Thanks Richard, I did mean CF rather than SD cards. I know of a
couple of folks that have had both the SD722 and the Korg MR-1000 and
most have stayed with their Sound Devices. Most sited better
sounding results when using the built-in mic pre's as the main reason.
On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:37 PM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
> Hello, Steve,
> I think there is confusion somewhere. Perhaps Sound Devices has
> announced something that isn't on their website, but I don't see
> them moving from Compact Flash to SD cards. I think where we see
> SD702 it is a shorthand way of writing Sound Devices 702 and does
> not imply the use of an SD (secure digital) memory card.
> Taken from their website http://www.sounddevices.com/products/7.htm
> as I'm writing this:
>> The two-track (<http://www.sounddevices.com/products/702.htm>702,
>> <http://www.sounddevices.com/products/702t.htm>702T, <http://
>> www.sounddevices.com/products/722.htm>722), four-track (<http://
>> www.sounddevices.com/products/744t.htm>744T), and eight-track
>> (<http://www.sounddevices.com/products/788t.htm>788T) recorders
>> write and play audio files with either 16 or 24-bit depth at all
>> professional sampling rates, up to 192 kHz (48.048 kHz on the 788T).
>> The 7-Series recorders write to industry-standard WAV files (with
>> Broadcast Wave Metadata). Audio files are recorded to Compact
>> Flash cards on all recorders and to internal hard drive on the
>> drive-equipped 722, 744T, and 788T.
>> Audio files can be transferred via FireWire or USB (FireWire 800
>> and USB on 788T only) to a Windows PC or Mac OS computer for post-
>> production or archiving. For maximum redundancy, both mediums can
>> be recorded on the 722, 744T, and 788T providing a RAID-1 level of
>> redundancy to recorded program.
> The 702 and the 722 differ in that the 722 has the internal 40 GB
> shock-mounted hard drive and the 702 does not. The 702T has
> timecode capability. The multi-track recorders (4- and 8-track)
> come with hard-drive AND timecode. I would have preferred a non-
> timecode 4-track, but the timecode put it out of my price range. In
> fact, getting a second 702 would permit me to record 4 tracks and
> have more redundancy for about the same price as the 744T plus
> outboard preamps.
> I like the idea of the long record capability of the hard-drive
> equipped units, and yes, I use the equivalent of RAID-1 mode on my
> 722, recording to the internal hard drive plus the compact flash card.
> For some important recordings, I've also recorded to an external
> hard drive via the FireWire port (which can either connect to an
> outboard drive OR to a PC). So, I've had three media recordings:
> internal HD, external HD, compact flash. If any one fails, it will
> not affect the other two recordings.
> The 722 will power the external drive ONLY if the 722 is powered
> from external power. They do not want to load the internal battery
> with the external drive. OR you can separately power the external
> With a year of use of the 722 behind me, I'm not using the external
> drive other than an archive of some of the things I've recorded
> with the 722. However, I may use it if I have any more all-day
> recordings (like five Christmas Eve services at my church) which
> wouldn't conveniently fit on a compact flash card. I've semi-
> standardized on 4 GB CF cards for my Nikon D200 and my Sound
> Devices 722. I may get some 16 GB CF cards for the SD (if not the
> Nikon) when the price is right for the faster cards.
> I looked at the link you posted and while the Tascam offers better
> dynamic range, the 722 has a range switch that permits different
> options for setting levels. I don't know if maximum gain is the
> optimum point for maximum dynamic range, but I suspect it is for
> equivalent input noise.
> I prefer to look at equivalent input noise of the mic/preamp
> combination as the mic self-noise and the preamp noise conspire to
> create the acoustic noise floor of the recording. I cannot take the
> time right now to explain all of that, but ideally, I think one
> should be thinking about how low the self-noise of the recording
> system is (in dB SPL) as well as how many dB SPL it can take at the
> same time.
