macrecorder

There is a grouping function which can group any number of tracks together for control. So I think that covers an ambisonics input, although would be good to get it confirmed.

If you are ever likely to do conferences or panel shows, or even multiple open radios, then the automix on the 688 is a no brainer for a mix track. The option of the already very good SD algorithm or the industry standard Dan Dugan one is outstanding.

I guess it depends on what voltage they need. But if they capsules are derived from the 4060 series, which some people say they are, then there is hope they will.

Well, the polarity of that lead is reversed, because the ground goes to the mic input and the signal to ground. But generally, Apple products are quite idiosyncratic. I can get a timecode signal into an iPhone using a similar lead, but the exact same lead with the same unit refuses to register anything on an iPad.

Ambient have a new 'low cost' hydrophone coming out http://ambient.de/en/product/asf-2-hydrophone/

fair enough, Masaki. I can see that a collaboration between two companies with a similar philosophy makes more sense than attempting a universal controller for all comers. However, whether that would be more efficient, or just make more (compromised) work, is a moot point, one which only they can answer.

It's a complete non-starter, cloud cuckoo land stuff. Given the physical differences, the protocol differences etc etc all you could get is a cumbersome, ill-adapted controller which would constantly be the subject of complaints as the software on the machines it controls changes. Look at the beauty of the styling of the Sonosax product and how it fits with the recorder, you would never get that integration with a third party product. Superslot makes sense, this doesn't. Enjoy the differences.

However much headroom you give iso's ( which means you are recording at relatively low levels), completely unexpected events occur, such as shouting, door slams, things smashed on a table or floor etc etc. You should be protected from going into distortion for such unpredictable events. The dual converters means the dynamic range is huge (and no distortion at the inputs, so no limiters needed), but also means that wonderful dynamic range can trip you up at record and output level. It is no more than a safety net, which catches the unpredictable, and unrepeatable.

I'm sure it is excellent, Moe. I am not knocking it, just very surprised that it doesn't have what every other portable recorder and mixer i can think of has - limiters. Seems odd to me, but whatever, that's their choice.

There are lots of things I really like about this machine, and would be very interested in purchasing it. However, not having the safety net of limiters on the card tracks or the outputs is a complete no no in the world of documentary, where you never know what is coming next.

Because of their use of the ambient technology, I have always found SD TC to be completely trustworthy, so I don't have to think about it. That's how I like it.

Yes, I had a similar experience. It happened on random, odd occasions which i couldn't replicate on testing. The only solution was an external TC box.

Thanks, Jurg, very useful. For me, I would need the ability to mix more than 4 tracks to the stereo out, but i thought maybe it was done via the touch screen and encoder knob. Also, I am surprised at the lack of limiters, since in most jobs there will always be some surprise peaks , and it is better to have a safety net (although if I am transmitting to camera, I have the transmitter limiters to cover that). I do appreciate that with the double AD system you cannot clip the inputs but presumably you could still clip the record tracks? However, it still looks like a great machine, I will await developments and see how version 2 plays out.

Thanks for this useful info, Jurg. If I may ask a couple of questions: If you were using the 6 analogue inputs, or more, how would you adjust the fader levels for output to the stereo mix on the tracks not assigned to faders 1-4? And are there easy/quick ways of assigning tracks to L and R of the stereo mix? Are there limiters on the record busses, the mix bus and the output, and if so do they sound clean and transparent? thanks

I've noticed that for many years with different Rycote assemblies. I spoke to them once about it, suggesting they change the material of the basket but no reaction. It seems to be an inherent part of the design. The MZL of course means you have no bass cut, so maybe notice it more.

Excellent work, Matt. and very professionally handled.

Sound Devices reply is opaque in the extreme. Do they not know, not care, or are just interested in avoiding any responsibility by passing the buck to retailers? What does 'assigning territories' mean, since the dealers are implying that it carves up their sales territories too. Does SD prohibit giving guarantees for their products outside of these artificial territories, which keeps the dealers in line? And if SD are now saying we can buy anywhere we like in the EU, which is the law, then why are their dealers refusing to sell to anyone in the EU outside of their territories? What does Mr Capp think about that - and no, it has nothing to do with fluctuating exchange rates, since UK citizens can purchase in euros? It looks like SD and their network is clinging to the old model where EU countries were distinct entities in terms of trading laws, and think they can keep that model in spite of very clear EU single market policies. If SD deem that we can buy from any European dealer we like, then UK retailers are not going to be very happy that they are saddled with significantly higher prices than their EU colleagues. For the purposes of trade the EU is one territory - that is the point of the single market. What dispensation allow SD and their dealers to deny and ignore that?

You can get the software now, if you ask them. The requirements are based mainly on the need for the sync software to operate correctly with quicktime and various codecs. So for instance, if you try syncing an MXF file, you actually need Yosemite 10.10.3. Other codecs may be ok on 10.9. But for the sync box setup software I would imagine that the specs are not nearly so demanding, since codecs etc don't really come into it, so it may well run on earlier OS's. But you can try it out.

It's a very different story outside the US.

Exactly. Roger has saved Zaxcom's reputation on many occasions, going way beyond their 'support' to supply his own unstinting backup. They could learn a lot from his attitude.

I can't say that the display on the side is a major issue for me. The quality and price looks great, and that will be the deciding factor. Once I am up and running I can't remember actually having to look at receiver displays anyway, even though I have them.

That's low, you are surprisingly chilled about it.

Neither - the 8060 is much better than both!

Of course, I didn't mean otherwise. If they are happy with their proposed workflow, then all I am saying is you don't have to feel a weight of responsibility for it, and you have to assume that they know the pros and cons of it. In this case I would be happy to concur with their proposal. Which is also collaboration.

Vincent is right, imho. Treat it like you are shooting with a 5D. You are recording good sound on your 633, they are presumably getting good pix with this new camera. Send a scratch track with a G3 and they can easily sync with Plural Eyes. I think you are over worrying about it and unnecessarily over complicating it. They will thank you for recording easily and unobtrusively without a big fuss, and remember they have chosen this camera - you have provided your sound, you know they can sync it with PE - if they have a problem with that, it is entirely their issue not yours. Relax and enjoy it. (I have done shoots with a 5D where they even refused to have a G3 and used onboard sound for sync- they never had a problem with that either)