Jump to content

Sound Devices 633…What do you think?


Jim Feeley

Recommended Posts

What is it you think you are missing on the 633?

 

With my 744T I need another device (302, 442...) to be able to use the 4 recording channels with 4 mics (without having one of the big ones, 664 or 788)

 

I was expecting a unit with 4 mic preamps (ideally 744T tipe) and mixing options...just it

 

As I said, It´s a great unit, flexible, light, pretty, with a great price.....but not what i wanted

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

no word clock? Thats a shame.

It only has a single digital input, and from what I can tell from the manual, there are no options to lock onto that source, as it appears the SRC is always active and simply converts to the recorder's set sample rate.  For the market it is aimed at, probably not a big deal.  Use AJA ADA4 as intermediate D-D converters if you want to lock onto a house master clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a solid machine in the vain of the 302/552/664. Love all the power options and the USB for keyboard feature. I do hope Zaxcom gets that happening real soon. It's not like I'm looking to get one since I just bought my Nomad and so far I love it but if I had held on and knew that SD was coming out with a new product, I might have considered this product. I do very much like a lighter machine since I am always looking to lighten my load and less stress on my back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another question...are the hpf filter working in the analog domain (before AD) or not?

From the manual:

 

The 633’s High-pass Filter circuit is unique because of its placement before any electronic amplifica- tion. Most mixers’ High-pass Filter circuits are placed after the microphone preamplifier, such that all of the low-frequency signals get amplified. By virtue of the 633’s circuit cutting the low-frequency signals before amplification, higher headroom is achieved in the presence of signals with significant low-frequency energy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... here's the 633 in a nutshell.

 

We all love the 302 and were clamoring for a recording 302, sort of a 302DT if you will.

 

What we got was the 633.  Sound Devices amortized their design from the 664 and tried to consolidate a unified look / feel amongst their current offerings, by making a mini 664 - makes perfect sense, instead of just bolting a TC capable 2 channel recorder onto the 302.

 

REALLY the 633 is a 3 channel ENG mixer with some optional 6 channel EFP capabilities added on top - for occasional use.  If you are regularly mixing 4 to 6 mics, you should really be looking at the 664 or a 788T setup.  Sound Devices graciously unlocked channels 3-6 for us, but it is pretty clear that it is not a form factor that is ideal for doing so as its primary function.

 

I still maintain that for a 3 channel mixer, there is really no significant need to record ISOs - if you can't commit 2 mics to a mix, one could question your title as "sound mixer".  Plus, these little jobs that are typical on a 302 level gig are not the type of productions that have a lot of money for post sound and for the most part, the camera mix is king.  We are jerking ourselves off if we think that all these ISOs we are recording are ever going to be of any use to anyone - Or recording is important because they are using a DSLR, in which case they really just want a Mono or LR mix track separately recorded.

 

For the guy who was asking for a 302 + 2 channel recorder, you got a little bit more than you were asking for.  The price, at $3100 is a bit more than a 302 + a recorder like the FR2, a lot less than a 302 + 702T.  If they had make a 302DT, it may have been a bit cheaper than the 633, but more expensive than just a 302 - so for the minor price differential, SD figured it would just go the high road and make a more capable unit rather than trying to find a product that came in at the approximately $2500 price point (estimated price of a 302DT).

 

MAJOR POSITIVE POINTS - 3 channel ENG mixer that has fader, input trim, and pan controls for each channel.  Filters are not quite as quick to adjust as 302, but quick enough as its usually something that is adjusted fairly infrequently, compared to gain and pan.  Trims are not needed too often, but when you do need to adjust, you need to do quickly, so in this respect, the mandatory functions of an ENG mixer are all there.  You can record the mix.  In fact you can record much more, ISO tracks, X1/X2, but for the most part, this is superfluous from the device's core function, so just consider it an extra bonus.

 

POINTS OF INTEREST - Channels 3 to 6.  Think of it as a built in Rx emergency for those occasional times you need to interface with an extra input or 3.  AND with PFL capability, but yeah, the fader pots are awkward.

 

NEGATIVE POINTS - There is NOTHING that beats the sunlight legibility of a nice set of LED meters.  Even when the screen is visible, there's just a little bit more information to sift through before you decode what your LR mix buss is looking like.  Remember, since a 302 is mostly providing a camera mix, that is really the single most important data point to be concerned with.  ISO levels, metadata, all is ancillary.  The inherent advantage of the LCD, to provide lots of data or contextual menu navigation, at the same time detracts a little bit from what was before a single purpose function.

