pvanstry

Guys, let's have people free to give there opinion. It is a free forum and should not have constant wars going on. Some people like Zaxcom, others like Sound Devices. Buy what you want, end of discussion.

I agree. With the modular approach for input, control and now output, Sonosax is making this machine more versatil. My wish is for this to become reality soon. I hope that the output module will not be as big as the other because a multi input bag would consist of three modules which would make it pretty big and awkward shape wise. If it could be the same width but something like 1.5"x1.5"Xsame width as R4+, and attach itself to the bottom of the R4+, it would make it perfect for bag use.

DC out on a hirose limited to 500ma

I believe there is but limited to a small current draw.

Interesting thing about the preamp. Does this mean that the fader has a lot of gain ( over nominal ) in order to ride the isos fairly low but have enough gain to have a decent mix?

I would submit that a fourth module is an good idea but I would make it a much smaller one. It would attach itself at the bottom of the unit and simply be a single XLR chassis height. This way, the unit in a bag doesn't become ridiculously sized and awkward to bag. But again, replacing the ta3 by a ta5 with 4 unbalanced out, would work I believe for most people.

It is beautiful indeed and that is why I am being so persistent. I have used Sonosax mixers before and they are amazing sound wise. This really hits the mark size wise and , if outs get sorted out, could be the answer to bag/cart hybrid system. My two cents: Dante is important, internal battery is nice but if it means no outs then out is the internal battery.

What about replacing the ta3 aux out by a ta5 with 4 unbalanced out. Dante is important and having an extra box is not really appealing.

Mr Sax, thank you for being here. I believe that there is two possible scenario that would meet everyone needs. First let's define that there is two different thing to address. Physical outputs and then source material for those outputs. Physical outputs: Indeed, having a total of 4 analog outputs would meet our needs. Two of those can be unbalanced while the other two would nice if they were balanced. Source audio for those outputs: Two possibilities here: 1- a simple matrix that enable to assign each individual inputs to any of the four outputs, in pre or post fader mode. Very flexible and simple to work with. Also all assignment are made via a single menu page. 2- a stereo mix buss for two of the outputs, accessible via an input menu setup ( I visual to each input ) and two individual auxiliary sends that can send each input individually in pre or post fader to an individual output. Also there is a question that remains for me, is there a set of input and output limiter on each input and output? Thank you very much for your time and I hope that the above is possible to implement. That would make me seriously think about the complete package. Pascal

Photos?

So far, it's been discussed earlier in this thread, the solutions are really thin for more outputs. 1- replacing the rj45 ( Dante ) with an output connector. In my mind that would be bad, Dante is amazing to have. 2- replacing the ta3 output connector with a ta5 for a total 4 unbalanced output. Not ideal, but a start. 3- using the AES output in the multi pin aes connector with another module ( to convert to analog ). Problem is that the unit doesn't seem to have any provision in the software to create more outs, acces or mixes. 4- I believe there is an AES Input connector on the side of the Input. Replacing it with an output connector instead.

Dante

Thanks so much Rado, great video. I appreciate it. You are 100% right, Sonosax needs to communicate more with the end user, two outs is a deal breaker there.

Size comparison or less glamorous, I simple way of raising and aligning the Sonosax recoded/preamp to the fader panel.

You should try Montreal...

He guys, I'm coming to New York April 7-8 and was going to raid BH but just saw that it is closed for Passover...I will go to Professional sound and Gotham but need a place for these specific items: Blackmagic duo monitors grio stuff ( magic arm etc... ) Connectors Rechargeable batteries and charger Any ideas?

Thanks Jeff, I appreciate the honest review. Makes me think about using something else. Is there an aluminium option out there you would recommend?

Hi guys, I need a little help for something. I am building a case for a friend and plan on using an SKB VS1 sliding shelf. I have a couple of things to ask: 1- any issues using it? Is it a good product for our use? Will be installing an audio bag on it. 2- I need to measurement( max depth including frame. ) web site only says about usable shelf dimension but I need to knoe how much space it needs in a rack ( how deep does the rack needs to be. 3- long term use. Is it holding up? http://www.skbcases.com/music/products/proddetail.php?id=182&c=119&o Thanks Pascal

Now we only need to know if the R4+ can supply outputs on Dante and if so how it works ( matrix, busses, mixing busses or nothing. ). Also will there be some sort of limiters on those outputs.

Plus people could be very unhappy about not having a choice.

Guys, I'm my opinion there is no dedicated machine for one thing or another. It's how you use it and that's all. Not about the arrow but the archer. 688 as currently more feature then a 788t, so why shouldn't it not be at home on a cart?

If that's the case, either it was done on purpose or really shortsighted indeed. Either way, it would be pretty stupid. Still crossing my fingers here. In between a SOnosax with no outputs and a SOund devices with no faders, am i the only one that feels like some of us should design these things instead….

So now that the 688 is out, i would ask Sound devices to make us a CL12 linear fader controller. Here is what i would like to have on it: 1- 12 high quality ( Penny Giles if possible ) fader 100mm 2- Stop and Record button like on the CL6 3- That it hooks via the USB port or that SD makes a box that could fix itself to the current 688 connector used for the CL6 and then goes to a heavier duty connector. 4- USB pass thru in order to hook up a keyboard to the new CL12. 5- THat Fader 7-12 on the 688 turns into trim for does channel when the CL12 is hooked. 6- 10 programmable shortcut keys 7- Low power consumption 8- Small footprint but still with enough spacing in between faders to be practical to mix. 9- Under 3000$ 10- Make it available really soon!!! Anybody interested in this? please add your voice to this post so that we can get it… This would really make me purchase a kit. ALso, please SD, let us know if you are thinking of doing this. Thank you Pascal Van Strydonck

Personally I think that making a statement about it being a recorder is not up to date with how most of us work. Plus being a recorder but with optional modules, one being a fader pack is even worst. The reason is, if it is only a recorder, the philosophy in the past was to add a mixer in front of it to deal with all the other needs ( inputs and outputs ). But it has a fader option that will not add any outs or ins so you are still left with what is on the recorder itself. Of course one could buy a mixer but what is the point to design something and not being at least up to modern work requirement. Again this unit/package is extremely tempting for a lot of people but when I ask around it is 100% the same answer, without additional outputs, it does not fit what the needs are now. There are very few people just needing a recorder. It is the age of the mixer/recorder. pretty please... Again...

Ok thanks