Jump to content

Sound Devices 688 + SL-6


Ze Frias

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sorry for the thread hijack. But I just wanted to reply to "resonate".

Zaxcom's next move is a real game changer for everyone. While I can't get into too many details at this point - I can say that Deva32 is only a small part of what Zaxcom will be announcing at NAB.

Just be prepared to have your minds blown.

Jack,

Please refrain for making videos with rivers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the thread hijack. But I just wanted to reply to "resonate".

 

Zaxcom's next move is a real game changer for everyone. While I can't get into too many details at this point - I can say that Deva32 is only a small part of what Zaxcom will be announcing at NAB.

Just be prepared to have your minds blown.

 

 

Jack,

Please refrain for making videos with rivers...

That's a tease, and 'minds blown' quite a claim.

Not rivers of tears? :)

NAB April 11-16th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I advised Sound Devices that BNC is a better antenna connection compared to SMA. Easier to repair. Sturdier. Quick interconnection.
They immediately mentioned that they are taking it in consideration and it is possible to change it before they ship. They made an online pole. So far 99% are for BNC.  Go on facebook and vote.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/sounddevices/permalink/10153098200704906/?notif_t=group_post_mention

 

This is how change happens before our eyes. Speak up people!!!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1  I don't think Jack was necessarily out of line in his initial mention, but the ensuing discussion belongs in another thread.

I agree with John Blankenship and others --- let's keep this as much on topic, Sound Devices 688 + SL-6, as possible. Jack's slight digression is fine, no problem there, but we wouldn't want a real derailment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's improper to mention another competing product in the context of comparing / contrasting, and otherwise discussion about advantages and disadvantages, but ONE the Deva32 is not released and not even officially announced (as in tangible pre-release details) and TWO it does not compete for the same types of applications, completely different animal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in the spirit of healthy conversation, the things I don't like about the 688...

 

I'd rather have HPF knobs in place of the mini faders (use 7-12, absolute have the CL-6 anyways).  HPF in my mind is one of those things that helps to solve a problem that comes up unexpectedly.  You don't want it set to too high all the time obviously, so when you need it, I'd like to be able to reach down to the problem channel and sweep a HPF knob immediately and find the sweet spot without having to go into a menu, look at an LCD, or select other advanced functions.  If I need 12 channels, I'm going to buy the CL-6, and would have loved to have the same controls as channels 1-6 (PFL - hopefully in the same position as 1-6 versus on the opposite side of the fader, pan, trim, and HPF).

 

Joystick, I'm the minority here, but just never see myself using a recorder that uses a mini joystick as the main transport control.  (to be fair, I would never use a recorder with a multi-function membrane or membrane-like button either)

 

Not a huge fan of NP-1 batteries... I understand that it is the single most popular battery system for sound bags, just never embraced them myself.

 

The powering scheme of the 633 was pretty cool, with the NP-F, AA, and external DC power management system.  That carried over to the 688 would have been cool too.

 

I DO LIKE the fact that the SL6 is using slot receivers and pushing the design envelope and trying to make progress on the slot format standard.  I like this fact even though I use another company's wireless (I think that company should make slot-in receivers too).

 

I also like the fact that this is a real mixing surface from the get go, without the expansion control unit, and doesn't try to miniaturize everything beyond the point of practical usability like a 788T (not useable without a CL-8 and then when added just too compact for my taste).

 

I'm not in the market for a >8 input channel recorder, but if I were, this would be the logical choice even given my criticisms above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I drive a 664+cl6.  I don't "wear" it (with a brace of RX), it is the all-in-one-bag replacement to my long series of sound carts.  I DO like having the HPFs on the front panel as knobs (an "analog" thing I guess) as opposed to how they are on the CL6 (on/off, but still front panel) or how the are on 688 or 7xx (away in menus), it makes the 664 more "mixer -like" for me and I'd miss those controls if they were hidden away in a menu.  This is all down to how I use this rig (like my old analog mixers), as opposed to an over the shoulder doco-style rig.  I see the 664 is still in the SD lineup today, and think it might hang around for a bit, partly for these reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if someone is looking for a mixer solution with linear faders that is also more or less usable in the bag, the options are there. Nomad+Mix 8 or 12 and 788+CL9. The 688 seems to be aimed at the growing market of ISO recordists, with Mix Assist being a great way of also delivering mix tracks without the need to pull faders all the time. Look at your style of work, look at your jobs' requirements and choose accordingly. Or wait for the next game changer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 688 seems to be aimed at the growing market of ISO recordists, with Mix Assist being a great way of also delivering mix tracks without the need to pull faders all the time. Look at your style of work, look at your jobs' requirements and choose accordingly. Or wait for the next game changer.

While I'm very happy with the 664, I'm quite interested in the Mix Assist functionality of the 688. Getting tired of hearing my camera hop temp tracks ending up in TV shows just because they are "good enough" for the (lazy/uninterested) pic editor - with occasional comb filtering as a result, Mix Assist would help me mix lavs on the run while swinging boom at the same time (I do mostly documentary work) making the temp tracks a little more broadcast worthy.  :mellow:

 

I wonder how well Mix Assist work in an outdoor or noise environment. I've used Dan Dugan's auto mixers when mixing conferences and events - if Mix Assist is anywhere close in sound quality and performance I will seriously consider switching to 688.

 

 

Cheers

Frederick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ninja, in high noise environments, mix assist (on 788) does much less well but can still deliver usable results with a bit more steering to keep the noise under the threshold and the signal above the threshold. Same with booms and other sources that are likely to pick up multiple speakers at close volume levels.

I'd love DSP to detect mic X's signal in input Y and only activate the input with the higher level when both signals are similar enough, but are both over the threshold. With automix, at times when one person gets loud, they get even louder because they are opening up multiple mics around them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

With automix, at times when one person gets loud, they get even louder because they are opening up multiple mics around them.

Only if the automixer is designed poorly. The correct designs reduce the gain as more mics are opened so that the overall gain is always equivalent to one open mic.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[snip]

I'd love DSP to detect mic X's signal in input Y and only activate the input with the higher level when both signals are similar enough, but are both over the threshold. 

[snip]

 

All good automixers do this and they don't even have fixed thresholds. Sorry for the two replies but I seem to be in single thought mode this morning.

Here's more than you ever wanted to know about automixing. Go down several pages to where the white paper talks about Aspen automixing:

 

http://www.lectrosonics.com/Support/Table/White-Papers/ASPEN/

 

You will see that all your requests for automixing operation  have been resolved, at least for fixed installations. There is no reason portable automixers can't do the same types of things.

Best Regards,

Larry Fisher

Lectrosonics

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...