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,
>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
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 drive.
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.
>On Aug 27, 2008, at 10:32 AM, Richard L. Hess wrote:
>>At 11:01 AM 2008-08-27, Craig Breaden wrote:
>>>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 thrown
>>>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 list
>>>regarding 1-bit, I'm not certain he shouldn't. Any thoughts?
>>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
>>(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
>>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/ contact.htm
>>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/contact.htm
Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.