&kw=Article_Sound_Devices

Its neat but expensive and requires two additional products if you want to use it with your DSLR.

[mountaintaper]

I've been running mine for a few weeks now, I like the sound of it, especially with my KM150's.

[hi and lo]

Jon Tatooles from Sound Devices states the mixpre is a little better for... you guessed it... mixing! The usbpre2 is better if higher sound quality is needed. ymmv

http://vimeo.com/22302001

[page]

Jon Tatooles from Sound Devices states the mixpre is a little better for... you guessed it... mixing! The usbpre2 is better if higher sound quality is needed. ymmv

http://vimeo.com/22302001

not real surprised. I'm guessing the remark is in relation to the transformer-less design of the usbpre2.

[jonch070]

Hey all might start a new topic on this, I know this is an old post BUT:

Thinking of buying a MixpreD over the 702 because of ios capability, but still want recording when I dont have the ipad around (like in rain etc). Mostly nature recording.

Functionally will having a bit bucket make that much of a difference from recording the line level out from the mixpre to a sperate device? I was planning on just running the XLR outs from the Mixpre into the line in on my Sony PCM-m10 which im told bypasses the Sony pre's and the all the sony does is just pure conversion. There would be XLR to 3.5mm adaption, but still. 

Is the conversion really noticeably superior on the Mixpre as opposed to this solution? Am I losing that much quality from the conversion on the sony? Am I loosing that much quality with the  XLR to 3.5mm adaption (or alternatively tape out)?

Thanks,

Jonathan


Thanks!

Jon