> Anyway, IF I ever got a "bump" on the Sound Devices 722 hard drive,
> I'd just go and use the compact flash version, but I have not seen
> one yet, and I suspect that would cause a data error and would
> cause a new file to start.
> The MicroTrak II was quite disappointing. I think the fact that
> it's sound quality was on the par with perhaps the best portable
> cassette ever made is telling, but I suspect that the cassette had
> more flutter than the digi-box. Interestingly, I was torn between
> the Sony TCD-5M and the WMD-6C and chose the TCD-5M as I thought it
> would be better. I learned later that the WMD-6C actually recorded
> better-sounding tapes. I still have the TCD-5M.
> Interesting the recorders that got the +++++ rating for Sound
> Quality. It was the usual suspects. I also thought it ironic that
> the minidiscs got + for handling! I agree!
> At 02:32 PM 2008-08-31, carlstephen koto wrote:
>> Hey Richard, the MR-1000 has some issues regarding HD vibration
>> sensitivity which could have been the origin of the pop. Not placing
>> gear that might need to be adjusted on the fly in direct contact with
>> the recorder and a stable platform (rather than over the shoulder
>> use) seems to eliminate this problem. Another issue is a relatively
>> sensitive mic preamp which can overload. Here's a link to some self
>> noise comparisons with other solid state recorders;
>> The newer SD702 is a lower priced version of the 722 and uses SD
>> cards and/or an external firewire HD rather than the internal HD.
>> With the SD cards, battery life should be greatly improved also.
>> Steve Koto
>> On Aug 27, 2008, at 10:32 AM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
>>> At 11:01 AM 2008-08-27, Craig Breaden wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> One of our donors, a collector of traditional songs, has just
>>>> purchased a Korg MR-1000 1-bit recorder to do his field recording.
>>>> I created 44.1/16-
>>>> and 24-bit versions using Audiogate, trying to get an idea of
>>>> what a
>>>> user copy would sound like, and noticed some digital artifacts
>>>> in around what had been, on the original file, a very soft pop
>>>> in the
>>>> background. This was not encouraging, although I realize I could
>>>> render at a higher resolution using Audiogate then create the user
>>>> copy using WaveLab. He's on the fence, wondering if he should go
>>>> to his Tascam, and from some of the discussion last year on the
>>>> regarding 1-bit, I'm not certain he shouldn't. Any thoughts?
>>> Hello, Craig,
>>> This is indeed an interesting question.
>>> The first question I have for you, is can't he capture in 96/24 on
>>> the Korg instead of1 bit DSD?
>>> I would like you to evaluate all of the following transfer modes of
>>> the audio surrounding this click and report back to us, if you can:
>>> MR-1000DSD------------analog-----------studio 96/24 converter
>>> MR-1000DSD file-------audiogate----------------96/24 file
>>> MR-1000DSD-----------SPDIF/AES--------------96/24 file
>>> (I don't know if this is possible since the original was DSD and I
>>> don't know if the Korg can do the conversion inside before
>>> outputting SPDIF/AES)
>>> I'm trying to isolate the problem to the Audiogate software with
>>> these tests. We have waaay too many variables.
>>> Of course, then downsampling all three in Wavelab to 44.1/16 would
>>> need to be tried.
>>> I would be willing to downsample all three in Sampitude to 44.1/16
>>> if you wish as one colleague says he can hear a difference between
>>> Wavelab and Samplitude, but I have not with the limited use I've
>>> put Wavelab to (he's used it a lot more). This is an echo of our
>>> thread last week <sigh>!
>>> More tests can present themselves, like comparing the Korg in DSD
>>> mode vs. 96/24 mode, then comparing the Korg to the Tascam and
>>> perhaps a rented Sound Devices 702/722. I selected the SD722 for
>>> field recording with a pair of DPA 4006 TL mics--actually I got the
>>> SD after I got the mics as I wanted something that would truly do
>>> justice to the mics.
>>> Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
>>> Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX
>>> Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
>>> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.
> Richard L. Hess email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada (905) 713 6733 1-877-TAPE-FIX
> Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.