stefanosound Posted April 15, 2013 Report Share Posted April 15, 2013 impressions? thanks Stefano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 15, 2013 Report Share Posted April 15, 2013 once is enough... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmahaAudio Posted April 16, 2013 Report Share Posted April 16, 2013 impressions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 16, 2013 Report Share Posted April 16, 2013 " impressions? " there were several acts doing shows in LAS featuring impressions... I always liked Rich Little and Danny Ganz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 http://vimeo.com/63984205 http://www.trewaudio.com/audioflow/nab-2013-zaxcom-booth/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Great videos! The Gotham vid is very well done. What's the price point of the cam link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Somewhere around $2300 including the two track recording and ZaxNet receiver/transmitter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Is the two track recording an option? Can I opt out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 All standard equipment - no opting out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 I can't imagine you could opt out of the two track recording function. Is this request to try and get the already quite reasonable price down? With all the clamoring for a recording version of the SD 302 the Zaxcom MAXX seems to fill the bill quite nicely (and with features that a recording SD 302 could never provide at any price). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fieldmixer Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Indeed, I read " including two track recording" and wondered if there was a variation that did not include that feature. I would not have been surprised, we can after all "opt out" two channels of the qrx. Zaxcom gear is often nicely built to order. I don't recall making a request really...just a question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnpaul215 Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 The card slot also means you can update firmware yourself instead of sending it back to the factory each time.... Though maybe the transmitters without recording still have a card slot under a rubber cover. It's been a while since I used a TRX without internal recording. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Norflus Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 The card slot also means you can update firmware yourself instead of sending it back to the factory each time The card slot on the camera link will not only allow you to update the link itself but it will allow you to update the QRX, the QRX IFB board, as well as ERX receivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 I can't imagine you could opt out of the two track recording function. Is this request to try and get the already quite reasonable price down? With all the clamoring for a recording version of the SD 302 the Zaxcom MAXX seems to fill the bill quite nicely (and with features that a recording SD 302 could never provide at any price). Dearest Jeff, i'm not sure Maxx does quite fit the bill as a recording 302. Maxx may include "features that a recording SD 302 could never provide at any price" But there are many sound folk who like hardware switches and controls on their mixers and willingly choose those over kit with similar (and other) functions accessed in menus. I also think (as presumptuous as it may be) people imagine a recording 302 could be produced for a similar price as the current 302 which is nearly $1000 dollars cheaper than the basic Maxx. kind regards, Dan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Wexler Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Hey, Dan, I agree with you completely on the whole personal preference thing, as I'm not a fan of all the menus and complexity that comes with so many of the devices we use. I'm not a luddite and have fairly successfully adapted to things which must be menu driven by virtue of the complexity of features and functions. With this in mind, I understand the desire for a very simple 302-style mixer with 2-track recording capability (and comparison to MAXX was probably not helpful --- MAXX does so much more and of course costs more). You say: "people imagine a recording 302 could be produced for a similar price as the current 302" and I would say you are correct, particularly the part about people "imagining." I think it is not a valid assumption that a record capable 302 would cost the same as the older non-record capable 302. This falls in the same category where people declare that it would be "trivial" for The Company (take your pick) to produce these things differently, with all the bells and whistles that someone wants, and it should go for the same price or lower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Hey, Dan, I agree with you completely on the whole personal preference thing, as I'm not a fan of all the menus and complexity that comes with so many of the devices we use. I'm not a luddite and have fairly successfully adapted to things which must be menu driven by virtue of the complexity of features and functions. With this in mind, I understand the desire for a very simple 302-style mixer with 2-track recording capability (and comparison to MAXX was probably not helpful --- MAXX does so much more and of course costs more). You say: "people imagine a recording 302 could be produced for a similar price as the current 302" and I would say you are correct, particularly the part about people "imagining." I think it is not a valid assumption that a record capable 302 would cost the same as the older non-record capable 302. This falls in the same category where people declare that it would be "trivial" for The Company (take your pick) to produce these things differently, with all the bells and whistles that someone wants, and it should go for the same price or lower. I guess the challenge for SD (if indeed they go for it) is can they produce a mixer for significantly less cost than a Maxx and more function/features than say the Fostex DC-R302, to fit that part of the market which they have so far done well in. After 10(?) years of selling the 302 I can understand why folks think something might be in the pipeline and why it might include more functions for the same sort of price - there are precedents across the industry, not least from Zaxcom, eg Maxx vs Deva 2 (in terms of track count, features and time frame as opposed to market sector) or SD's MixPre vs MixPre-D, 442 vs 552. But perhaps the absence of this (nearly mythical) recording 302 reflects the changes in demand from the different sectors of our industry. Maybe the 302 is a bit of a 1 off (like the SQN 3m before it) and we should enjoy those switches while they last :-) I'll stop (unintentionally) hijacking this thread as i'm sure folks want whatever Maxx news there is out there (?) and not my 302 ramblings. dan. (an occasional luddite) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 Dan, You, and others, are welcome to discuss your product ideas with the manufacturers, who, including SD, are receptive to these discussions... or, of course, you are welcome to research, design, manufacture, and market your own products, as several have... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 dearest mike, I'm not in the market for a hypothetical (or otherwise) recording 302. I just enjoy speculating on speculations. And since i have neither the technical or financial means of developing a such a product, the speculation thing is just my way of passing some time. A bit like the way people enjoy talking about art/buildings/cars/furniture they will never own and will never create. On the surface, an un-necessary increase in the bandwidth of the site but underneath a low-level form of self development, enhanced of course with your words of wisdom, for which I'm truly grateful (as I'm also grateful to JW for hosting and contributing). atb, dan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 " I'm not in the market for a hypothetical (or otherwise) recording 302 " OK, sorry, then, as I was referring to " all the clamoring for a recording version of the SD 302 " and thus all those folks doing all that clamoring.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel Posted April 17, 2013 Report Share Posted April 17, 2013 nothing to be sorry for - you keep the place on track and you're 1 of the reasons i come here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmahaAudio Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 http://vimeo.com/63984205 Excellent presentation from Thomas Pop in the Gotham video! Clear and concise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atheisticmystic Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 Great video from Gotham. When would you need the recording capabilities on a camera hop? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiomprd Posted April 18, 2013 Report Share Posted April 18, 2013 " you need the recording capabilities on a camera hop? " when the sound fails to get properly recorded on the camera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atheisticmystic Posted April 19, 2013 Report Share Posted April 19, 2013 " you need the recording capabilities on a camera hop? " when the sound fails to get properly recorded on the camera. But isnt that why we run a backup ourselves? Isnt there additional risk by running your fail-safe off-site as it were? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crussell Posted April 20, 2013 Report Share Posted April 20, 2013 impressions? thanks Stefano Impressions? Meh. Seemed like a fine machine. The firmware on it seemed far from completion. The 664 is going to fit my workflow better. The great thing about shows like NAB is that you get your hands on all the options in the same room. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.