 

If the above points don't make much sense to you, then you may not have been the original 302 + recorder target market that this product really addresses.  If you would be best served by a 664 or 788T + CL8, but save some money and go with the 633 instead - sure I'm sure you can make it work, I think I would be able to too - but there will be a few compromises made.  Once you get into the mindset of it realistic limitations, other than sunlight legibility and slightly more complex operation, there's really no other downside to the unit.

 

*** me personally would never1 buy due to the joystick control, but I also realize I'm being pigheaded and somewhat of a fuddy duddy by continuously harping on this same point - I understand that most people won't have a problem with it ***

 

 

 

1 - The term "never" in this case means while the author's current and future jobs continue to be served by in-inventory equipment and has the luxury of not being forced to purchase any mix / record gear in the immediate future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joystick...

 

 

not the best ergonomics. it simply does not provide tactile feedback. the best in the lot so far - the Nagra and the Cantar "REC" switches. You don't have to look for them (like with a REC button), you can simply turn the thing clockwise until it stops and you KNOW you have 'asked' the recorder to start recording. Then of course, a glance at the front panel is needed to check if the recorder is really recording... or in the case of the Nagra, to see the tape rolling... :) 

 

about ruggedness, i'd have to ask around to ascertain if there are any 552 664 owners who have had to get it replaced because it had stopped working properly, broken etc... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd strongly disagree regarding lack of tactile confirmation with the joystick. It moves in 5 ways. Up is record, and there is a beep in the headphones to confirm. I don't even have to look anymore, I know where the joystick is, move my hand to find it and press upwards.

I've been using my 552 solidly, (15 - 20 days per month) for the last 4 years and it has been flawless, including the joystick.

I'm surprised the joystick is a "sticking point" for some ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just ordered mine and it will be in my hands tomorrow! I've been using my 788/cl-8 on a long term news magazine job for a few months now and while the 788 has been rock solid on many trips around the globe and in tough conditions, its hefty, a battery hog and just too big to comfortably travel with.

   I'll probably machine down the fader knobs and fabricate my own bag out of Cuben fiber and 1/4" closed cell foam for a custom build up.

There's no "perfect" piece of gear but for my needs, this comes really close. Time will tell!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was doing a job yesterday with my 552 during the 633 announcement and was feeding two Sony f3's with breakout cables and monitoring both for behind the scenes interviews while recording back up in the bag which was a perfect fit for the 552. The 633 would have required at least one hop, and some sort of confidence return to pull this kind of functionality off.

And as much as i love my 302, i think i will sell it now. I often say this is my favorite mixer, because of the sound & light weight. With a hop to camera, It's a run & gun dream come true in that respect. However like many here I really wanted some sort of BU recording and more output options. Especially for a wirelss hop situation where back up in the bag is a top priority and confidence monitoring is a pain. The 633 fits this perfectly. I will also hold on to the 552 for now, eventually replacing it with the 664, but probably no rush on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weight Comparisons

302 w/o batteries weighs 1lbs 12oz 
633 w/o batteries weighs 2lbs 9 oz
664 w/o batteries weighs 4lbs 12oz

Maax                             2lbs  8oz  (website does not say with or w/o batteries or TX)

 

 

633 is 13 oz heavier than the 302 (approx. 3/4 of a pound) 

633 is 2lbs 3oz lighter than 664

633 is 1 oz heavier than Maax

 

 

I am very excited to be receiving my 633 today.  

 

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom, your comments are so dead on.  I really like the way you approach things.

 

I also believe that when doing 3 input shoots, ISOS recordings are superfluous.  Having the extra inputs is nice and gives you the flexibility and security of being able to handle larger shoots occasionally.

 

But at this point when comparing price vs features, i would still say that a 664 is a better value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another +1 for smaller pots on 1-3 (though take in mind I haven't had one in my hands yet).

 

 

 

With my 744T I need another device (302, 442...) to be able to use the 4 recording channels with 4 mics (without having one of the big ones, 664 or 788)

 

I was expecting a unit with 4 mic preamps (ideally 744T tipe) and mixing options...just it

 

As I said, It´s a great unit, flexible, light, pretty, with a great price.....but not what i wanted

 

The zaxcom maxx seems to be just what you describe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd strongly disagree regarding lack of tactile confirmation with the joystick. It moves in 5 ways. Up is record, and there is a beep in the headphones to confirm. I don't even have to look anymore, I know where the joystick is, move my hand to find it and press upwards.

