0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.
ah i see now, but that still is a hassle that a $1600 box should not exhibit imo. i think they sound great though, has the build quality given you any trouble yet?
Quote from: raoulduke on August 17, 2005, 01:23:51 PMah i see now, but that still is a hassle that a $1600 box should not exhibit imo. i think they sound great though, has the build quality given you any trouble yet?I have only run it in the office, it's too big to stealth. It feels a bit plastic-y, and lots of air space, but no glaring weaknesses I can see. The parts that need to hold seem like they will.Jeff
Quote from: Nick's Picks on August 17, 2005, 01:33:11 PMyea...for $1600 I think you can get the Oade mod of your choice.and I still think it smokes anything else out there.i think its 1500 for the t or w, then its another 125 or 150 for a mod simiiar to the PLUS mods done to the ua5. so for 1650 tops, you have a kickass box. the only bummers are the 12v power, build quality & not true digital 24/192. the 722 is a lot more expensive though. maybe if the m-audio works out it will be a moot point & i'll keep my ua5's, but damn the fr-2 is a nice sounding all in one even with its shortcomings mentioned above.
yea...for $1600 I think you can get the Oade mod of your choice.and I still think it smokes anything else out there.
pretty much every single thing we run, or will ever run, will have shortcomings imho. as has been mentioned before, no one really makes products with tapers in mind(except maybe core sounds?). almost every device needs to be modded in some way, or is lacking some feature we'd love, or isn't all in one, etc. i really hope the microtrack is sweet, but i highly doubt it'll be the holy grail. the sound devices box is actually not that much more expensive then the fr2 if you factor in 2 4gig CF cards; the reason it appeals to me is that i personally like most oade modded gear i've heard and i haven't really liked any 722 shows i've downloaded yet, just not for me. and i really don't think the 192khz issue is a big one, for me at least. i see/hear absolutely no reason to desire it for what i tape, and it makes the files bigger. besides, from what i read, it most certainly does do 192khz recording, it's the marantz that only goes up to 96khz.
24/96 = great crowd conversations
wayne, may i ask how you feel about 96 vs 192?
i guess i just wonder why you are so concerned with 192 raoulduke, help me understand
with all this talk of 16 v. 24 - if there is added crowd noise, would it be worthwhile to record at 24 w/ omni mics? i like my 4061's, but at any decent sized venue - i hardly ever get good tapes unless i'm close to the stack
Quote from: Nick's Picks on August 17, 2005, 01:56:05 PM24/96 = great crowd conversationsSo are you of the opinion that 24/48 is fine for our purposes?
(P.S.: On a threaded discussion board like this one, there's no need to repeat someone's post when you reply to them; everyone can see all the messages in the thread.)