I've been using my 552 solidly, (15 - 20 days per month) for the last 4 years and it has been flawless, including the joystick.

I'm surprised the joystick is a "sticking point" for some ;-)

 

yes, the beep is confirmation, i had forgotten about this. however, i do feel there is a massive difference between the REC actuation of a Cantar and a 664. Not saying the 664 is terrible, but some ergonomics are certainly not possible due to form factor i guess. For example, the MENU spherical actuator tactile switch is simply too small, i would have preferred a larger surface for this. 

 

I am sure SD have given everything due thought - with all the key combos that are needed to do things (like arm/disarm etc). Obviously there is a compromise - again the form factor (and weight etc). 

 

I am certainly not dismissive of anything SD has done, dont get me wrong. But there is always scope for advancement. The digital age is all about that (and more).... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

" consolidate the post-announcement discussion "

well done, Jim,  it's all in 4 or 5 threads now...

 

" wasnt enough room for a hirose or multipin out / return connector. "

my BFF Eric will be glad to make you a snazzy fan out !

 

 "...but not what i wanted "

you can please all of the people on jwsoundgroup.net...NEVER.

" Built-in Double MS decoder "  NEVER EVER!!

" would never1 buy due to the joystick control, " EVER !

" There's no "perfect" piece of gear " Amen.

 

" since I just bought my Nomad and so far I love it but... "

new products will always continue coming out...

If you carefully chose the best tool available to meet your needs, then you need have no regrets (cognitive dissonance).

 

" I would have really liked to see the price around 2.5k but hey... "

I would have really liked to see the price around $1k...but realistically...

 

" with some optional 6 channel EFP capabilities added on top - for occasional use. "

I wouldn't say that...

and I'll bet those additional 3 inputs will work just as well every day.

and remember the 664 really goes to 12 channels!

" for a 3 channel mixer, there is really no significant need to record ISOs "

very often,  and the 302 is still available at a noticeably lower price!

" Channels 3 to 6. " you do mean 4-6, right ?

" legibility of a nice set of LED meters. "

yes, of course, and regrettably the term "readable in any light" is unrealistic optimistic, but many of us actually prefer old style mechanical meters (of several versions), which have pretty much disappeared on any new sound equipment...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was waiting for this device for smaller gigs where I'll only use my 302 plus wireless cam hop. Sometimes I'd need a 4th input so I'd use my Mix-PreD linked to the 302 for that purpose (don't own an RX emergency). 

I was expecting a 4 inputs mixer that could record my two main outs for backing up my wireless hop to cam and also having that option of using the returns for two additionnal inputs if needed (the same way MixPreD does with similar behavior on the unit to adjust gains, etc...).

 

The 633 covers all these needs. Sure I would have liked a fourth ''main pot'' for that 3rd wireless that pops up sometimes on smaller shoots but since it's more an occasionnal thing that happens I don't make a big fuss of having to use a smaller pot to mix it.

 

With the 633 I get possibility to record isos (can be usefull to cover for two dinky cams covering stuff like crazies on large sets with me mixing for the ''main'' one - well, if they ever use those files as stated up here), I get even more flexibility than I asked for, overall, so I'm welcoming the release for sure.

 

And yes, the screen. I expect to be having some hard time when shooting outside in the sun wearing sunglasses but on interior shoots that'll be a great screen to have i think with all that info and different screen layouts. Would probably make a sun shade for the screen and I'm tinking about buying pilot sunglasses for exteriors in the sun (lenses dark at the top & light at the bottom ; moreover since I just made my entry into that select ''old fart progressive lens happy wearers'').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a nice recorder to fill the bill for most low budget video and ENG or Bag situations.   Has everything I would need as a recorder for commercial shoots used with an outboard mixer and still have the ability to break loose for those car mount or run and gun situations.

Very flexible output routing and the ability to record time Stamped MP3 files for transcription simultaneously is a big plus.

 

I think the joystick record switch may be hit accidentally on occasion.  At least they have headphone Bells to tell you clearly when you go into record and when you stop.

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...